Issue - meetings

Matter for Decision

To give Members an opportunity to ask questions about the officer’s progress with applications for the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) projects, this report provided an overview of the projects, (for which the Director for Planning and Economic Development has delegated authority) together with a high-level programme for the projects.

The GCP projects covered by the delegation were as follows:

      i.         Cambourne to Cambridge Rapid Transport Route (C2C) public transport corridor project.

    ii.         Cambridge South-East Transport Route (CSET) public transport corridor project Phase 2.

   iii.         Cambridge Eastern Access public transport corridor project.

  iv.         Waterbeach to Cambridge public transport corridor project.

    v.         Greater Cambridge Greenways (various routes).

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure

 

      i.         Noted the update report in respect of the GCP projects identified in criteria (i) to (v) of Paragraph 1.3 of the Officer’s report (as shown above).

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

In response to Member’s comments and questions the Strategic Sites Delivery Manager and the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said the following:

      i.         The Shared Services response and input was determined by the project programmes that were being led by the GCP which were at various stages.

    ii.         The dialogue at pre-application stage was not publicly available. These conversations were based around technical advice around planning matters/evidence resting with the Planning Authority. GCP was the project promoter and drew upon SPS advice as required.

   iii.         Conversations involving planning policy officers working on the emerging Local Plan had been held. The LPA had referred GCP to its technical studies on the Local Plan and assisted with understanding and interpretation. 

  iv.         In terms of the Waterbeach to Cambridge public transport corridor project there was a phase one series of interventions that were required before 1600 dwellings approximately had been completed. Officers could not confirm whether the Waterbeach Public Transport Corridor was part of those phase 1 works but would advise further. Until there was a substantive number of residents, the trip effects and the transport mitigation were not required immediately. However, the cycleway enhancements along the A10 had been completed (one part of the mitigation proposals).

    v.         Noted the statements read out by Councillor Copley on the projects referenced in the Officer’s report.

  vi.         Welcomed members views, whether individually or collectively on these projects, which would be taken into consideration as part of the preparation of the Council’s responses

 vii.         The Council’s formal position at the point of statutory consultation would be formed either through the Out of Cycle decision process, approved by the Executive Councillor, in consultation with the Chair and Opposition Spokes or if possible through the Committee – but timelines for responses are fixed and not within the Control of the Council.

viii.         Noted the comment that shared space cycle/pedestrian facilities were not favoured by members - there should be separate pedestrian and cycles ways with clear signage

  ix.         Welcomed the comments that good bridle ways should also be considered.

 

The Committee

 

      i.         By a show of hands (6 votes to 0) to note the update report in respect of the GCP projects identified in criteria (i) to (v) of Paragraph 1.3 of the Officer’s report.

 

The Executive Councillor thanked Councillor S Smith for chairing the committee during the municipal year 2022/23, who had been rigorous in their reading of the emerging Local Plan and committee items. Members appreciated all the input made as Chair.

 

The Chair thanked all Members for their work for the Committee.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted).

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.