Issue - meetings

To consider the attached report.

The Executive Board

AGREED

(a)  that the headline objectives for the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise are:

-        to prioritise transport infrastructure investments to prepare those which best meet the City Deal’s strategic objectives  for delivery when funding becomes available (City Deal strategic objectives, which include economic growth and maintaining quality of life, are set out at Annex 1);

-       to ensure that those investments support the growth strategy set out in the Local Plans and the supporting Transport  Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire; and

-       To ensure the prioritisation is aligned to wider work by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) on the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) and of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.

(b)  To recognise dependencies between ongoing Tranche 1 work, the Local Plan examinations, the work of the Combined Authority, the Economic Assessment Panel, the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise and Tranche 3 and agrees that potential alignment and synergies with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority be explored;

(c)  that the previously used criteria and methodology should be reviewed and built on and that Board, Joint Assembly and other stakeholder input be sought on assessment criteria and methodology and the ‘long list’ through workshops in early 2017;

(d)  to note existing commitments to consider particular schemes through the Tranche 2 prioritisation process and confirms these;

(e)  Agrees to receive a further report in June recommending the prioritisation methodology and criteria and long list process, as well as the potential for synergies with the Combined Authority and other bodies;

(f)   officers should explore potential use of a proportion of future City Deal funding to:

·         create a potential ‘rolling fund’ for investment in transport infrastructure/ measures to unlock early growth from which a future repayment revenue stream would follow (for example from s106 contributions) and /or

·         create a fund for smaller scale measures (likely to be those costing less than £500 000) that could be bid into to allow delivery of measures that unblock localised barriers to growth and provide strong economic benefits in line with City Deal objectives.

These options would be brought back to the Board with the proposed long list in September 2017.

(g)  To endorse the outline timetable for recommending  transport investment priorities for Tranche 2 and notes the key dependencies.

Mike Salter, Transport Strategy Manager, presented this report which updated the Executive Board on work prioritising transport infrastructure schemes for delivery in the second tranche of Greater Cambridge City Deal transport infrastructure programme from 2020 to 2025 and agree the next steps.

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, reminded the Executive Board that the Local Plans of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire District Councils had not yet been agreed. He stated that there had been some concern expressed by the Assembly on how the funding would be managed, but the recommendations in the report had been endorsed, as it only called for officers to “explore potential use” of future City Deal funding.

Councillor Ian Bates stated that he supported the direction of travel, but recognised that there were several obstacles to overcome.

It was confirmed that the workshops scheduled for February/March 2017 would be jointly held with the Executive Board, the Joint Assembly, the business community and other stakeholders.

Councillor Francis Burkitt suggested that the Executive Board should ensure that some of the £200 million in Tranche 2 was kept in reserve, for new projects to be funded during the Tranche 2 period of 2020-25.

Concern was expressed about the potential to focus too closely on the traditional Benefit:Cost Ratio (BCR) at the expense of achieving the City Deal’s strategic objectives, and that prioritisation should be more wide-ranging that only traditional BCR measurement. Mike Salter assured the Executive Board that a multitude of criteria were used to assess which schemes should be prioritised and the BCR methodology was only one tool that was used.

The Executive Board

AGREED

(a)  that the headline objectives for the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise are:

-        to prioritise transport infrastructure investments to prepare those which best meet the City Deal’s strategic objectives  for delivery when funding becomes available (City Deal strategic objectives, which include economic growth and maintaining quality of life, are set out at Annex 1);

-       to ensure that those investments support the growth strategy set out in the Local Plans and the supporting Transport  Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire; and

-       To ensure the prioritisation is aligned to wider work by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) on the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) and of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.

