Agenda item

A428 Cambourne to Cambridge Better Bus Journeys: Selection of a catchment area for detailed scheme development

To consider the attached report.

Decision:

The Executive Board:

 

(a)        NOTED the accompanying option assessment report, the further background papers containing the outline business case and the map appended to the report.

 

(b)        AGREED, in principle, that a segregated route between Cambourne and Cambridge, with a Park and Ride near the Madingley Mulch roundabout, best meets the strategic objectives of the City Deal and the City Deal Agreement, given the wider economic benefits.

 

(c)        AGREED, in principle, that the possibility of a segregated cross country super cycleway running close to or through the key villages between Bourn Airfield and the M11 should be explored as part of a wider examination into improving cycle links between settlements in Greater Cambridge.

 

(d)        INSTRUCTED officers to undertake a topographical survey of the A1303 from Madingley Mulch to the M11 and undertake preliminary design to assess whether or not it is feasible to provide a two way busway, a cycleway and a road within the existing highway boundary, and to share the information with the Local Liaison Forum.

 

(e)        INSTRUCTED officers to undertake further appraisal on:

 

(i)         Possible specific route alignments within catchment area 3a, with catchment area 3 as an alternative if option 3a proves unviable, noting that both would connect with and potentially through Cambridge West, in accordance with the scheme design criteria set out in paragraph 12 of the report, and within established environmental and planning policies.

 

(ii)        A new Park and Ride at either Scotland Farm or a new location 4, which combines site 2 with the north portion of site 3, as set out in the report, with the remainder of site 3 not to be used for any Park and Ride facilities, in accordance with the scheme design criteria set out in paragraph 12 of the report, and within established environmental and planning policies.

 

(f)        REQUESTED officers to:

 

(i)         Ensure designs for the Western Orbital bus route, the bus route through north-west Cambridge to the Science Park and the management of buses in the city centre fully integrate with this project.

 

(ii)        Seek to deliver all of these schemes as close in time as possible to the eastern section of the A428 Cambridge to Cambourne scheme.

 

(g)        DELEGATED to Cambridgeshire County Council's Executive Director of Economy, Transport and Environment:

 

(i)         To act with input from the A428/A1303 Local Liaison Forum, including the Parish Councils and Residents' Associations along catchment areas 3a and 3, interested Members of the Joint Assembly and interested elected Members from the County Council, City Council and District Council.

 

(ii)        To act in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the City Deal Executive Board.

 

(iii)       Responsibility to identify a specific route alignment(s) within catchment area 3a or, if necessary, catchment area 3.

 

(iv)       Responsibility to identify a footprint for a Park and Ride location at either Scotland Farm or new location 4, as set out above.

 

(v)        Responsibility to bring back the results of (d), (g)(iii) and (g)(iv)  above to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board ahead of the next round of public consultation.

 

(vi)       Responsibility to undertake a public consultation on that specific route alignment and Park and Ride location.

 

(vii)      Responsibility, subsequent to that public consultation, to provide a report to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board containing a recommendation and full outline business case for a specific route alignment and one Park and Ride location that would then subsequently be worked up in detail and an application made for Statutory Approval in 2018.

Minutes:

The Executive Board considered a report which set out the next stage of the A428 Cambourne to Cambridge Better Bus Journeys City Deal scheme and recommended a catchment area and Park and Ride location.  The report also sought to develop a specific route alignment within that catchment area, using the Transport Appraisal Guidance, together with an associated new Park and Ride site and proposed that both of these aspects be approved for public consultation in the summer 2017.  The recommended option contained within the report, from the officers’ perspective, represented the fastest and most reliable route, equating to a 28 minute return journey between Cambourne and Cambridge, and was the route best positioned to enable effective transport into the city.  The wider economic benefits were estimated as being £679 million over a 30 year period with the scheme estimated to cost £142 million to deliver. 

 

Bob Menzies, Director of Strategy and Development at Cambridgeshire County Council, presented the report.  It was noted that this scheme supported a number of significant local policies, including Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Local Plans, the Local Transport Plan, the Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire and the Long Term Transport Plan. 

 

Mr Menzies highlighted that this was still a very early stage in the developmental process for this scheme, with at least two further public consultations due to be held with subsequent decision points for the Executive Board, as well as the high likelihood of the scheme involving a public enquiry.  The Board would be required to prove that the scheme was needed and that all environmental issues had been assessed and mitigated against.  It was emphasised that the next stage of the process would begin to explore those issues and develop detailed route options, setting out the pros and cons of each.  Mr Menzies said it was imperative that that Board could demonstrate that it had not ruled anything out too early and could evidence that it had given due consideration to all possible route options.  This was the main reason behind the catchment area being so wide.

