Agenda item

20/00104 - Kent Transport Model Support & Development Commission


Mr D Joyner (Transport & Development Manager (West Kent)) and Mr T Read (Head of Transportation) was in attendance for this item

(1)          Mr Payne (Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport) and Mr Joyner introduced the report which set out an overview of the key aspects of the Kent Transport Model and the Support & Development Commission and recommends the granting of delegated powers to award a contract, subject to the outcome of a procurement process.

(2)          Mr Payne and the Chairman emphasised that the proposal was not a proposal for Kent County Council to spend £15m, it sought to find an appropriate provider to deliver £15m of work that would be bought by individuals such as developers etc. The proposal was not part of the end of transition, it was a standalone proposal for the next ten years.

(3)          Mr Payne reminded Members of the Committee that they had already been given the opportunity to discuss the details of the Kent Transport Model Support & Development Commission proposal and the associated costs outside of the meeting, prior to the Cabinet Committee meeting taking place.

Officers then responded to a number of comments and questions from Committee Members, which included the following: -

a)    Mr Joyner said that the determination of the availability and cost of data was a decision for the County Council. It would depend on who had commissioned the work and how it would be used. He gave examples in terms of supporting the Local Plan process and said that whilst there would be a cost involved for local groups with regards to obtaining data, it was not intended that this would be prohibitively costly.

b)    Mr Joyner said in terms of innovation, many transport modelling consultants were involved across different counties and countries. The commission would allow for future development including towards near real-time modelling to monitor traffic and travel, feed data into the model and implement solutions. Near real-time modelling had just started being introduced in York. It was intended that Kent would be able to take advantage of such technology.

c)    Mr Joyner said cycling journeys were not specifically included within the model, but the intention was to use other data, including cycling, alongside information from the model.

d)    Mr Payne emphasised the importance of adopting new technology early as a Council to put Kent in the forefront of thinking and to ease traffic and congestion issues in Kent.

e)    In terms of public access to information, Mr Read said it would be set out in the fees and charges report which was reported annually to each of the Cabinet Committees. He said Members could be undated on and be able to comment on contracts and the award process.

f)     Mrs Cooper commended the report and said that it would provide a single model of the truth for different agencies to access.

g)    Mr Read reiterated the points made by Mr Joyner in relation to charging and said that the charge for information and what was charged for the use of the model was entirely a decision for the County Council, not the consultant.

(4)        The Cabinet Committee endorses the proposed decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport to grant the Director of Highways, Transport & Waste delegated powers to award a contract to maintain and develop the Kent Transport Model and to run a scenario testing service on behalf of the County Council, subject to the outcome of a procurement process. The Cabinet Committee also recommends to the Cabinet Member that a further report be brought back to the Environment and Transport Cabinet Committee covering issues relating to availability of the data and the pricing.


Supporting documents: