To consider responses to the resolutions of General Overview & Scrutiny Committee (2 December 2014) following the call in of the decision of cabinet taken on 13 November, and confirm a preferred option for the South Wye Transport Package (SWTP) including the preferred route for a new link road from the A49 to the A465 (with a link to the B4349)

The Vice Chairman of the General Overview and Scrutiny Committee (GOSC) opened this item by explaining how the committee had spent approximately 5 hours looking in depth at the decision made by cabinet on 13 November 2014 and had resolved that the decision should be referred back to cabinet with the two recommendations in the report.

The Cabinet Member for Infrastructure advised the decision taken on the 13 November 2014 for the preferred route was key in providing infrastructure improvements. The call in from GOSC had allowed the decision to be looked at to ensure it was sound and well founded. Having listened to the arguments put forward and the responses from officers and consultants he was satisfied the decision was based on sound reasons and had been through a robust process. He reminded members that the funding for the project was in place.

The Assistant Director, Place Based Commissioning began his presentation by explaining the layout of the report and confirming that it was focussed on the two recommendations from GOSC.

A Group Leader wished to make a point of correction at this point as he alleged the wording of the first recommendation from GOSC was incorrect; the word actuality should have been accuracy. He questioned if this affected the content of the report.

The Assistant Director, Place Based Commissioning advised that both the accuracy and actuality of the cost modelling and scoring had been looked at and the changing of the word within the recommendation would not change the response given.

Gary Dymond from Parsons Brinkerhoff (PB) presented the response to the first of the GOSC recommendations. He confirmed that cost estimates had been consistently undertaken for all route options and were in line with industry practice and relevant guidance. A review of the approach had been done by Balfour Beatty and this had validated the results. He pointed out to members the details of the approach within the report.

Phil Davidson (PB) gave the response to the second of the GOSC recommendations. He advised that the inclusion of Grafton Wood on the Ancient Woodland Register does not change the mitigation measures they would have to put in place. He confirmed the exact nature of the mitigation being developed will be in the environmental statements produced as part of the planning process. He pointed out that similar mitigiation would be required for all route options.

In reply to a Cabinet Members question, the Section 151 Officer confirmed that he was satisfied with the robustness of the response and recommended that Cabinet proceed with their decision. He confirmed he had spent time with the project team and had looked at the robustness, accuracy and risks of the project along with the consistency of the approach taken, from a financial perspective. He confirmed to cabinet that he has had experience of projects of this nature. Having gone through the figures in detail he was satisfied the information presented to cabinet was accurate and consistent.

A Cabinet Member questioned if the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49

To consider the call-in of the Cabinet decision on the South Wye Transport Package.

The Cabinet report and appendices are available at:

http://councillors.herefordshire.gov.uk/ieIssueDetails.aspx?IId=50007922&PlanId=0&Opt=3#AI34921

Adjournment to review the agenda supplements

A committee member noted that Supplement 2, containing the ‘Questions from the public’ and the ‘Response to South Wye Transport Package Call-in’ documents had been published two hours before the meeting and requested that the meeting be adjourned to provide members of the committee with additional time to review the documents; it was also noted that Supplement 1, containing a report by Alan James and an extract from the draft and unapproved minutes of Cabinet of 13 November 2014, had been published the day before the meeting.

The Assistant Director, Governance suggested that an adjournment of an hour should be sufficient for members to familiarise themselves with the documents; it was noted that the response document addressed the matters set out in the call-in notice and provided further detail but it did not raise new issues.  In response to a question, the mover of the motion said that he was personally content with an adjournment of an hour.  The motion was seconded and agreed by the committee.

Comments by the members that submitted the call-in notice

Upon the recommencement of the meeting, the Chairman invited the members that submitted the call-in notice to address the committee.

A committee member commented on: the potential complexities of the planning process; the need to be assured that the processes were done thoroughly; the call-in provided an opportunity to review the issues ahead of any challenge; there was a perception of haste and perhaps even pre-determination; he felt that the response document raised more questions than it answered; he considered it difficult to understand some decisions without sight of the original brief to the consultants; four routes options had been ruled out as they impacted on ancient woodland but the route selected would impact on ancient woodland at Grafton Wood; and limited direct consultation with English Heritage could leave the authority vulnerable to challenge.

Another committee member commented on: it was welcomed that the call-in notice had been accepted and the level of public interest was evidence of wider public concerns; in addition to the stated reasons for the call-in, he considered that the decision was based on incomplete and flawed evidence and an unsound option appraisal process, and the consultation was based on misleading and partial information and failed to engage with key stakeholders; and he also considered that the decision could result in a challenge, with the potential for loss of scheme funding.

Executive response

The Cabinet Member Infrastructure read out a statement, the principal points included:

•        Cabinet had selected route SC2 as the preferred route for the Southern Link Road (SLR) at its meeting on 13 November 2014;

•        the call-in reasons were noted and Cabinet Members, whilst of the view that the decision was sound, wanted to hear what the committee had to say;

•        a comprehensive response had been provided to the reasons in the call-in notice;

•        Cabinet had considered the work undertaken by Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) and the officer report;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40

To consider consultation responses and confirm a preferred package for a new link road from the A49 to the A465.

Cabinet were presented with reports recommending a preferred route for the new link road from the A49 to the A465, together with details of the consultation responses received during the public consultation period in July and August 2014.

The Cabinet Member for Infrastructure introduced the item giving details of how the proposed road fits into the core strategy, opens up business and housing growth and addresses transport problems within the South Wye area. He thanked the Cabinet Members who attended a site visit earlier in the week to the area of the route options.

He confirmed that route SC2 was the preferred route to progress to planning application stage, and had been chosen following the assessment work carried out by consultants Parsons Brinkerhoff and review of public consultation feedback. This is the most southerly of the route options passing under Haywood Lane and over the railway line. Funding for the route was in place and would come from Government funding through the Marches Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP).

The Assistant Director, Place Based Commissioning advised that if the preferred route was selected by Cabinet, the project will proceed to the planning stage. Further reports would be made to Cabinet once planning approval was in place, to enable the project to progress.

The Construction Manager gave cabinet the background of the project from 2010. She confirmed in 2013 consultants Parsons Brinkerhoff were asked by the council to look at the eight identified options available. Through 2013 residents were kept up to date with the progress of their work and in July 2014 public exhibitions were held giving details of the proposed routes.

The Construction Manager confirmed that a professional review had been undertaken by Herefordshire Council project team and they are content with the Preferred Option Report which accompanies the cabinet report and recommends SC2 as the preferred route.

Ben Pritchard from Parsons Brinkerhoff (PB) presented a slide show, showing the eight original route options. He confirmed four of the eight had been discounted prior to public consultation due to their impact on avoidable ancient woodland areas and impact on residential and listed buildings. The four remaining routes were considered and presented for public consultation over the summer.   Three further routes were assessed in detail post the consultation in response to comments received.  Further slides were shown of the extra three route options considered, an appraisal summary table showing the scores given to each route using the Department of Transport WebTag system, the costs of the proposed routes and concluding with the preferred route, SC2.

A Cabinet Member asked about the status of Grafton Wood. Four routes had been discounted due to their impact on other ancient woodlands areas but four remaining routes had an impact on Grafton Wood, an explanation of this was requested.            `

Ben Pritchard (PB) confirmed the project team had been made aware of Grafton Wood being added to Natural England’s ancient woodland inventory in July 2014.

Phil Davidson (PB) advised the ecological value of all of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43