Agenda item

The Joint Assembly considered the report which provided an update on the progress with the West of Cambridge package. It was noted that significant enhancement of park and ride capacity would still be needed in this location even if improvements were made to parking facilities at Foxton and Whittlesford. 

The Joint Assembly was updated on work undertaken with the Combined Authority to ensure alignment of proposals and to avoid duplication. The report reflected and acknowledged the Combined Authority’s view that park and ride should be temporary in nature as other planned enhancements would in future remove the need for park and ride. It was hoped that park and ride could be enhanced by extending the existing park and ride site at Trumpington, or through provision of a new site to the west of the M11. The agreement of the Executive Board would be sought to go out to public consultation on the best location for the park and ride facility.  It would also be necessary to consider the need for further interventions along Trumpington Road to enhance bus reliability into the city centre. This would support extending park and ride provision. 

In discussing the report, Joint Assembly members made the following points:

·         Councillor Williams queried why detailed origin and destination data on existing users of Trumpington park and ride was not in the report. This data was needed in order to support  the assumptions being made.

·         The Combined Authority’s desire for park and ride sites to be temporary in nature was acknowledged by Councillor Williams, however he pointed out that the sites would need to go through the planning process and this would require them to have proper road surfaces, lighting, drainage and facilities.

·         Councillor Williams pointed out that Whittlesford was on the Liverpool Street line, which was not the best line for getting into London. In response, the Chairperson informed the Joint Assembly that the West Anglia Taskforce was working towards four tracking a short section of the Liverpool Street line to enhance capacity, which would enable better access to London.

·         Councillor Williams commented that Whittlesford station might be attractive to people using Stansted Airport and suggested that if there was a park and ride facility at Whittlesford, people using the airport might park at the park and ride site as this was cheaper than parking at the airport.

·         Councillor Williams expressed concern that parking for users of Cambridge South Station was not mentioned in the report. It was important to bear in mind that many people travelled from villages such as Fulbourn to Cambridge North Station as they found this more convenient than using Cambridge Station. The same would happen when Cambridge South Station opened. As Cambridge South Station would be served by the busway and rapid transit system, people would also use this station to access Cambridge City.

·         Councillor Sollom echoed Councillor Williams’ earlier comments regarding the apparent lack of data analysis and the need to see quantification of the statements made in the report. He also pointed out that there were no other measures for mode shift along the A10 and queried whether this was to be abandoned, or whether there were other schemes that could be brought forward for that route.

·         Councillor Topping informed the Joint Assembly that Harston Parish Council had expressed concern regarding the growth of the employment centres and the potential increase in rat running through villages if there were not proper transport solutions. Councillor Topping was concerned that another park and ride site in South Cambridgeshire would do little to tackle the congestion in Harston and surrounding areas. He felt that there needed to be more in the plans that benefitted the residents and villages of South Cambridgeshire.

·         Councillor Massey queried the impact and timespan of the disruption that would be caused to the road network when the park and ride capacity was enhanced.

·         Dr Wells felt the report lacked context, was missing detail around the transport network and  how commuter destinations would be reached from the park and ride. The GCP needed to be able to tell a more compelling story of a 10 year evolving strategy for creating a strategic interchange network.

·         Helen Valentine recognised that while provision of additional park and ride facilities  was not a perfect solution, there was an urgent need to respond to the significant increase in private car trips, particularly given the additional traffic that would be generated with the next phase of the Biomedical Campus. She acknowledged the need for provision of further park and ride facilities but was not supportive of an extension to the existing site at Trumpington which was likely to be an expensive option and to give rise to objections. She expressed support for a  new park and ride site off the M11but emphasised that significant improvement measures along Trumpington Road were also essential.

