Meeting documents

A presentation will be given on the activities of Bucks Advantage/Bucks County Council.

The Committee received two presentations on strategic infrastructure planning, one from Bucks County Council (Mr Stephen Walford, Director – Growth and Strategy was in attendance) and from the Buckinghamshire Thames Valley Local Enterprise Partnership (Mr Richard Harrington, Chief Executive was in attendance).

 

The County Council’s presentation explained that infrastructure was built over a number of layers from local site specific requirements progressively up through wider levels of consideration at Local/Town/Neighbourhood, Countywide/LEP, Regional/sub-Regional, and finally national requirements.

 

While it was acknowledged that Members had particular transport concerns, in particular with Aylesbury, it was explained that there were many other parts to infrastructure provision including:-

·                     Schools, education and skills.

·                     Waste transfer stations, recycling centres and disposal sites.

·                     Mineral sites and their availability.

·                     Drainage, flood amelioration and mitigation.

·                     Social care facilities / specialist housing / affordable housing.

·                     Green infrastructure, open space, parks, play areas, planting.

·                     Digital infrastructure and connectivity.

·                     Leisure facilities and libraries.

·                     Public realm and art.

·                     Doctors, dentists and healthcare

 

These were just some of the issues that needed to be considered and addressed in creating and shaping places we lived in.

 

The Committee was informed that there were two aspects to strategic infrastructure funding that needed to be considered alongside each other, namely, needs versus funding.

 

Infrastructure needs was established through a number of ways including technical, .e.g. known current capacity constraints within existing infrastructure assets and specific or area-based technical assessment of future implications.  There were also socio--political issues to be considered such as community betterment and the vision/aspirations for an area.  These needs were then quantified through plans such as a Strategic Economic Plan (SEP), Infrastructure Plan, Local Transport Plan, Neighbourhood Plans and Local Plans.

 

Having plans in place provided the catalyst, and was often a requirement of central Government, for funding for infrastructure to be attained.  Funding could come through a couple of routes – Structural/Planned (Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), Local Growth Fund (LGF)/SEP, LTB and base budgets) or through opportunistic routes such as Section 106/legal agreements, Local Sustainable Transport Funding, the EU or lottery money.  It was inevitably the case that there would be financial shortfalls and difficult decisions would have to be taken.

 

Future infrastructure needs for Buckinghamshire had identified North-South connectivity as a priority for key settlements.  As well as this, there were pressures from neighbours on all sides (MK, Luton, Tring, London and possibly Bicester/Oxford.  A list was provided of major transport infrastructure needs for coming years, in north south order, but not priority, order, as follows:-

·                    A421 ‘Brains Route’ Expressway (at feasibility).

·                    New M40 junction at Bicester.

·                    East West rail (new Winslow Station)

·                    HS2.

·                    Aylesbury East Link Road.

·                    Princes Risborough Relief Road.

·                    Possible new M40 junction 3a.

·                    A404 upgrade at Westhorpe (at feasibility), and Bisham (in RBWM).

·                    Western Rail Access to Heathrow.

·                    A355 Link Road in Beaconsfield.

·                    Crossrail.

·                    Heathrow Third Runway?

 

Information was also provided on strategic transport links/roads that might be delivered in the future on the fringes of Aylesbury as part of growth and development.

 

The Bucks Thames Valley LEP presentation informed Members that the LEP was working to build conditions for sustainable economic growth in the entrepreneurial heart of Britain.  The LEP was the County’s main voice to Government, and was a public / private sector partnership comprising 5 local authorities, Bucks Business First, Bucks Skills Board and Buckinghamshire Advantage (BA).  To date, £150m in inward investment had been obtained which would contribute towards faster broadband and digital infrastructure, better road and rail connections, and help to improve skills delivery.  Key achievement included:-

·                    £53m Local Growth Funding received.

·                    £40m generated in public and private investment.

·                    600 new homes.

·                    5,000 new jobs.

·                    82,000 m² of employment space.

 

BA had been tasked with a number of responsibilities including managing Growing Places Funding and LGF Rounds 1 and 2, co-ordinating next generation infrastructure investment and driving new work behaviour.  In support of all of this, BA was taking the lead and being proactive in putting together a Bucks Infrastructure Plan.  The plan would look to identify and promote infrastructure projects that would boost the Bucks Economy and frame an ask of government on local growth priorities.  BA’s partnership approach meant that a current and reviewable set of agreed local priorities could be agreed, which also demonstrated that Buckinghamshire was taking a clear and consistent approach and which maximised funding for local priorities.  The plan would also support the local authorities to demonstrate they were discharging their "Duty to Comply".

 

Members were informed that local authority input and approval was fundamental to the plan process, as the outcome required an aligned, proactive and innovative set of propositions, not just a wish list of infrastructure projects.  This necessitated looking at issues including national, regional and local road/rail, broadband, utility growth and business interventions.  It was anticipated that the Bucks Infrastructure Plan would be finalised by the end of 2015.

 

Members sought further information and were informed:-

 

(i)         on some of the major infrastructure work currently being delivered by the County Council, which included the Woodlands project, east/west links, delivering new employment land and investing in broadband (including developing 5G).

 

(ii)        that it was likely that the road capacity was exacerbating business getting in/out of the Vale.

 

(iii)       that a new Transport Plan for Aylesbury would be put together once the levels of growth for the next 20-30 years were known.

 

(iv)       that it was important to businesses with the business sites they wanted and which included also the on-site infrastructure they required.

 

(v)       that it was difficult to obtain infrastructure funding in the short term as CIL money was not allocated to business development.

 

(vi)       that the Council’s Economic Development team had re-started regular discussions with developers through the Developers’ Forum.  The ED team was proactive in working with applicants and planning to help progress economic development opportunities.

 

(vii)      that within 3-5 years the County Council would hope to have a detailed road map of transport infrastructure requirements.

 

(viii)     that the Bucks Infrastructure Plan, in the absence of an adopted Local Plan, was being used to plug the gap and obtain infrastructure monies from Government, and other inward investment into the area.

 

Members also commented –

 

(a)       that improving rural broadband and road links from Aylesbury to Milton Keynes, Wycombe, the M25 and M40 should have a high priority in the Infrastructure Plan.

 

(b)       that the HEDNAs being developed by areas surrounding Aylesbury seemed to be concentrating more on business growth, with an expectation that Aylesbury Vale would be taking any associated housing growth.  However, it was important for Aylesbury Vale that employment jobs were created alongside housing growth.  If Aylesbury Vale did take extra housing growth for surrounding areas then providing transport infrastructure would be critical.

 

(c)       that the Council’s Economic Development Strategy needed to be very clear to businesses about why they should invest in the Vale and the benefits of doing it.

 

(d)       that the Infrastructure Plan should also be looking at whether there was a best place to invest infrastructure that would then help to unlock business investment / job growth.

 

RESOLVED –

 

(1)       That the Director, Growth and Strategy (Bucks County Council) and the Chief Executive (Bucks Thames Valley LEP) be thanked for attending the meeting.

 

(2)       That the feedback from the Committee be provided for consideration as part of the consultation undertaken on the Bucks Infrastructure Plan.