Members of the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) held the first debate about the road charging and transport improvement proposals since the results of the public consultation were released.

Members of the GCP’s joint assembly discussed the proposals on June 8.

Most members agreed the plans should not be abandoned, but support was voiced for changes to be made.

Professor Helen Valentine, representative from Anglia Ruskin University, said she felt the “status quo” was not an option.

She said: “We do need to take some radical steps to improve our city in the future.”

Professor Valentine said she recognised there were “strong feelings” about the proposed road charge, but said she did not think the overall proposals should be “abandoned all together”.

However, in a statement read out to the meeting, Councillor Heather Williams said she thought it would be a “grave error of judgement” to continue moving forward with the plans, highlighting the opposition to the congestion charge shown in the consultation.

The GCP announced proposals for the Sustainable Travel Zone (STZ) last year, which proposed a £5 weekday charge for drivers in the city between 7am and 7pm.

A number of exemptions and discounts have been proposed, including for Blue Badge holders, and people on low incomes.

More than 24,000 people responded to the public consultation to share their views on the plans, with 70 per cent of respondents in favour of the proposed transport network improvements, but 58 per cent opposed the congestion charge.

The meeting heard that around half of those who opposed the congestion charge, did still support the proposed public transport improvements.

Some members at the meeting said the responses to the consultation showed that some who opposed the road charge had said they were open to adapted plans.

Councillor Neil Shailer said: “58 per cent said they were against it, but [only] 17 per cent of them did not want charging at all.

“That gives us a huge leeway in between to bring something to the people that should be acceptable, but it is going to have to be nuanced.”

A specific exemption for people living within the city was not supported by members at the meeting, with some saying this could be “unfair”.

However, there was some support for ‘free days’ where in certain circumstances people could be granted a few free days from the charge.

Members also said they did not think electric cars should be made exempt from the charge, saying they still contributed to congestion in the city.

A question submitted by Neil Mackay, the managing director of Mackays of Cambridge Ltd, said he estimated the deliveries to his business could end up costing him £104,000 a year in congestion charge fees if it was implemented.

Claire Ruskin, a business representative at the assembly, said she believed there needed to be “some concessions” in relation to businesses.

Councillor Simon Smith said the GCP needed to “champion the needs of small businesses in the city” and said they needed to give a “clear positive response to the issues raised by the businesses in the city”.

Councillor Katie Thornburrow said she had heard an “awful lot” about problems faced by people trying to drive into and from the hospital site.

She highlighted the plans for the new Cambridge South Station, and suggested there could be a free mini bus shuttle set up from park-and-ride sites.

He said it should be free to visit the hospital and said the issue was important for “trust in the scheme as a whole”. He said: “We need to be clear on this that patients and visitors are not going to be charged.”

The joint assembly as a whole did not make any specific recommendations for changes to be made, but supported adaptations being explored. They asked for more information to be made available looking at the potential impacts of any changes.