Issue - meetings

To consider a report of the Cabinet Member for Economy & Regeneration.

Following a commitment by Cabinet to release the strategic outline business case for the A6 to M60 Relief Road once it was complete, this report provides an update on the status of the Strategic Outline Business Case for the A6 to M60 Relief Road and the required next steps to progress the scheme, including the financial implications and timescales of these steps.

A review of the Strategic Outline Business Case and the potential next steps was undertaken by Council Meeting on 30 November, and the Council Meeting resolved to recommend to Cabinet that a formal funding request be submitted to government to fund the next stage of business case development.

In light of the resolution of the Council Meeting on 30 November 2017 at which it was recommended that the Cabinet progress the next steps identified in Section 6 of the report, including the submission of a formal funding request to government to fund the next stage of business case development, the Cabinet is recommended to adopt and action the recommendation of the Council Meeting.

Officer contact: Sue Stevenson, 0161-474-4351, sue.stevenson@stockport.gov.uk

The Cabinet Member for Economy & Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Cabinet to consider a draft Strategic Outline Business Case for a relief road between the A6 and M60 as part of a first phase of work to review the strategic case for such a road in light of contemporary evidence. A further phase of work, subject to Government approval, was needed to produce a full business case and detailed scheme prior any application for Government funding of the scheme construction costs and prior to submission of any planning application and associated public consultation.

The Cabinet Member referred to the three hour debate during the Council Meeting, at which 37 councillors spoke after which the Council Meeting recommended to the Cabinet that it proceed to the next stage of Business Case development.

Cabinet Members discussed and commented on the proposals.The issues raised included:-

·         although councillors had expressed a wish for more information on the impact and viability of the road, there was already significant evidence available on the impact of road building, particular the relatively quick loss of benefit, spread of congestion and air pollution, and the expansion of ancillary development;

·         much of the evidence of the impact would only be available after a road was built, but existing studies demonstrated the limited benefits similar schemes actually accrued;

·         the environmental and ecological damage of the road would be significant and could not be mitigated against;

·         the SEMMMS Strategy had emphasised the need to change travel patterns and habits, including away from cars, and this needed to happen before new roads were considered;

·         collecting more evidence would allow the matter to be settled more finally than just making a decision based on the current draft outline business case;

·         by moving the next stage this would allow a more comprehensive engagement and consultation with the public and give an opportunity for those residents not previously engaged by the public campaigns;

·         it was a concern that many of the assessments of the impact of the road would not be available before a public consultation;

·         it was important that any consultation be clear about the information that the Council has and does not have.

The Cabinet Member for Economy & Regeneration emphasised that no decision was being taken on whether to build a new road, only whether to proceed to a further stage of business case development.

RESOLVED (5 in favour, 3 against) - That in light of the recommendation of the Council Meeting on 30 November 2017, that approval be given to progressing to the next stage of Outline Business Case development of the A6 to M60 Relief Road as set out in Section 6 of the report, and to seek funding from the Department of Transport for this work.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.

The Cabinet Member for Economy & Regeneration (Councillor Kate Butler) submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Council meeting to consider a draft Strategic Outline Business Case for a relief road between the A6 and M60 as part of a first phase of work to review the strategic case for such a road in light of contemporary evidence.

RESOLVED – (43 for, 14 against) That the Cabinet be recommended to progress the next steps identified in Section 6 of the report, including the submission of a formal funding request to the government to fund the next stage of the business case development.

A named vote was requested in relation to the voting on this item and the voting was recorded as follows:-

Those members who voted for the motion were:-

The Deputy Mayor; Councillors Geoff Abell, Malcolm Allan, Brian Bagnall, Kenny Blair, Stuart Bodsworth, Laura Booth, Kate Butler,  Christine Corris, Stuart Corris, Tom Dowse, Roy Driver, Annette Finnie, Dean Fitzpatrick, Colin Foster, Alex Ganotis, Lord Goddard, Chris Gordon, Graham Greenhalgh, Paul Hadfield,  Keith Holloway, Sylvia Humphreys, Mark Hunter, Mike Hurleston, Sue Ingham, Oliver Johnstone, Julian Lewis-Booth, Syd Lloyd, John McGahan, Tom McGee, Wendy Meikle, Adrian Nottingham, John Pantall, Paul Porgess, Lisa Smart, June Somekh, Charlie Stewart, Jon Twigge, Lisa Walker, Mark Weldon, Elise Wilson, John Wright and Suzanne Wyatt.

