To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies from councillor Ivan Powell

To receive declarations of interests in respect of Table A, Table B or Other Interests from members of the committee in respect of items on the agenda.

A non-pecuniary interest was noted by Cllr Hurcomb in regard to his employment with National Highways

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2026.

Resolved:       That the minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2026 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairperson

To receive questions from members of the public.

Questions received and responses given are attached as appendix 1 to the minutes.

To receive questions from councillors.

Questions received and responses given are attached as appendix 2 to the minutes.

To receive reports from the Council’s scrutiny committees on any recommendations to the Cabinet arising from recent scrutiny committee meetings.

-        Recommendations from Connected Communities Scrutiny Committee on ‘Hereford Western Bypass Phase One – Assessment Criteria’.

The Hereford Western Bypass Phase One – Assessment Criteria went to Connected Communities Scrutiny Committee on 15 April 2026. 

The chair of the committee, Cllr O’Driscoll introduced the committee’s work on the assessment criteria for Hereford Western Bypass Phase 1, noting that the committee benefited from input from an independent transport planning expert who acted as a “critical friend”. Following discussion, the committee agreed four recommendations:

·       First, the committee recommended moving away from simple pass/fail judgments to a scored (graded) approach, so decision-makers get more nuance and detail rather than a tick-box outcome. This would provide greater granularity across a wide set of factors including traffic and safety outcomes, land acquisition, carbon reduction, woodland mitigation, biodiversity net gain, construction cost, social value, affordability, and value for money. The criteria were also to be reorganised around the “five case” model for the final report.

·       Second, the committee asked for the social value criteria to be broadened so it better captures how impacts are distributed across people and communities in Herefordshire.

·       Third and fourth, it called for clearer reporting of project risks, assumptions and uncertainties, and for the inclusion of high/medium/low growth scenarios (including the risks associated with each), reflecting current economic uncertainty.

The chair of scrutiny reported that all four recommendations had been accepted.   The committee’s next step is to shape the questions for the June scrutiny session on the pre-business case, with the aim of ensuring Cabinet has sufficient information to make an informed decision.

To seek approval from Cabinet on the set of criteria from the Phase One Full Business Case which will be used to assist Cabinet in its assessment of the scheme; and to set out the scheme requirements which need to be in place before the start of construction.

Councillor Price, cabinet member for transport and infrastructure introduced the report.

It was noted that road infrastructure is essential to supporting Herefordshire’s economic progress. The development of the Hereford Western Bypass is critical to this and enables the council to move forward from design into delivery. Phase 1 will link the A49 in the south of Hereford city to the A465 at Belmont.

The focus of this Cabinet decision is agreeing the assessment criteria that will feed into the Full Business Case, which is due by June. This will then enable Cabinet to make a decision in July on whether to progress the project later in the year. The assessment criteria have recently been debated at scrutiny and through political group consultation, with recommendations considered and incorporated into the amended report now before Cabinet.

Cabinet is being asked to adopt the recommended assessment criteria to evaluate the Phase 1 scheme and to accept that specified pre-construction requirements must be met before construction can begin.

Comments from cabinet members:

Cllr Stoddart, cabinet member, finance and corporate services welcomed the report.  It was noted that the recommendations and feedback gathered through the scrutiny and PGC process had influenced the updated report.

Group Leaders were invited to offer their views:

The Group Leader for Independents for Herefordshire outlined the views of their group and argued that:

Appendix A (of the report) remains fundamentally unclear because it mixes up two different questions: whether the scheme can proceed (i.e. is it deliverable?) and, whether it should proceed (i.e. is it justified?). Items such as planning status, land assembly, statutory approvals, procurement compliance, programme/contracts and the risk register —are important but they are “gateway” requirements that indicate buildability.  They are not a true assessment criteria that test whether the scheme should progress.

It was argued that the framework’s evidence was not sufficiently clear.  Safety outcomes, freight impacts, growth scenarios and resilience should be presented numerically and quantified wherever possible, so councillors have hard evidence when being asked to support a major project. The current value-for-money threshold was suggested as being too weak, noting it does not demonstrate a robust margin of benefit against costs, risks and harms.

It was acknowledged the appendix has improved compared with earlier drafts—particularly by adding more detail on journey times, safety, carbon, social value and growth scenarios.  However, the framework still does not clearly separate pre-construction gateway conditions, the assessment criteria, and the decision thresholds Cabinet should require before approving the scheme.The Independents for Herefordshire wish to see strengthened, clearer and a transparent framework that distinguishes between “ready to build” and/or “worth building.”

The Green Group Leader outlined the views of their group and argued that:

Cabinet continues to conflate the Southern Link Road, Phase 1 of the bypass, with the full Western Bypass ambition. The Southern Link Road was dropped because there was no full business case, insufficient evidence to justify public spend and no demonstrable congestion benefit. Scrutiny and political group consultation have improved the assessment criteria, with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.