There were no apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

The Executive Board NOTED declarations of interest from Executive Board members.

Professor Phil Allmendinger declared the following non-pecuniary interests:

1.    in relation to agenda item 6; as was an employee of Cambridge University, which was a landowner and agenda item 8; as a resident of Gilbert Road.

To authorise the Executive Board to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 October 2018 as a correct record.

The Executive Board APPROVED the minutes of the meeting held on 11^th October 2018 as a correct record.

The Executive Board APPROVED the minutes of the meeting held on 11^th October 2018 as a correct record.

The Executive Board RECEIVED and responded to public questions as part of agenda items 6 and 8.

The Executive Board RECEIVED and responded to public questions as part of agenda items 6 and 8. Details of the questions and a summary of the responses are provided in Appendix A to the minutes.

To follow.

The Executive Board RECEIVED an overview report on the discussion from the meeting of the GCP Joint Assembly held on 15 November 2018.  

The Executive Board RECEIVED an overview report from Councillor Tim Wotherspoon, Chairperson of the GCP Joint Assembly, on the discussions from the GCP Joint Assembly meeting held on 15 November 2018.

Councillor Wotherspoon was pleased to see that since the Joint Assembly’s meeting, the issues regarding Histon Road had been resolved with the Histon Local Liaison Forum (LLF), and the proposed improvements were reflected in the scheme being presented to the Executive Board.

The Executive Board:

a)    CONSIDERED the outcome of the public consultation and the work to date developing the Cambourne to Cambridge Better Public Transport project;

b)    RECEIVED the key conclusions of the Interim Report and in relation to this:

                      i.        AGREED that Phase 1, Phase 2 and a Park and Ride location continue to be developed towards an Outline Business Case for a High Quality Public Transport route between Cambourne and Cambridge;

                     ii.        For Phase 1, NOTED that the recommended off-road route, defined as the Specific Route Alignment providing a new public transport corridor between Madingley roundabout and Grange Road best meets the strategic and policy objectives of the Greater Cambridge Partnership; and

                    iii.        AGREED to develop options for Phase 2 between Cambourne and Madingley roundabout for further Business case assessment including a public consultation and that this section of the route and final recommendation for a preferred Park and Ride site, be presented in the final Outline Business Case;

c)    AGREED that the outcome of further work required as a result of recommendation (b) above be included in the final Outline Business Case which will be presented for Board approval in accordance with the current programme (October 2019);

d)    REQUESTED that officers develop detailed technology and design solutions and draw up landscaping and ecological design proposals which would enhance the potential impact of the off-road option solution on the rural environment and ensure maximum transport benefit;

e)    AGREED that cycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements identified for Madingley Road are taken forward for delivery developed in detail as part of a separate project;

f)     AGREED that, following the review by the Combined Authority, proposals for the Cambourne to Cambridge High Quality Public Transport corridor align with the features of a rapid transport network (CAM);

g)    AGREED that through the CAM Programme Board, officers ensure that the interface point at the eastern end of the scheme aligns with the work on the tunnelled section of the CAM network; and

h)    AGREED that the ambition for the preferred mode for the scheme once open is an autonomous electric rubber-tyred metro, subject to final business case, and that any interim mode required will be an electric vehicle to ensure a beneficial impact on air quality.

Helen Bradbury, Chairman of the Cambourne to Cambridge Local Liaison Forum (LLF) summarised the outcomes of the LLF meeting which had taken place on 14^th November 2018. In addition to a number of detailed comments on proposals, the LLF had agreed the following recommendations:

·         That no decision be taken on a preferred route until greater clarity on the Cambridge Autonomous Metro (CAM) was provided; the proposed network, connectivity and funding. It was felt that the off-road bus route due to its poor connectivity to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus (CBC), Science park and the city centre, it’s poor transport benefits and low BCR, did not stand up to scrutiny.

·          That a northern off-road option be developed. It was felt that there could be major advantages to this; it could better connect with the Oxford Cambridge Expressway and developments at the Girton Interchange in the longer term, and could link with the Science Park, CBC and the North West Cambridge site.

·         That given the lengthy timescale involved in building an off-road scheme, an in-bound bus lane be designed on Madingley Road immediately. This would provide significant public transport benefit to the residents west of Cambridge.