Those councillors who voted against the motion were:-

Councillors Sheila Bailey, Richard Coaton, Becky Crawford, Dickie Davies, Tom Grundy, Yvonne Guariento, Philip Harding, Daniel Hawthorne, Mags Kirkham, Patrick McAuley, Chris Murphy, Andy Sorton, John Taylor and Wendy Wild.

To consider a report of the Cabinet Member for Economy & Regeneration.

In March 2015, the government granted funding to the GMCA (on behalf of Stockport Council) to undertake a contemporary review of the strategic case for the A6 to M60 relief road and produce a strategic outline business case for the scheme. In line with DfT guidance, completion of the strategic outline business case is the first phase of the decision making process for any major transport scheme, and further work is required to develop the full business case for the project.

The next phase of development work would include further work on the detail of the scheme and would include a public consultation exercise. Subject to approval by government on completion of that stage, further work would still be required to get the scheme to the point of submitting for planning permission, including further public consultation.

The draft strategic outline business case accompanies this paper. 

Cabinet is requested to:

·         Review and comment on the draft strategic outline business case

·         Advise on the next steps which will include submitting a bid for funding to GMCA and DfT to undertake the next stage of the scheme development process which would include more detailed environmental investigation and extensive public consultation and inform the development of a full business case.

Officer contact: Sue Stevenson, 0161 474 4351, sue.stevenson@stockport.gov.uk

The Cabinet Member for Economy & Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Cabinet to consider a draft Strategic Outline Business Case for a relief road between the A6 and M60 as part of a first phase of work to review the strategic case for such a road in light of contemporary evidence. A further phase of work, subject to Government approval, was needed to produce a full business case and detailed scheme prior any application for Government funding of the scheme construction costs and prior to submission of any planning application and associated public consultation.

The Cabinet Member stressed that in considering this document the Cabinet would not be making a decision on whether or not to proceed with the road scheme, only whether it wished to proceed to the next phase of development work on a possible scheme.

The Cabinet Member, echoing comments made during her responses to public questions earlier in the meeting, emphasised that the Council had gone beyond the usual practice of local authorities in publishing the draft Strategic Outline Business Case and the supporting documents because it was aware of the public interest in this matter.

Cabinet Members discussed and commented on the proposals. The issues raised included the following:-

·         the proposal for a relief road would be a waste of public money as it would devastate the environment while only providing short term relief of traffic congestion;

·         once constructed, the road would open up what remained of the Goyt and Poise Brook valleys to development as was almost universally the case with bypass scheme;

·         the road would divide the Offerton community;

·         the environmental impact of the scheme would be significant, damaging the habitats of a range of species, introducing noise and light pollution and reallocating air pollution;

·         there was insufficient detail in the DSOBC on the cost of the scheme and the costs to the Council to progress this work, with no mention of mitigation costs nor spending to encourage alternative travel. The headline cost projection was double the projected costs to introduce Metrolink to Stockport and out to Marple, which should be a preferred aspiration;

·         there were concerns about the modelling and underlying assumptions used in the DSOBC, not least the fact that the well-evidenced induced traffic effect of bypass schemes would erode the congestion relieving benefits of the scheme within a short time of its opening, and insufficient focus on induced traffic was included in the document;

·         the assertion that congestion was a barrier to economic growth could not be substantiated given all the investment in Stockport and the statistics that showed the high quality of employment and high productivity of residents and businesses in the borough;

·         congestion nevertheless remained a problem for many residents, and had been raised most recently during the SEMMMS refresh consultation events. There was sufficient evidence in the document to suggest that not investigating the matter further may let down residents;

·         the impact of the activity of neighbouring local authorities needed to be taken into account, particularly the encouraging of significant house building, as the Council was not in a position to prevent people moving to or through the borough;

·         there was a well established link between air pollution and health, particularly respiratory illnesses, and this needed to be considered as part of any decision to move forward;

·         in developing any further the business case for this scheme there would need to be a thorough public consultation and full environmental impact analysis.

