Agenda item

To received and consider the report of the Director of City Development and West Yorkshire Combined Authority which seeks to provide the Scrutiny Board with background information on the development of Supertram and NGT. The report also starts to explore some of the lessons that can be learnt from both projects and provides and update on the emerging transport strategy.

The Director of City Development and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority submitted a report which provided the Scrutiny Board with background information on the development of Supertram and NGT. The report also provided some information regarding some of the issues that arose during the NGT project and an update on the emerging transport strategy.

The following information was appended to the report:

·  Appendix 1 – The Local Partnerships Gateway Report, February 2013

·  Appendix 2 – DfT rejection letter from Martin Woods, 12 May 2016

·  Appendix A: Atkins Report: Study of High Quality Buses in Leeds

·  Appendix B:  Response from Metro on the Atkins Report

·  Appendix C: Transport in Leeds, Consultation Questionnaire

·  Appendix D: Gateway Review- Actions Undertaken

·  Appendix E: Background to the Economic Impacts Assessment

·  Appendix F :SDG Report (Jan 2014); Wider Economic Impacts

·  Appendix G: Commentary on the individual decision  points

·  Appendix H: Sub – mode options report

·  Appendix I:  email from the Project Director to DfT

The following representatives were in attendance to respond to Members

queries and comments:

- Gary Bartlett – Chief Highways Officer, City Development

- Dave Haskins – West Yorkshire Combined Authority

- Cllr Richard Lewis – Executive Board Member, Regeneration

  Transport and Planning

The key areas for discussion were:

·  A presentation outlining the chronology of the NGT project and the various phases in the development of submissions and outcomes.

·  The response to the Atkins report regarding the proposed bus alternative, the rationale for a bus based system following that response, and the lack of alternative options provided by government.

·  An update on the consultation plan to inform the submission of an outline business case for transport. This will be presented to Executive Board in October 2016 and will seek to secure £173.5m of funding from Government also in October 2016. Confirmation about this funding should be announced in the Autumn Statement.

·  The Board requested information and responses provided to WYCA and Leeds City Council from the Department of Transport about the NGT project.  

·  Clarity was sought about the independent panel of experts due to be set up, and the track records of the advisors used previously. This information will be provided to the Scrutiny Board.

·  Clarity was sought about the Inspectors reservations about local funding, if future projects have to be profitable, and if there will potentially be a funding gap for future schemes.

·  The need not to be constrained in ambition due to finance during early consultation and the intention to bring together a Transport Strategy for the next 20 years. The Board were advised that the Bus Strategy and Transport strategy under consultation will be aligned to bring a cohesive strategy together which should have the support of the City.

·  The purpose of the Gateway Review, which looked at key themes giving cause for concern at the time.

·  The gap between the advice given by DfT and meeting the expectations of the Planning Inspector. The perception that Leeds has fallen short in nearly every heading in the report. Clarity was sought about the preparation for the depth of inquiry, and if this should have been expected.

·  The importance and need for public support in any future schemes, with promotion of the benefits to the areas along and neighbouring identified routes.

·  The need for the Scrutiny Board to be advised about the lessons learned by Leeds City Council and WYCA which was lacking in the report provided. This information will be provided at a future meeting.

·  Governance of transport at a local level and the opportunities that could be available through devolution.

·  The Board requested further information about current technologies that are non-bus based for a future meeting.

·  The preparation of a letter to the DfT about the differences in advice given and the response by the Inspector, the contradictions and the apparent disconnect.

RESOLVED – The Scrutiny Board:

a)  noted the comments in the report of the Director of City Development and WYCA

b)  requested that the information required be provided at a future session of the inquiry.