 

Mr Menzies reported that the option recommended in the report consisted of a dedicated, segregated route that was off-road, rather than an option that used existing infrastructure.  The fact that the route was segregated would mean that more people would be attracted to use buses rather than their own cars, on the basis that bus journeys would be more reliable as a result.  Mr Menzies referred to evidence elsewhere in the county which suggested that this busway would encourage development in areas such as Cambourne and be seen as an attractive quality.  He acknowledged that there were significant environmental issues to consider, but he believed these could be mitigated against and that it would be up to officers to demonstrate this as part of the next stage of the process. 

 

It was noted that work had already taken place in terms of landscape evaluation for the proposed Park and Ride sites, with plans being made available which showed how much of each proposed site people would be able to see at ground level, first floor level and how much of each site would not be visible at all.  Members were informed that this was ongoing work which would be developed further as part of the next stage of the scheme. 

 

Helen Bradbury, Chairman of the A428 Local Liaison Forum, reported that the Forum had met on 26 September 2016 where 19 elected Members were in attendance.  She was encouraged by the debate that took place at the Joint Assembly on 29 September 2016 and generally supported its recommendations.  However, she was disappointed that option 3a had been retained.

 

Helen Bradbury explained that the Local Liaison Forum had stated that it had serious reservations about options 3 and 3a on environmental, social, value for money and public consultation grounds.  It was the most unpopular option, with the Forum itself voting unanimously against this option in June 2016, as well as being the most expensive, the most risky and the most environmentally damaging.  At £141 million this option cost £57 million more than any other option, with there being significant risks not only in terms of construction but also due to the risk of challenge resulting from conflicts of interest and the environmental and economic cost.  The recommended option also scored the worst of all options for CO2 emissions, water environment, landscape, visual impact and heritage impact.

 

She highlighted that the Forum was reminded that in 2008 the entire Coton corridor was regarded in a ruling by the High Court as ‘critical to the character of Cambridge’, with the proposal set out in the report going against the spirit of that judgement which she believed would be open to legal challenge.

 

With regard to the cited benefits of the recommended option, in response to the claimed two minutes improvement in journey times, she said that evidence had shown that most people tended to value reliability over sheer speed.  She also questioned the wider economic benefit figure of £679 million which she said was inexplicably £153 million more than other off-road segregated busways considered, therefore claiming that this was not credible.  Helen Bradbury also highlighted that the proposal failed three out of four of its own evaluation criteria.

 

The Local Liaison Forum had made the following resolution at its meeting:

 

“The Local Liaison Forum cannot support option 3/3a while the West Fields, the Countryside Reserve and the area south of the Polhil Garden Centre are included in the catchment area”.

 

She therefore called for those aspects to be removed from the proposal.

 

The Forum had also resolved at its meeting that the proposal to place the possible new Park and Ride site close to the Madingley Mulch roundabout was not acceptable.  Helen Bradbury reminded the Board that the preferred option was within an extremely insensitive location and therefore asked for this to be moved.

 

Further to these comments, the Local Liaison Forum recommended a proposed hybrid solution of options 1 and 3 that delivered almost the same advantages as option 3a, at a fraction of the cost and environmental damage and which could be implemented immediately with little public opposition, comprising:

 

-       the proposed route 3a from Caxton Gibbet roundabout running through the new developments at Cambourne West, Cambourne and Bourn Airfield as this offered the greatest benefit to residents;

-       the route continuing as close as was possible to the existing A428 with a segregated high quality cycleway running to the south in order to best serve the villages along the route;

-       a high quality cycleway that would run between Bourn and Cambourne West, via Coldecote, Hardwick and Coton;

-       a two-lane busway, down Madingley Rise with a parallel cycleway running off-road via Coton and over the current cycle bridge.

 

Helen Bradbury informed the Board that the Forum had carried out its own survey of Madingley Rise which clearly demonstrated that, from hedge to hedge, the road was between 18 metres and 24 metres wide, noting that officers had indicated that the width requirement for two car lanes and two bus lanes down that road, including verges, was between 16 metres and 18 metres. 

 

As part of this recommendation, the Forum asked the Board to approve the recommendation of the Joint Assembly that a full topographical survey and feasibility study be carried out on Madingley Rise.

 

Helen Bradbury explained that the route could then progress over the M11 bridge, with the hybrid option saving at least £60 million with journey times only being approximately two minutes less than with option 3a.  Using the same Multi-Criteria Assessment Framework, she explained that a Forum member had calculated the hybrid option scoring 105 which was more than the 73 for option 3a.