It was acknowledged that there was insufficient evidence in the document to answer all concerns about a possible scheme as this was not the document’s purpose. In light of the strategic significance a relief road represented to the borough, it was suggested that the matter should be debated at the Council Meeting so that whichever approach was chosen this would have the broad support of all of the Council.

Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

The report encloses the draft strategic outline business case for the A6 to M60 Relief Road. In line guidance from the Department for Transport, this is the first phase of the decision making process for any major transport scheme and further work is required to develop the full business case for the project.

The Scrutiny Committee is invited to review and comment on the draft strategic outline business case for the A6 to M60 Relief Road.

Officer Contact: Sue Stevenson on 0161 474 4351 or email: sue.stevenson@stockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) enclosing a draft strategic outline business case for the A6 to M60 Relief Road. In line with the guidance from the Department for Transport, this was the first phase of the decision making process for any major transport scheme and further work was required to develop the full business case for the project.

The Cabinet Member for Economy and Regeneration (Councillor Kate Butler) attended the meeting to present the report and respond to Members’ questions.

 The report would be considered by the Cabinet at its meeting to be held on 14 November 2017.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

• There was a divergence of views amongst the Members of the Scrutiny Committee with regard to the benefits of the scheme.
• A Member contended that the report stated on a number of occasions that the scheme was for the benefit of the Stockport Town Centre Access Plan and Stockport Town Centre public realm improvements yet the scheme would add considerable traffic volumes to High Lane.
• Paragraph 1.5.1 stated that the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework ‘was a joint plan to manage the supply of land for jobs and new homes across Greater Manchester up to 2035. A Member felt that this should be amended to ‘maybe’ as the Framework was still out for consultation and had not been agreed.
• With regard to paragraphs 2.5.20-2.5.21 of the consultants’ report, the figures in the Accelerated Growth Strategy were still being re-assessed as part of the refresh of the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework. It was queried how that affected the ability of this Scrutiny Committee to scrutinise the draft strategic outline business case for the A6 to M60 Relief Road and whether this business case was contingent upon the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework being implemented.
• With reference to paragraph 1.6.2 of the consultants’ report, a Member requested to see the Appendices in Volume 2 and the Forecasting and Economic Assessment report.
• Clarification was requested on what was being done about the increased traffic volumes predicted on the A6 between Hazel Grove and New Mills (paragraph 3.3.3 of the consultants’ report refers).
• The report mentioned a package of mitigation measures which would be implemented to limit any negative impacts resulting from the scheme. Clarification was requested on whether these would be prescribed in the planning application or whether these would be decided if approval was given to build the road.
• Clarification was requested on what mitigation measures would be proposed for High Lane given that these had been implemented already for the A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road scheme.
• Scheme Objective 2.2.3 in the consultants’ report stated ‘reduce the impact of traffic congestion on local businesses and communities’. A Member enquired how this objective would be met for communities south of the proposed new road.
• Paragraph 2.3.14 of the consultants’ report referred to current pipeline investment in the town centre standing at approximately £560 million and a Member requested that some of that investment should be spent in the Council’s district and local centres.
• In the light of the fact that the M60 through Stockport was heavily congested in the peak periods and given the physical constraints there was limited scope for any capacity improvements, it was enquired what would happen to the M60 at Junction 25.
• It was recognised that there was significant congestion daily on the south east quadrant of the M60 and Highways England had plans to implement a smart motorway scheme along this section.
• With regard to accident clusters in paragraph 2.4.27 of the consultants’ report, a Member felt that there would be a better comparison against accidents per traffic movement.
• Paragraph 2.4.36 of the consultants’ report referred to plans by the Elected Mayor for Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, to publish a new plan to tackle congestion and commission an urgent review of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5