Agenda item

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly considered the report which recommended the A10 Foxton level crossing bypass for further development as part of the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Future Investment Strategy. The revised proposals would also consider a ‘travel hub’ with the provision of additional parking facilities to complement the existing Park and Ride and Rural Travel Hub proposals. The Joint Assembly members welcomed this being put back on the agenda and felt that Network Rail should contribute financially to the scheme. Some anxiety was expressed for the provision of adequate parking, including the provision of cycle parking spaces. The Joint Assembly was informed that the local Parish Council had expressed preference for an underpass and there was fondness in the local community for the signal box referred to in the Mott MacDonald report, which the local community did not want to be demolished.

The Joint Assembly supported the overall approach being recommended to the Executive Board, to review the options and develop a full business case for a preferred option.

The Joint Assembly considered the report which recommended the A10 Foxton level crossing bypass for further development as part of the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Future Investment Strategy. The revised proposals would also consider a ‘travel hub’ with the provision of additional parking facilities to complement the existing Park and Ride and Rural Travel Hub proposals.

The Joint Assembly was informed that there were currently four trains per hour which resulted in the level crossing being down for up to 30 minutes in every hour. There would soon be six trains every hour and traffic was growing on the A10. The Joint Assembly was informed that Network Rail did not consider this crossing to be a priority and did not consider that anything needed to be done with it.

The Joint Assembly members discussed the report and made the following comments:

·         The Joint Assembly members welcomed this being put back on the agenda and felt that Network Rail should contribute financially to the scheme. Members were informed that the Greater Cambridge Partnership was in discussions with Heidi Allen MP regarding this and would be pursuing the issue with the Department of Transport. The Executive Board’s Transport Portfolio Holder pointed out that the Greater Cambridge Partnership had secured money in the past from Network Rail for other similar projects.

·         It was queried whether any of the options impacted on the option of a car park at the station and it was confirmed that it would not.

·         Officers and members were informed that Foxton Parish Council’s preference was for an underpass at the crossing as it was concerned that a bypass would land lock areas of greenfield land for development. The Interim Director of Transport informed the Joint Assembly that officers would be attending Foxton Parish Council’s March meeting and that they were tying this in closely with Foxton’s neighbourhood planning exercise.

·         The planning permission that had been granted for 200 houses at the quarry site in Barrington was queried, as a requirement of this was that the cycle link along the old Barrington train line to the A10 be completed. Officers confirmed that this would be incorporated into the scheme.

·         It was requested that the comment in the consultant report regarding the Victorian signal box be removed, as the signal box was valued by the local community. The Interim Director of Transport informed the Joint Assembly that Network Rail had informed the Greater Cambridge Partnership that there was no benefit to removing the signal box and Foxton Parish Council had already made it clear to the GCP that they did not want this to be demolished. The Joint Director of Transport clarified that the removal of the signal box was not being proposed.

·         A member commented on the high value of this scheme and thought that a bigger park and ride with 500-1000 parking spaces with a train link, should be considered. It was pointed out that within nine months, 2000 Papworth Hospital staff would be travelling along the A428 to the Addenbrooke’s Hospital site and that they would need somewhere to park. The Interim Director of Transport informed the Joint Assembly that parking would be integral to the options being developed for bypassing the level crossing and creating a travel hub. He also informed the Joint Assembly that the Greater Cambridge Partnership had had a proposal for a travel hub at Papworth and advised that the Joint Assembly may want to consider further work on this being done. The Joint Assembly was informed that the partners on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus site had commissioned this study and the proposal had been for 200 parking spaces to be retained at Papworth Everard, with buses provided to Addenbrooke’s.

·         As an almost daily user of the Foxton level crossing, a member expressed support for this being put back on the agenda provided it was looked at in conjunction with East/West rail and travel hubs.

·         A member commented that the level crossing was not safe for pedestrians and cyclists. It would be beneficial to have more cycle parking at the station. The integrity of the Cambridge to Royston cycleway needed to be maintained whatever was decided with the Foxton level crossing. In response to this, the Joint Assembly was informed that cycle parking would be built into proposals.

The Joint Assembly welcomed this scheme being put back on the agenda and supported the overall approach being recommended to the Executive Board, to review the options and develop a full business case for a preferred option.