To review and determine the boundaries of Rural Settlements for the administration of Rural Rate Relief (“Village Shop Relief”) in accordance with section 42B of the Local Government and Rating Act 1997.

This is not a key decision, but it is a legal requirement that boundaries are set and published before 31^st December each year

Rural Settlement List for 2022/23 as attached at Appendix A has been approved and publication authorised.

Cabinet:

a)    Noted the forecast 2021/22 revenue position against the approved revenue budget shown in Appendix B, the projected major variances with reasons for these variances at Appendices C1 and C2 and the action being taken to address the underlying issues.

b)    Noted the latest Capital Programme 2021/22 position [and variances, if any] as shown in Appendix D.

Cabinet:

a)    Acknowledged the performance achieved in relation to the Capital Programme schemes substantially completed in 2020/2021, summarised at Appendix A in the report.

b)    Considered the capital programme bids for new projects outline at Appendix B and to determine whether to approve the new capital schemes.

c)    Recommended to Full Council the revised capital programme for the period 2021/2022 to 2026/2027, at Appendix C for the General Fund and at Appendix D for the Housing Revenue Account, to reflect the new scheme bids, amendments to the programme and the reprofiling of expenditure identified in the report.

Cabinet:

Reviewed the KPI results and comments at Appendix A and progress against Business Plan actions at Appendix B.

Cabinet:

a)    Noted the growth bids put forward (both one off and ongoing) and detailed at Appendix A and B and consider whether those for 2022/2023 should be included in the Budget to be proposed in February 2022.

b)    Noted the proposed range of service efficiency savings/policy options detailed in Appendix C and that these will undergo further refinement and consultation with stakeholders prior to forming part of the Budget Setting Report in February 2022.

Cabinet:

a)    Approved the fees and charges as detailed in Appendix A of the report to take effect from 1 April 2022 (unless otherwise stated) or the earliest feasible date thereafter.

b)    Noted the proposed variations to fees and charges in comparison to the prevailing inflation rate detailed in the report.

Approval of the draft Empty Homes Strategy to go out for wider consultation.

Cabinet:

a)    Approved the Draft Empty Homes Strategy 2021 -2025, as set out at Appendix A, to go out to wider public consultation

b)    Delegated authority to the Lead Member for Housing to approve the final Strategy subject to minor amendments, if any, arising from the consultation.

To agree an updated strategy.

Cabinet:

Recommended to Full Council the updated Investment Strategy attached at Appendix A which includes a range of investment indicators to comply with the Statutory Guidance on Local Government Investments and the governance arrangements that enable the Council to seek approval for priority investments in a timely manner in response to market conditions, subject to minor amendments by the Head of Finance, in consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member for Finance.

On 26 November 2021 the Grants Advisory Committee reviewed all Community Chest applications received between 16 September 2021 and 15 November 2021, to the Community Chest funding scheme during 2021/22. 

3 applications were brought forward in ‘Appendix A’ of the meeting’s reports pack: Grants Advisory Committee Meeting Reports and Papers

After consideration of these applications, the Committee recommended to the Lead Cabinet Member for Finance that:

1.    Cottenham Colts FC (PPTKLFFZ), to be approved and funded at the full amount requested of £1,000

2.    Great Chishill Bell Ringers (RSDLGBJF), to be approved and funded at the full amount requested of £1,000

3.    Orwell Carpet Bowls Club (NFTMRGQJ)to be approved and funded at the full amount requested of £152.95 (please see further information section below)

To accept the recommendations of the Grants Advisory Committee (see above).

On 26 November 2021 Grants Advisory Committee met to consider making several amendments to the Community Chest Grant (CCG) Criteria, proposed as follows:

1.    To include biodiversity grants (formerly Wildlife Enhancement grants) as a £10,000 ringfenced fund within the CCG grants criteria.  Bringing this fund in line with the CCG provides a transparent application process and could result in more than the original £10,000 being allocated towards biodiversity. Parish Councils would be eligible to apply for this funding as they are for the Council’s Zero Carbon Communities (ZCC) funding if they are not already in receipt of a grant from the Council’s ZCC fund for the same financial year. 

