environment committee
|
10 September 2001
10.00am – 11.20am |
Also
Present: Cllrs Bagnall and C Rosenstiel during item 01/h/74
FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE COUNCIL |
The minutes of the meeting held on 19 June 2001
were confirmed as a correct record.
01/h/70 Apologies
Members noted apologies for absence from Councillors Dixon and Johnston.
Councillor Durrant declared a Code of Conduct (non-financial) interest as a
Co-Chair of Cambridge Futures, see minute 01/h/00 below.
01/h/72 Public Question TIME
John Ratcliff, representing STEER, asked the
following question in relation to a subsequent item on the agenda, the Cambridge Huntingdon Multi Modal Study, ‘CHUMMS’:
“In view of
the very limited amount of public consultation that has taken place since the
publication of the CHUMMS final report, what arrangements will the Council make
to explain the possible implications for Cambridge to the public and to ensure
that the views of City residents will be conveyed to the Regional Planning Body
and to Government ministers?"
In doing so he referred to STEER's hope that local environmental groups
could work with the Council in conveying information about CHUMMS and enabling
people to make their views known, perhaps through a public meeting.
He pointed out that there was a great deal of common ground between
STEER's position and that which the Committee is being recommended to adopt
with the only point of disagreement relating to paragraph 6.3(h).
The Chair responded and said that officers and members would welcome the opportunity to support a public meeting organised by STEER and work with the media to engage public interest about the proposals contained in CHUMMS.
01/h/73 BEST VALUE REVIEW: CEMETERIES AND CREMATORIUM -PROJECT
DEFINITION
The Project
Definition of Cemeteries & Crematorium services had been submitted to
Committee for approval on 9 January 2001 but had been deferred pending consideration by City Board later the same
month of changes to the Best Value Programme for 2001/02.
The Project Definition circulated with the agenda
had been subsequently amended although the timescale for completion was unaffected.
Resolved that the Project
Definition of Cemeteries & Crematorium services be approved.
01/h/74 THE CAMBRIDGE HUNTINGDON MULTI MODAL STUDY (‘CHUMMS’)
The report set out the background to the Cambridge Huntingdon Multi Modal Study, ‘CHUMMS’, and the proposed comments from this authority to the consultation paper for transport improvements along the A14 corridor. The study looked at ways of easing congestion and improving safety in the A14 corridor, where there were also substantial development pressures. It examined public transport, traffic management and other measures to manage demand as well as road improvements. The aim was to meet the projected needs in 2016 while considering needs up until 2031.
The Committee considered the issues raised by the study, set out in paragraph 6 of the report, in particular the matters of principle in section 6.3 and the detailed issues for clarification in section 6.4. A number of amendments were made to these issues as set out on the attached appendix
Resolved (by 6 votes to 1) that the Council support the proposed strategy on condition that:
i. Effective demand management measures are introduced in Cambridge;
ii. The proposed public transport element of the strategy is delivered in advance of the highway works and is shown to be capable of achieving the projected modal shift;
iii. The other principles set out in paragraph 6.3 of the report be adopted as amended (see appendix);
iv. The details set out in paragraph 6.4 are clarified (see appendix).
G:\Committee\MINUTES\2001\09September\010910
(Env).doc
APPENDIX
ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
10 September 2001
Cambridge City Council Response to CHUMMS Strategy
Amended Detailed Comments following Discussion by
Environment Committee 10 September 2001
6.3 On matters of principle:
(a) the approach to demand management in Cambridge (which may include congestion charging or workplace charging the revenues from which must be hypothecated to support public transport in Cambridge and the Sub region) must be developed and agreed for early implementation in advance of road building and highway improvements;
(b) it is essential that public transport improvements commence quickly, certainly preceding road building, and the Government is called on to fund through the Local Transport Plan a full and independent study of the guided bus public transport link to establish its feasibility and viability;
(c) in order to achieve maximum flexibility of operation (flexibility in this context means the ability to access a variety of sites now and in the future and responsiveness to factors like the environmental considerations and existing road layouts) and early implementation, a light vehicle (rubber tyre tram/tram/light rail) option may provide the best way forward for the public transport link;
(d) the specification for the guided bus service must ensure it provides a high quality real alternative to the private car;
(e) Section 106 money must not be used to pay for investment needed to overcome the existing infrastructure deficit, which requires true public sector investment from central government. In particular, the Cambridge -St Ives guided bus way must not be dependent financially on building the new settlement at Oakington nor in any way pre-empt a proper planning decision on that proposal (note, however, that s106 money may contribute to the implementation of aspects of the strategy that arise from the transport demands of new development);
(f) all proposals must be assessed to ensure they remove barriers to movement for cyclists and pedestrians and create new opportunities for expanding the use of these modes;
(g) the Council will want to be convinced that the proposed parallel roads do not disadvantage City residents by increasing the number motor vehicles attempting to get into Cambridge;
(h) consideration of extending the three lane dualling of the A14 east to the Quy interchange in view of the long term development pressures on Cambridge; and
(i) new road building is supported only where it is essential to sustainable development and the City Council will endorse the position of Huntingdonshire District Council unless the benefits of the Huntingdon Eastern Bypass can be demonstrated unequivocally;
(j) all practicable steps are taken to reduce the impact of noise and air pollution;
(k) rail freight links must be developed to improve their competitive position and provide more sustainable ways of moving the freight that is a major contributor to transport problems in the CHUMMS study area;
(l) a positive position by Railtrack and the Strategic Rail Authority on the East-West rail link must be established; and
(m) action on short term management measures to improve road safety.
6.4 On matters of detail, clarification of:
(a) the exact route of the A14 widening and its impact on the Northern Fringe sites and the University's proposed development in North West Cambridge;
(b) the changes proposed for access to the M11at junctions 13 and 14;
(c) what improvements are required for public transport crossings of the A14 Northern Bypass;
(d) how and when the guided bus system gets through the city;
(e) the impact of road widening and parallel roads on the Cambridge Crematorium; and
(f) the provision to be made for cyclists and walkers, including the impacts around Cambridge and the opportunities for improved village-village links.