Nine members of the public were invited to ask their public questions. The questions and a summary of the responses are provided at Appendix A of the minutes.

Councillor Rod Cantrill was invited to address the Executive Board. Councillor Cantrill made the following comments:

·         The GCP had created the LLF structure to allow direct input into the development and delivery of transport schemes. The Cambourne to Cambridge LLF had sought to work with the GCP in a constructive way.

·         He asked if the Board would indicate how the report took into account the work of the LLF and whether the community’s preferred option would continue to be developed in parallel with other options.

·         He felt that the recommendation ignored the input of the LLF and sought to drive forward a proposed option that did not have the support of the local community.

·         He asked what role the LLF would play in the development of proposals going forward.

Councillor Gavin Clayton, local Member representing Cambourne, was invited to speak and made the following points:

·         Cambourne residents had not been involved and their opinions had not been heard as much as they could have been so far.

·         Cambourne was an important community to be considered in the GCP’s decisions; it consisted of over 4300 homes.

·         He had been a Cambourne resident for 19 years. He used his car on average once a week and cycled and used the bus from Cambourne the rest of the time. He was therefore well aware of the failings of public transport and the lack of cycling infrastructure between Cambourne and Cambridge. He cycled through Coton and empathised with the impacts the residents of Coton feared with an off-road solution. He would like to walk the route of the off-road option and suggested this may be useful for other councillors to do.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Executive Board:

a)    NOTED the work to date on the City Access Programme;

b)    AGREED to undertake a second big conversation exercise to obtain feedback on the options to invest in and significantly improve public transport and manage demand for road space contained within the report; and

c)    AGREED to continue to work on developing a final package of City Access proposals and public transport improvements, incorporating public feedback, for the Executive Board’s consideration in 2019.

Councillor Tim Bick was invited to address the Executive Board and made the following comments:

·         City Access should have been the centrepiece of GCP policy around which other initiatives had been calibrated. Its absence had left the GCP unable to provide a complete context for its other schemes, which had led to them receiving more opposition than would have been the case.

·         Failure to approach City Access in an open minded and strategic manner, led to the ill fated road closures scheme.

·         Accessible first class public transport, safer walking and cycling, cleaner air and less wasted time was the cause for which this policy area was working.

·         The public needed to be given the opportunity to consider and evaluate the range of options.

·         Road charging needed to be discussed with the public to let them reach a view on this and what it could offer. Road charging was an important option, which officers had described as potentially the most effective option.

·         Councillor Bick expressed his support for the recommended approach, which he felt was honest and evidence based and he congratulated officers on a clear, fair and practical report. He encouraged the Executive Board to support the recommendations.

·         Councillor Bick queried whether the estimated cost of £20 million to put in place a first class transport system, was ambitious enough and commented that it seemed arbitrary.

·         He queried the fairness of the suggestion that revenue support for public transport could come from a form of general taxation, and whether this was deliverable; Councillor Bick was not aware of any power that would enable this to be achieved.

·         Regarding the table which compared alternative measures, Councillor Bick suggested inclusion of a further criteria for comment against each of the measures, called ‘backfill potential’, to help people understand the dynamics. For example, the prospect of some measures being successful in reducing car usage by only a certain class of users, would enable other car users to take their cars out uninhibited on the roads and fill this space up, thereby cancelling out the gain that had been made.

The GCP Transport Director responded to Councillor Bick and presented the report, which outlined the GCP’s transport vision and the challenges it faced. He referred to:

·         The £20 million estimate which was based on evidence suggesting the existing public transport offer needed to be doubled.

·         Locking in the benefits was critical and how this was done would need to be demonstrated to decision makers. Phasing and reassigning road space would be critical.

·         There were emerging Mayoral and Combined Authority powers to allow business levies to be raised.

·         The Transport Director was looking at the issues in the villages and how they would benefit. This work was ongoing, with a particular focus on Cottenham.

Councillor Herbert made the following comments on the proposals:

·         He highlighted the public transport issues in Cottenham, which had been raised at the Joint Assembly meeting.

·         The £20 million cost for a first class public transport system had been suggested by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To follow. Publication of this report has been delayed so that it can be updated to reflect the outcome of the additional meeting of the Local Liaison Forum, which will take place on the evening of 26^th November 2018.

