Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Matter for
Decision
The Officer’s report provided an update on the
activities of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority since the
6 July Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Strategy and External Partnerships
i.
Noted the update provided on issues considered at the
meetings of the Combined Authority held on the 5 August and 30 September 2020.
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 Head of Corporate
Strategy.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Noted that the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough
Combined Authority (CPCA) Mayor had joined the Greater Cambridge Partnership
(GCP) Board as an observer and asked the Executive Councillor whether he
thought this would be advantageous.
ii.
Asked if the Executive Councillor shared concerns
regarding the length of time taken with the Cambridge Autonomous Metro (CAM)
project and commented that if the project was deliverable then it needed to
progress but if the project was not deliverable this needed to be acknowledged
as further work on the project could affect work on other planning for
transport projects.
iii.
Noted that the Combined Authority should not focus
solely on dualling the A10 between Ely and Cambridge as there were other
initiatives which were being considered by the GCP.
iv.
Noted the e-scooter pilot scheme the Combined
Authority was looking to promote in Cambridge and raised concerns regarding
parking, distribution and management of the project following issues with
previous 2 wheel hire schemes.
v.
Expressed concerns regarding the abolition of
regional planning structures and asked what was being done by the CPCA Mayor in
response to the White Planning Paper ‘Planning for the Future’ as Mayors were
identified within the White Paper.
The Executive Councillor said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
All the authorities needed to work together to link
up homes, jobs and work whilst also taking into consideration climate change
impacts. The CPCA Mayor had delayed work on the Cambourne to Cambridge link for
9 months because the CPCA Mayor had an alternative route. The Combined
Authority projects needed to link up with the GCP projects.
ii.
Noted that the CPCA Mayor had returned to
technology that the GCP had been working on regarding the CAM project which
involved narrower tunnels as a technical group had identified that the wider
tunnels were unaffordable. He expressed concerns regarding the amount of time
and money which had been spent on the CAM project and also expressed concerns
regarding the transparency of the external company which was being set up to
take the project further.
iii.
Noted that a good outline business case had been
prepared regarding the A10. Expressed concerns regarding the dualling of the
A10 because there was a lot of traffic that used the A10. Referred to work which had been undertaken by
the GCP regarding a northern route rather than a large roundabout linking the
A14 and the A10.
iv.
Noted that the CPCA Mayor had publicised the
e-scooter project but commented that there wasn’t a lot of detail available
regarding the e-scooter project. He
would prefer to see an e-bike trial as he thought these would be more important
in the future to connect homes with employment sites. He shared the concern
expressed by the Royal National Institute of Blind People regarding the
unregulated aspect of e-scooters.
v.
A lot of work had been put into the non-statutory
spatial strategy which contained a lot of good evidence, this included
information regarding the imbalance of the growth in the south of the county
and the disadvantage in the north of the county. He wasn’t clear how the CPCA Mayor would take
this issue forward. Acknowledged it was important that the City Council
responded to the White Paper ‘Planning for the Future’ consultation.
The Committee noted the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
noted the recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.