 

A second recommendation from the Local Liaison Forum supported the further investigation of other Park and Ride sites, particularly at Scotland Farm.  Helen Bradbury reflected that a Park and Ride at Scotland Farm could be bigger, have far less environmental impact, benefit from four-way access, have minimal impact on residential areas and be nearer to the communities it was intended to serve.  She added that situating the site further west would better reduce congestion at Madingley Mulch roundabout and provide better connectivity, including to the Science Park.  On behalf of the Local Liaison Forum she therefore asked that the Board gave consideration to Scotland Farm as a Park and Ride site.

 

A third recommendation supported the Local Liaison Forum's view that more research was needed into the benefits of the busway and how it would tie in with the Girton Interchange and the Western Orbital route.  Given the Forum's wish to remove the West Fields, this reduced the catchment area for entry to Grange Road to Adam's Road only, however, the Forum had serious reservations about this and the suitability of Grange Road as the ultimate destination for any buses.  Councillor Smith, in her capacity as Vice-Chairman of the Local Liaison Forum, therefore asked the Executive Board why it was so focussed on getting buses into Cambridge, when the key growth employment sites were elsewhere.  The Forum had suggested locating a series of transport hubs before the congestion pinch points, at the west Cambridge site and/or at the current Madingley Road Park and Ride, from where the buses could continue to the main employment sites including Addenbrooke's and the Science Park.

 

Helen Bradbury reported that the Local Liaison Forum was pleased that the Joint Assembly had recommended more research be carried out into how the A428 busway and the Western Orbital would interconnect and therefore asked the Board to approve this.

 

The Local Liaison Forum’s final recommendation followed unanimous agreement at its meeting that the single most beneficial investment made on behalf of residents west of the city would be the creation of an all-ways junction at Girton.  Helen Bradbury was of the view that even a single spur from the A428 to the southbound M11 would reduce traffic on Madingley Rise by 30% and therefore put into question the need for a heavy engineering busway solution such as option 3a. 

 

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, reported that this report had been considered and debated in depth at the meeting of the Assembly on 29 September 2016.  He took this opportunity to urge the Executive Board to take notice of public opinion, together with the views and recommendations of both the Local Liaison Forum and the Joint Assembly and highlighted that the draft minutes of the meeting of the Assembly had recently been published, setting out in detail the views of its Members.

 

The Joint Assembly's main concerns related to options 3a and 4, as contained within the report, together with development on the West Fields and the impact on Coton village.  It had also requested that a comparison be undertaken on all Park and Ride sites included in the report as options, with the inclusion of Scotland Farm.  It was therefore noted that the Joint Assembly had recommended that the Executive Board:

 

·         noted the accompanying Option Assessment Report, the further background papers containing the Outline Strategic Business Case, and the Map Appendix to the report;

·         agreed, in principle, that a wholly or partly segregated bus route between Cambourne and Cambridge, with the possibility of the potential for a segregated, cross country super cycleway running close to or through the key villages between Bourn Airfield and the M11 best met the strategic objectives of the City Deal and the City Deal Agreement, given the wider economic benefits;

·         instructed officers to undertake further appraisal on:

-           possible specific route alignments within Catchment Areas 3a and 4 (with the possibility of a bridge to the north of the existing M11 bridge), noting that both may connect with and potentially go through Cambridge West, in accordance with the scheme design criteria set out in Paragraph 12 of the report, and within established environmental and planning policies;

-           new Park & Ride locations 1, 2 and 3, as set out in Figure 3 of the report, and also Scotland Farm, via comparison.

·         requested officers to:

-           ensure designs for the Western Orbital bus route, the bus route through North West Cambridge to the Science Park, and the management of buses in the city centre fully integrated with this project;

-           sought to deliver all these schemes as close in time as possible to the eastern section of the A428 Cambridge to Cambourne scheme.

·         delegated to Cambridgeshire County Council’s Executive Director of Economy, Transport and Environment:

-           authority to act on input from the A428/A1303 Local Liaison Forum, the Parish Councils and Residents’ Associations along Catchment Areas 3a and 4, interested members of the Joint Assembly and interested Councillors from the County, City and District Councils, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the City Deal Executive Board;

-           responsibility to:

(i)         identify specific route alignments within Catchment Area 3a and 4;

(ii)        identify a Park and Ride location;

(iii)        bring back the result of (i) and (ii) to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board for approval prior to release for public consultation;

(iv)       undertake a public consultation on those specific route alignments and Park & Ride locations, planned for May to July 2017.