(b)  To recognise dependencies between ongoing Tranche 1 work, the Local Plan examinations, the work of the Combined Authority, the Economic Assessment Panel, the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise and Tranche 3 and agrees that potential alignment and synergies with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority be explored;

(c)  that the previously used criteria and methodology should be reviewed and built on and that Board, Joint Assembly and other stakeholder input be sought on assessment criteria and methodology and the ‘long list’ through workshops in early 2017;

(d)  to note existing commitments to consider particular schemes through the Tranche 2 prioritisation process and confirms these;

(e)  Agrees to receive a further report in June recommending the prioritisation methodology and criteria and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board:

(a)        Agrees that the headline objectives for the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise are:

·         to prioritise transport infrastructure investments to prepare those which best meet the City Deal’s strategic objectives  for delivery when funding becomes available;

·         to ensure that those investments support the growth strategy set out in the Local Plans and the supporting Transport  Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire;

·         to ensure the prioritisation is aligned to wider work by the Local Enterprise Partnership on the Strategic Economic Plan and of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.

(b)       Recognises dependencies between ongoing Tranche 1 work, the Local Plan examinations, the work of the Combined Authority, the Economic Assessment Panel, the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise and Tranche 3 and agrees that potential alignment and synergies with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority be explored;

(c)       Agrees that the previously used criteria and methodology should be reviewed and built on and that the Executive Board, Joint Assembly and other stakeholder input be sought on assessment criteria and methodology and the ‘long list’ through workshops in early 2017.

(d)       Notes existing commitments to consider particular schemes through the Tranche 2 prioritisation process and confirms these.

(e)       Agrees to receive a further report in June recommending the prioritisation methodology and criteria and long list process, as well as the potential for synergies with the Combined Authority and other bodies.

(f)        Agrees officers should explore potential use of a proportion of future City Deal funding to:

·         create a potential ‘rolling fund’ for investment in transport infrastructure/ measures to unlock early growth from which a future repayment revenue stream would follow;

·         create a fund for smaller scale measures (likely to be those costing less than £500 000) that could be bid into to allow delivery of measures that unblock localised barriers to growth and provide strong economic benefits in line with City Deal objectives.

and notes that these options will be brought back to the Executive Board with the proposed long list in September 2017.

(g)       Endorses the outline timetable for recommending transport investment priorities for Tranche 2 and notes the key dependencies.

Consideration was given to a report which updated the Joint Assembly on the work necessary to prioritise transport infrastructure schemes for delivery in the second tranche of the City Deal programme.

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, presented the report which set out the proposed approach and timetable for developing and agreeing tranche 2 transport priorities for the City Deal.  It was noted that a number of changes, most notably the agreement of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, presented opportunities that should be explored early in the next phase of this work.  Tanya Sheridan reported that the Executive Board was therefore being recommended to add that aspect to the previously agreed scope and approach for the project, together with the undertaking of further work to develop the prioritisation criteria and methodology and a number of other aspects including:

·         to explore the merit of potentially creating a rolling investment fund and/or a small schemes fund;

·         to develop a proposed long list of schemes;

·         to assess those and hence derive a recommended set of investment priorities for the City Deal post-2020.

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, reflected on references made in the report to the Local Plans of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire and highlighted that they had still not gone through the examination process.  He also acknowledged the moving landscape in respect of the recent commitment by the constituent authorities to sign up to a devolution deal for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.  He questioned whether this item should be deferred until the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority investment criteria and strategic economic plan refresh were available in February 2017.

Councillor Bridget Smith was unconvinced that it should be the City Deal’s role to set up a fund for transport infrastructure or other measures, citing the highway infrastructure grant as an example of a similar facility already in place.  She questioned how this fund would be managed.

Claire Ruskin was keen to see the City Deal develop its tranche 2 programme through discussion in order that a clear view of people’s priorities could be established.  Andy Williams supported this approach and said that the partnership needed to think about how it could leverage outcomes with other schemes being delivered outside of the City Deal.  He added that a common message would help communicate the City Deal’s objectives to the general public.

Dr John Wells said that the holistic transport plan for the Greater Cambridge area needed to be considered as part of the tranche 2 discussions, with outputs being a priority.

Councillor Tim Bick felt that it was important to start discussing the tranche 2 programme and any potential joined up approaches.  He was broadly supportive of the recommendations but sceptical with the grant based approach that was being proposed.

Councillor Hickford agreed to convey the Assembly’s concerns regarding the grant funding proposals to the Executive Board.

The Joint Assembly RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board:

(a)        Agreed that the headline objectives for the tranche 2 prioritisation exercise are:

·         to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9