2.    To include a one-off allocation of £50,000 from existing and available Council post-Covid funding into the CCG for Community Led Plans work and distribute in accordance with the CCG criteria. This sum would be allocated from adoption of the changes until the end of the current Community-Led Plan project (October 2023, in line with officer resources).This money will not fund projects that result from creation of a Community-Led Plan and is only for the creation of the Community-Led Plan itself.

3.    To increase the upper CCG grant limit of £1,000 to £2,000 this will allow community groups and, where appropriate, parish councils to request a larger contribution to their projects. The cost of materials and equipment is increasing across the board and since most CCG applications are for the maximum award of £1,000 towards a greater project cost.  CCG funding is historically this fund is underspent. By increasing the maximum award to £2,000 it is more likely that remaining funds will be spent by the year end and a full allocation can be made in future years.

4.    To amend CCG criteria to include Community Interest Companies are eligible for CCG funding as this is not stated explicitly in the criteria and, this should be mentioned for the sake of clarity.

To accept the recommendation (Option 1) of the Grants Advisory Committee.

Purpose

To agree the Council’s joint response with Cambridge City Council to Network Rail’s Ely Area Capacity Enhancements 2 consultation.

Background

The Ely area capacity enhancement (EACE) programme proposes to upgrade the railway to allow more trains to run through Ely.

The railway through Ely is operating at full capacity. This means that Network Rail cannot increase the number of services through Ely because the existing layout of the tracks, junctions, signals and existing speed restrictions across key bridges in the Ely area acts as a bottleneck on the network.

The aim of the EACE programme is to improve connectivity for passengers by providing an uplift in services to key destinations. Demand for rail freight is also growing and increasing capacity through Ely will support a shift from road to rail thereby providing a faster, greener, safer and more efficient way of transporting goods across the country; helping to remove lorries from roads and reduce congestion.

Earlier in 2021, Network Rail consulted on the options for upgrading the railway in the Ely South area, the results of which will be presented in 2022. This round of public consultation includes the options for remodelling the track at Ely North junction, Queen Adelaide level crossings options; and options for upgrading or closing other level crossings across the wider Ely area.

Details of the consultation are available at Network Rail’s Ely Area Consultation webpage: https://phase2b.elyareacapacity.com/

Features of the consultation relevant to Greater Cambridge

Features of the consultation relevant to Greater Cambridge comprise:

• Overall approach – enhancements at Ely North junction supporting growth in wider area
• No proposed interventions at Chesterton Level Crossing (Fen Road)
• Changes proposed to two level crossings in Waterbeach including Bottisham Road/Bannold Road but more materially Burgess Drove, where there are two options consulted on: 1 – Remove vehicle crossing rights but retain access for pedestrians and cyclists; 2 - Close Burgess Drove Level crossing

Proposed response points

The proposed key response points and reasons supporting these are as follows. The proposed full response is provided at Appendix A.

·         The need for capacity enhancements at Ely North junction to be sufficient to cater for all planned growth, noting national and local priorities to support more sustainable travel

·         Request to reconsider the consultation’s proposal not to make any further intervention planned at Chesterton Level Crossing, given the significant current impact of downtime there and potential for further downtime with the additional planned growth in services.

·         Burgess Drove Level Crossing: Of the two options proposed, support option 1 - Remove vehicle crossing rights but retain access for pedestrians and cyclists, to support the Councils’ access to food growing and access to nature priorities, noting that the level crossing provides access for village residents to allotments and the River Cam. In addition, note Burgess Drove residents’ views that upgrading the crossing would be preferable and likely less costly than upgrading and maintaining Burgess Drove surface (the proposed mitigation for closing the crossing to vehicles).

For the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development and Lead Cabinet member for Planning Policy and Delivery agree the response to Network Rail’sEly Area Capacity Enhancements 2 consultation as set out in Appendix A.

A parallel decision is being considered by Cambridge City Council to be agreed, and delegated authority is given to the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development to agree any minor amendments to the response agreed by the City Council that are consistent with the response at Appendix A.