The Executive Board SUPPORTED:

a)    The final design for Histon Road as shown in the plans in Appendix B of the report as a basis for moving to the detailed design stage, including preparation of the final business case and contractor procurement; and

b)    The Landscaping strategy as set out in Appendix A of the report.

Councillor Mike Todd-Jones and Lilian Rundblad were invited to speak as Chair and Vice Chair of the Histon Road LLF. They provided an update on the meeting, which took place on 26 November 2018, which had been called due to the changes that had been made to the Histon Road scheme design since the last LLF meeting. Officers were congratulated for taking steps to address concerns expressed at the Joint Assembly meeting. It was noted that the LLF had agreed the following resolutions:

·         To request the Greater Cambridge Partnership Executive Board to direct that in consulting with the residents of Histon Road between Blackhall Road and Brownlow Road, the officers, including the landscape designer, take into consideration incorporating into the design a three metre high steel-mesh fence with climbers, verge with seeded grasses and semi-mature trees planted in the verge by every other fence panel as replacement of present hedges between Blackhall Road and Brownlow Road. Further, that negotiations with the County Council would ensure that the area would be maintained by Highways as well as any drainage construction required between the verge and private properties.

·         To request that the Greater Cambridge Partnership Executive Board direct the officers to incorporate unambiguous pedestrian priority at minor road junctions.

Public questions were invited from Lilian Rundblad, Anna Crutchley and Matthew Danish. Details of the questions and a summary of the responses are set out in Appendix A of the minutes.

The Chairperson drew the Executive Board’s attention to public representations received from Molly and John Snedden, details of which had been circulated to the Board.

The Joint Assembly Chairperson provided an overview of the Joint Assembly’s discussions regarding Histon Road. There had been a feeling at the meeting that this scheme did not provide bus, cycling or walking improvements. He congratulated the officers for the work that had been done to redesign the scheme following the Joint Assembly meeting.

The GCP Transport Director presented the report which set out the final design proposals for Histon Road. The Executive Board was informed that dialogue was ongoing regarding boundary and landscape issues. The lessons learnt from the Gilbert Road junction design would be applied to other schemes.

The Executive Board discussed the report:

·         Councillor Van de Weyer commented that the result regarding the Gilbert Road junction, demonstrated what could be achieved. It needed to be reinforced that drivers did not have priority when entering cycle lanes.

·         Councillor Herbert highlighted that Histon Road was a constrained road, which had not been a safe route for cyclists or pedestrians. The scheme was very different to how it had begun, and had been much improved by the public engagement that had taken place.

The Executive Board unanimously SUPPORTED:

a)    The final design for Histon Road as shown in the plans in Appendix B of the report as a basis for moving to the detailed design stage, including preparation of the final business case and contractor procurement; and

b)    The Landscaping strategy as set out in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Executive Board

a)    NOTED:

                       i.        The update on the proposed GCP Apprenticeship Service procurement exercise.

                      ii.        The update on GCP cycling projects.

                     iii.        The communications update.

b)    AGREED to the joint procurement of a transport consultancy framework.

The Head of Strategy and Programme presented a report which updated the Executive Board on progress across the GCP work streams. The Board was informed that the GCP was revisiting the market regarding the skills apprenticeship service procurement, with a view to appointing a provider in the early Spring.

The Executive Board discussed the report:

Claire Ruskin expressed support for the joint procurement of a transport consultancy framework. She suggested that thought should also be given to the appointment of a Joint Transport Director.

Councillor Bates requested the inclusion of the information on the Gateway Review in the next report.

The Executive Board reviewed the Forward Plan identifying items for discussion at future meetings. It was noted that the South East Transport Scheme would be considered at the June 2019 meeting and the Waterbeach Public Transport Route would be considered in December 2019.

The Executive Board:

a)    NOTED:

                       i.        The update on the proposed GCP Apprenticeship Service procurement exercise.

                      ii.        The update on GCP cycling projects.

                     iii.        The communications update.

b)    AGREED to the joint procurement of a transport consultancy framework.

To note that the next meeting will take place at 4pm on Wednesday 20 March 2019.

The Executive Board NOTED that the next meeting would take place on Wednesday 20^th March 2019 at 4pm.

The Executive Board NOTED that the next meeting would take place on Wednesday 20^th March 2019 at 4pm.