·         Councillor Bick agreed that the site off the M11 appeared to be the most appropriate location for additional park and ride capacity and indicated his support for the direction of the proposals in the report. However, he suggested that independent public transport access was needed across the M11, potentially using the agricultural bridge to the north of the junction. He sought clarification on where the public transport would come out having come over the M11 towards the city and whether buses might come out at the Trumpington Meadows Park. He urged that the benefits of the park should not be eroded. He hoped that the detail around this would come out in the public consultation. Councillor Bick also referred to the need for more details on the nature of the proposed traffic interventions along Trumpington Road.

·         Andy Williams pointed out that Trumpington Road park and ride was already at capacity yet an additional 4000 employees would be coming to the Biomedical Campus in due course, all of whom would need somewhere to park.  He commented that Astrazeneca’s interest in a park and ride at Hauxton was due to its links to the strategic road network. 

·         Councillor Kavanagh suggested that a new park and ride facility could be used to accommodate coaches bringing day trip tourists to the city and school mini buses.

·         Councillor Kavanagh thought the option of increasing capacity at the existing Trumpington Road park and ride site should not be pursued and supported a further review of the option for a new park and ride site west of the M11.

·         Councillor Bates informed the Joint Assembly that a study had been carried out which looked at the coaches coming into Cambridge and future demand, linking to tourism. The GCP Transport Director could provide further information on this study to anyone interested.

·         Councillor Bates referred to the need to engage both with businesses and residents in Trumpington Road regarding potential improvement measures along the road.

·         Councillor Wilson pointed out that the GCP was concerned about the temporary nature of park and ride sites and suggested that people might be discouraged from using the sites if facilities, such as lighting, were not adequate. 

·         Councillor Baigent commented that as residents’ parking came on stream, those people who had previously parked in those areas might look to the park and ride sites for parking instead. He also emphasised the need for park and ride sites to have appropriate facilities such as toilets and suggested that there was scope for developing transport hubs providing services in the future.

·         Councillor Massey pointed out  that hospital staff parking was being reduced by a third from October 2018, which would increase the pressure on the capacity of the Trumpington park and ride site.

·         Councillor Topping made a plea that if proposals for a Foxton park and ride and crossing  were to come forward for consideration by the GCP Joint Assembly and Executive Board in December 2018, there should be early engagement with the residents of Foxton.

The GCP Transport Director made the following comments in response to the Joint Assembly:

·         A lot of data had been gathered  to justify the assumptions made in the report.

·         To bring forward park and ride sites, the GCP would need to work with planning authorities to ensure that facilities were sufficient to meet planning requirements.

·         The cost of developing the bridge access option would be considerable and unlikely to be compatible with the Combined Authority’s desire for temporary solutions. Further discussions would be needed with the Combined Authority and planning authority.

·         It was acknowledged that residents’ parking increased the pressure on existing park and ride capacity.

·         The proposals outlined in the report were not designed to fix the problems on the A10. Work was ongoing at Foxton, which would be presented to the Executive Board in December 2018.

·         Cambridge South Station was not a committed scheme.

·         Proposals had not reached the level of planning to determine the extent of disruption likely to be caused. The challenge of extending an existing park and ride site was that capacity would have to be taken out while the site was extended.

·         Traffic light improvements would not be enough to deliver the improvements that were needed on Trumpington Road. It would be important to work with communities to develop solutions for the road.

The Chairperson summarised the discussion, noting that there had been a mixed reaction from the Joint Assembly to the proposals. Members had been concerned that the Trumpington Road park and ride site was already at capacity and that this situation would be exacerbated by the further development of the Biomedical Campus. Members had generally concurred that additional park and ride capacity was needed urgently. However, Joint  Assembly Members had challenged what was meant by “temporary” park and ride sites. The extent to which the proposed schemes contributed to mode shift had been question and the need to secure more benefits for residents of South Cambridgeshire had been highlighted.  Reference had been made to the need for the GCP to be able to tell a more compelling story of a 10 year evolving strategy for creating a strategic interchange network. Finally, the need for improvements to Trumpington Road and to engage with residents on the proposals had been emphasised.