 

(v)        subsequent to the above consultation, provide a report to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board, targeted for November 2017, containing a recommendation and Full Outline Business Case for a specific route alignment and one Park & Ride location that would then subsequently be developed in detail and an application made for Statutory Approval in 2018.

 

Councillor Lewis Herbert, Chairman of the Executive Board, invited Members to debate the content of the report together with the issues raised through public questions, the Local Liaison Forum and the Joint Assembly.  In terms of the Girton Interchange, he made the point that it would not be possible to take this any further forward at this meeting in view of the Interchange falling under the responsibility of Highways England.  He was keen to discuss this further with Members of Parliament further to the indication from Heidi Allen MP earlier at the meeting that a meeting would be arranged.

 

Reflecting on the arguments for an on-road scheme against an off-road scheme, Mr Menzies said that the key issue was whether or not there was room for what was proposed on an on-road route.  He therefore agreed to undertake a topographical survey, to include preliminary design work, as requested by the Joint Assembly and the Local Liaison Forum in respect of Madingley Rise.  Councillor Ian Bates agreed that this was a sensible way forward. 

 

In response to a question by Councillor Francis Burkitt regarding publicity of the outcomes of this piece of work, it was noted that this would be made as available as it could be and that it should take approximately six weeks to carry out, with anticipated commencement being January or February 2017.  The Board was also given an assurance that the assessment would be undertaken by a third party and would therefore be a neutral piece of work, solely to establish whether or not there was room on Madingley Rise to use existing infrastructure for this scheme.

 

Councillor Bates informed the Board that he had visited all of the sites reflected in each option, as set out in the report, and had come to the view that route 4 lacked strategic value and was constrained by the woods, a special interest site, the American Cemetery and the M11.  For those reasons he was unable to support route 4 being progressed any further.  Mr Menzies reported that significant challenge had been received by English Heritage when the Ely bypass was being developed in view of the fact that the American Cemetery was a grade I memorial, so would expect significant challenge in the same respect for any route proposed for the north of the American Cemetery.  He added that National Planning Policy gave a very high priority to grade I memorials as well as sites of special interest such as those impacted by the route 4 option.  Regarding the scheme’s outcomes, Mr Menzies said that use of the bridge would mean a breakdown of reliability and reduced journey times, compared to other options.

 

Councillor Hickford explained that the Assembly felt that it had not seen enough detail to justify removing option 4 at this stage and had asked what could be done to mitigate against these issues, with use of the bridge not having appeared in the report. 

 

Councillor Herbert had taken into account the Joint Assembly’s comments but, having reviewed the analysis of that particular option since the Assembly’s meeting, agreed with Councillor Bates that there were a number of significant factors against that particular option.  He had therefore concluded that option 4 was not worth progressing further, which was supported by the Board.

 

With regard to the recommendation regarding the inclusion of a segregated, cross country super cycleway, Councillor Herbert supported this in recognition of the need for improved travel between the west and east having to include a cycleway as well.  Councillor Burkitt added that this was in fact an extension of the County Council’s Greenways project which was proposed for consideration as part of the City Deal’s tranche 2 programme.

 

Councillor Smith highlighted that this recommendation sought a segregated cycleway instead of, not as well as, any cycleway proposed to run alongside the busway.  Councillor Bates made the point that this aspect of the scheme and level of detail would be considered as part of the subsequent design stage.

 

Councillor Burkitt asked officers to explain why option 3 had been recommended above option 3a.  Mr Menzies said that further work was required in respect of option 3a to ascertain what was achievable with Bourn Airfield as a development being an important aspect of the scheme, the details of which were not yet known.  He confirmed that further analysis and evaluation was necessary to establish what was physically possible, as well as a better understanding of the implications of development in the area.  Until this further work had been undertaken officers were not in a position to be able to recommend or disregard it as a preferred option.

 

Councillor Herbert welcomed the recommendation regarding a comparison of the Park and Ride sites, together with the addition of Scotland Farm as a potential Park and Ride site.

 

With regard to Scotland Farm, Councillor Burkitt made the point that this represented a site on the very limit of the greenbelt which he thought was worthy of consideration.  He highlighted, however, that some thought would need to be given to whether that meant the busway should instead sit north of the A428.

 

Reviewing the anticipated footprint of a Park and Ride site, a map had been circulated which used the footprint of the current St Ives Park and Ride as an example.  Councillor Burkitt asked whether a Park and Ride site of that size was necessary as part of this scheme and it was noted that it probably would not be, although that detailed work had yet to be undertaken and at this stage the allocation of the site was the issue under consideration.

