Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
33 Local Transport Plan 2019 – Consultation Response PDF 502 KB
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
Decision
of Executive Councilor for Transport and Community Safety.
i.
Noted
the initial response to the Local Transport Plan consultation as set out in
appendix 1 of the Officer’s report.
ii.
Agreed
the wording of a final joint response and/or any individual response through an
out of cycle decision, in consultation with Chair and Spokes
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 Principal Planning Policy Officer.
The report referred to
the
Devolution Deal of 2017 which gave the Combined Authority (CPCA) the role of
the Local Transport Authority from Cambridgeshire County Council. One of the
key responsibilities of the Local Transport Authority was the development of a
new Local Transport Plan (LTP), to set out plans and strategies for maintaining
and improving all aspects of the local transport system.
The Principal Planning Policy Officer said the following in response to Members’ questions:
i. Noted the comment regarding the need for a mid or even short term strategy to reduce traffic within the city and improve transport links which should not be ignored when considering the long term local transport plan.
ii. Acknowledged a new dual-carriageway standard route, from Cambridge to Chatteris, March and Wisbech would encourage investment in north Cambridgeshire, and share the benefits of the success of the Greater Cambridge area. However this was not a priority project but there were plans for the fenland area to improve rail links, including Wisbech station.
iii. The issue of maintenance had been picked up in the plan under policy theme 19.
iv. Policy theme 18 of the plan proposed to identify a key local road network, identified parts of the network which should be prioritised for management and maintenance. This policy would also address measures to reduce number of vehicles, picking up on issues addressed in other policy themes.
v. Reference to social context and issues had been referenced throughout the document such as affordable travel for all.
vi. Discussion of the Dutch-type segregated walking and cycling infrastructure was to give an idea of what could be achieved but did not mean that this was the preferred choice.
The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts
of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations
Granted)
No
conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.