Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control, and Infrastructure
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: Yes
Is subject to call in?: No
To agree the project scope, initiation, timetable and use of associated project budget.
Matter for Decision:
The Executive Councillor was asked to agree
the project scope, initiation, and programme. Also for spending to be
authorised on initial project costs.
Decision of Executive Councillor for Planning
and Climate Change:
The Executive Councillor resolved to:
i.
Approve initiation of the
project and initial project costs in accordance with the project documentation
referenced in the Officer’s report, with implementation subject to further
scrutiny, and approval of project appraisals.
ii.
Approve the Programme as
detailed in Appendix A of the Officer’s report.
iii.
Approve the
Governance/Decision making process as set out in section 4 of the Officer’s
report.
iv.
Approve the Board terms of
reference as detailed in Appendix B of the Officer’s report.
v.
Approve the phasing as
detailed in Appendix C of the Officer’s report.
vi.
Approve the
Engagement/Consultation to commence for the first phase as detailed in Appendix
D of the Officer’s report.
Approve the following estimated initial project
spending:
vii.
Automatic Traffic Counts
(ATCs) for project baseline data collection – < £12,000
viii.
Project wide Engagement/Consultation Activities – <
£50,000
Reason for the Decision:
As set out in the
Officer’s report.
Any
Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations:
The Committee
received a report from the Cambridge 20mph Project Officer regarding the
Cambridge 20mph project.
The Committee made
the following comments in response to the report.
i.
The Police needed
to be fully consulted at an early stage of the project.
ii.
Could
short-term street closures of some streets be considered for community events
and play days?
iii.
As there has
been no public consultation to-date can members be assured that the questions
are open and neutral?
iv.
A skewed
consultation would not result in public buy in and the project would fail.
v.
Members did
not feel that a PR firm could add value to the project. However, a pro-active
approach to the local paper would be welcomed.
vi.
The Committee
suggested that there were omissions to the consultee list. The final consultee
list would be agreed by the Project Board.
In response to
members’ questions the Officers present confirmed the following:
i.
The
consultation process would be phased along area committee lines. However, no
individual area committee could opt out.
ii.
If the
consultation demonstrates a lack of public support, the project would not go
ahead.
iii.
If the public
had strong views that a particular A or B road be included in the project, the
County Council would be consulted.
iv.
The County
Council was contributing officer time and equipment but was not contributing
financially.
v.
The Police had
agreed to enforce the limit once adequate signage was in place.
vi.
The Project
Board would have the role of project management. They would not be empowered to
make decision.
vii.
Area Committee
Chairs would be members of the Project Management in rotation.
The Committee
resolved unanimously to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of interest declared
by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)
Not applicable.
Publication date: 18/02/2013
Date of decision: 15/01/2013