 

Councillor Burkitt queried whether Park and Ride site 1 should be removed from the process at this stage.  Mr Menzies said that this site had been included on the basis of it being close to and using the existing road network, as well as being located on the north side of the dual carriageway.  He therefore felt that it could act as a sufficient Park and Ride site to support the scheme. 

 

Councillor Herbert asked officers, in respect of the Western Orbital route and the recommendation by the Local Liaison Forum regarding an all-ways junction at Girton, how the linkages of such a proposal with this scheme could work.  Mr Menzies explained that there would be a lot of factors to consider in the area and that this information would arise as a result of the further assessment of specific routes as part of the scheme’s next stage.  He emphasised and reiterated, however, that there were practical and environmental issues with every option.

 

Councillor Herbert sought further clarity around what factors may determine which links were used, for example, to Grange Road as part of this scheme as the basis of being a preferred route.  Mr Menzies said that environmental issues around the landscaping of the Bin Brook together with associated flooding and other water courses in the area would be key considerations, as well as any flower, fauna and protect species in the area.  He said that the impact of these issues would not be known until the further work previously referred to had been carried out.

 

Penny Heath was invited to address the Board at this stage of proceedings and made the point that the areas referred to as ‘links’ to Grange Road actually consisted of residential areas and community roads, each with different characters, making the point that people needed to think sensitively in that respect when considering the options.

 

Taking into account the recommendations of the Joint Assembly and Local Liaison Forum, the Executive Board:

 

(a)        NOTED the accompanying option assessment report, the further background papers containing the outline business case and the map appended to the report.

 

(b)        AGREED, in principle, that a segregated route between Cambourne and Cambridge, with a Park and Ride near the Madingley Mulch roundabout, best meets the strategic objectives of the City Deal and the City Deal Agreement, given the wider economic benefits.

 

(c)        AGREED, in principle, that the possibility of a segregated cross country super cycleway running close to or through the key villages between Bourn Airfield and the M11 should be explored as part of a wider examination into improving cycle links between settlements in Greater Cambridge.

 

(d)        INSTRUCTED officers to undertake a topographical survey of the A1303 from Madingley Mulch to the M11 and undertake preliminary design to assess whether or not it is feasible to provide a two way busway, a cycleway and a road within the existing highway boundary, and to share the information with the Local Liaison Forum.

 

(e)        INSTRUCTED officers to undertake further appraisal on:

 

(i)         Possible specific route alignments within catchment area 3a, with catchment area 3 as an alternative if option 3a proves unviable, noting that both would connect with and potentially through Cambridge West, in accordance with the scheme design criteria set out in paragraph 12 of the report, and within established environmental and planning policies.

 

(ii)        A new Park and Ride at either Scotland Farm or a new location 4, which combines site 2 with the north portion of site 3, as set out in the report, with the remainder of site 3 not to be used for any Park and Ride facilities, in accordance with the scheme design criteria set out in paragraph 12 of the report, and within established environmental and planning policies.

 

(f)        REQUESTED officers to:

 

(i)         Ensure designs for the Western Orbital bus route, the bus route through north-west Cambridge to the Science Park and the management of buses in the city centre fully integrate with this project.

 

(ii)        Seek to deliver all of these schemes as close in time as possible to the eastern section of the A428 Cambridge to Cambourne scheme.

 

(g)        DELEGATED to Cambridgeshire County Council's Executive Director of Economy, Transport and Environment:

 

(i)         To act with input from the A428/A1303 Local Liaison Forum, including the Parish Councils and Residents' Associations along catchment areas 3a and 3, interested Members of the Joint Assembly and interested elected Members from the County Council, City Council and District Council.

 

(ii)        To act in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the City Deal Executive Board.

 

(iii)       Responsibility to identify a specific route alignment(s) within catchment area 3a or, if necessary, catchment area 3.

 

(iv)       Responsibility to identify a footprint for a Park and Ride location at either Scotland Farm or new location 4, as set out above.

 

(v)        Responsibility to bring back the results of (d), (g)(iii) and (g)(iv)  above to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board ahead of the next round of public consultation.

 

(vi)       Responsibility to undertake a public consultation on that specific route alignment and Park and Ride location.

 

(vii)      Responsibility, subsequent to that public consultation, to provide a report to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board containing a recommendation and full outline business case for a specific route alignment and one Park and Ride location that would then subsequently be worked up in detail and an application made for Statutory Approval in 2018.

Supporting documents: