Agenda item

Steve Wilson – Major Highways Project Engineer, Wiltshire Council

Steve Wilson – Major Highways Project Engineer, Wiltshire Council gave a general overview of the A350 Melksham Bypass Public Consultation. (The power point presentation is attached to these minutes).

 

The full range of options were briefly outlined

 

This consultation provided the opportunity to gather additional information on the scheme and its potential effects and help identify mitigation measures where required.

 

It should be noted that the consultation was not a public ‘vote’ for the most popular route or option. A wide range of factors had to be taken into account in determining a preferred option.

 

That there would be other formal consultation stages in the future, including at the planning application and in connection with the statutory orders, but it was considered that early consultation was a vital stage in developing major projects.

 

Views were requested by Monday 30 November 2020.

 

Further information could be found at:

 

https://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/highways-a350-melksham-bypass

 

Points made included:

 

·         That the importance of the A350 to the local economy had long been recognised by Wiltshire Council

 

·         That this was the primary north-south route between M4 & Dorset Coast

 

·         That the route was one of Busiest Routes in Wiltshire connecting principle settlements

 

·         That sections of the A350 were subject to high traffic volumes, congestion and delays

 

·         That funding from DfT to prepare Outline Business Case (OBC) was available

 

·         That the scheme was currently at an early stage. It had many stages and statutory consultations to go through before construction could start.

 

 

That the aims of this non-statutory consultation were to:

 

·         Engage with stakeholders & potentially affected land owners

 

·         Encourage involvement

 

·         Build strong open relationships

 

·         Raise awareness

 

·         Inform about the option assessment process

 

·         Understand concerns, issues and suggestions

 

·         Receive feedback on the options to allow us to develop the scheme further

 

·       Prepare for the statutory consultation phases

 

 

Next Steps

 

·         Ongoing technical investigation and review works, Ecology / environment walk over surveys

 

·         Consultation to be launched at Melksham Area Board Meeting (4thNov 7pm) Runs to the end November 2020

 

·         All suggestions and comments would be welcomed and would be considered

 

·         Responses would feed into option consideration process

 

·         Sifting of options to progress from long list to short list

 

·         Further consultation mid 2021

 

·         Adoption of preferred route & submission of Outline Business Case

 

 

The Chairman thanked Steve Wilson for his informative presentation.

 

Note: That the Consultation has now been extended until 23:59hrs on Sunday 17 January 2021

 

Questions raised at the end of the presentation

 

(Note – the information provided below is a synopsis of the questions asked and answers provided – this is not a word for word transcription)

 

Q1. Cllr Jonathan Seed – Can the slides from tonight’s presentation be made available as part of the consultation?

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R1. The information pack on the website utilises a lot of information within presentation and expands upon it, however the slides will be provided as a standalone document as well.

 

Post meeting note – slides uploaded to web site Thursday 5^th November 2020.

 

 

Q2. Tom and Mandy Pearce – Live in 600 year old listed house which would be directly affected by option 10d.  Would there be a need for compulsory purchase order to be placed on our property?  The building has shallow foundations - what happens with increased vibration during construction and heavy traffic, who would be responsible and liable?

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R2. Any option taken forward will be subject to a planning application and will be designed and implemented in compliance with current design standards and practices.  One of the constraints to work through, and around, relates to listed buildings.  The constrains plan available as part of the consultation information highlights all of the listed buildings that we are aware of within the Melksham area.  This is not a unique issue and will be considered and feed into the route selection process.  One key question is always in connection with the deliverability of routes and the impact that deliverability has.  Issues such as this will need to be worked through as part of the scheme development, business case and planning application process.

 

 

Q3. Graham McNally – length of period of consultation is short given the size of the issue being considered and other wider matters such as COVID 19.  Would have expected the consultation period to be longer.

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R3.  This is non-statutory consultation, which we are wanting to undertake in a timely manner to allow the route selection process to proceed.  Ideally, we would not be in a COVID-19 lockdown situation and would prefer to undertake this type of engagement through face to face discussions in a Town or Parish Hall.  Formal consultation will be undertaken as the scheme evolves and develops, so this is not the only opportunity for the public to engage and help shape the scheme.  We are doing our best in very difficult circumstances.

 

 

Q4. Tom Turner – Understands that route 10d was not part of the original proposal.  Sometime has been spent explaining the route this evening.  Why has this been added when it crosses the canal, a key area for leisure and tourism and has impact on the countryside?  Who suggested it and why has it been considered?

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R4. The new route has come about following suggestions at the Melksham Area Board in March 2020 where a wider or longer version of Option 10C was suggested with a connection directly to the A361.  We gave an undertaking at that Area Board to consider the suggestion and have done so.  We believe the option has some merit, but it does need to be explored fully.  The scheme could end up at a public inquiry and if that were to be the case then we would need to ensure that we have undertaken all of the necessary investigations, and have documented and evidenced why potential routes have been discounted in the same way as we need to evidence why route are taken forward. There may be further suggestions / ideas coming through this consultation and if so, we will be duty bound to consider whether those have merit as well.

 

 

Q5. Ian Jones – Have we got plans to consider whether a bypass is necessary given changes to traveling habits i.e. working from home.  Also, friends & neighbours were not aware of this meeting – need to look at communication on the consultation.

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R5. Yes.  Non-road based options are part of long-list being considered.  These did not perform particularly well at the Strategic Outline Business Case stage, but we are considering and would welcome thoughts and views.  In connection with changes to travel patterns, we need to assess routes in line with the rules set out by DfT through WebTAG, which is the formal way schemes such as this are assessed in traffic terms.  WebTAG is updated from time to time, and we are anticipating an update early next year, in part, due to changes in travel patterns associated with COVID 19.  We will assess route options in line with the rules at that time.   

 

With regards to the consultation communications there are two press releases – one from a week or so ago advertising the Melksham Area Board and this agenda item, the other is due to be issued tomorrow in connection with the launch of the consultation.  We are sorry that your friends and neighbours were unaware, but colleagues in the communications team have been working hard to advertise.

 

Post meeting note – there was also a press release regarding the launch of the consultation on 05/11/20 as well as those on 13/10/20 following Wiltshire Cabinet Meeting and on 27/10/20 advertising the Area Board Meeting.

 

 

Q6. Janet Giles (summary only of statement / questions) – Will recent correspondence submitted in advance of the consultation be taken into account?  Who is involved with the route selection analysis, will Councillors be involved and how much will be in the public domain?  What decarbonising targets have been used in the modelling process? Feels there is a bias towards 10d – is there a proposed housing development south of Bowerhill through which a contribution to the bypass would be sought?

 

The Area Board Chair requested the Mrs Giles submit her questions through him to allow for a full response to be provided.

 

Post meeting correspondence received form Mrs Giles (20:22 04/11/20)  with questions as follows:-

 

 

   

Finally who has got the Major Scheme Business case for the Melksham bypass or any WebTag analysis?

 

Post meeting response to these questions as follows:-

 

 

The Consultation is scheduled to close on 30^th November 2020.

 

Yes. Recent correspondence received ahead of the launch of the consultation will be considered.

 

The consultation responses received will be analysed and summarised in a report to the Council's Cabinet which will be publicly available. The information collected will help to inform the development of the detailed proposals, which will be the subject of further consultations. As part of the options assessment process, our Consultant and Client Officer team will engage in the development of an Options Assessment Report, which will form the basis of any recommendation made to Wiltshire Council Cabinet regarding the preferred route and will be publicly available alongside the OBC.   The adoption of a Preferred Option will be a matter for Wiltshire Council's Cabinet. It should be noted that the statutory orders to construct the scheme are likely to be the subject of a Public Inquiry, the results of which will be considered by the Secretary of State.

 

There is no bias towards option 10d (unintentional or otherwise). All options will be considered on their own merits.  The current exercise to consider and assess options is as much about being able to evidence why options are not viable as it is about demonstrating viability. Option performance is being modelled and assessed in line with WebTAG. 

 

Only currently committed developments have been considered in developing route options. Potential housing development sites will be considered through the Local Plan process, but currently these are not sufficiently developed or certain enough to be considered as constraints on route options .

The previous Strategic Outline Business Case reports are available on the consultation website.

 

 

 

Q7. Phil Chipper (summary only of statement / questions) – Expresses confusion regarding the extent of options being considered, and understood that following SOBC there were only two options remaining.  Believes there has been misinformation presented to DfT at SOBC stage. If a bypass is such a good idea why is there a need to invent a case for funding?  WC have to make a funding contribution to the OBC works – where is this coming from?

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R7. The SOBC is the starting point for developing a scheme such as this, during which a high level assessment is undertaken in order to establish a concept and the need for scheme.  The SOBC process establishes that need, and whether there is a scheme to be found which may “stack up” in terms of Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR). It is an exercise in its own right.   At OBC stage you look in more detail, revisit and reassess, undertake more analysis and more design work.  Beyond this, again, further assessment, design and development is needed to get to the Full Business Case position.  We are following the process in line with Government guidelines and requirements.

 

 

Q8. Steve Dagnall (summary only) – What percentage of traffic load increase is perceived?  Westbury had failed bypass requirement 9 years ago. Westbury needs to be considered – is a bypass at Westbury being considered as part of this business case?  

 

Response provided during the meeting:-

 

R8. The percentage increase in traffic will be in line with what is required through the WebTAG assessment, which determines what growth rates are applied, and what future developments are to be considered. The slide presented depicts graphically the change in traffic between 2018 and 2036 during the AM peak hour.  Westbury is probably beyond the scope of what can be responded to tonight.

 

Area Board Chair requests submission of Westbury questions through him to allow for a full response to be provided.

 

Post Meeting response:

 

It is hoped to bid for funds to improve the A350 at Westbury, but this scheme will fall into a further round of government funding, which is unlikely to begin until 2025.

 

 

Q9. John Freeman – Agree with Westbury comment, and the passing of traffic further along the A350 towards Westbury.  Costs in the order of £150m have been muted - what happens when the cost increases and who picks up tab?

 

The Area Board Chair requested that questions be submitted to him to allow for a full response to be provided.

 

Post Meeting response:

 

It is hoped to bid for funds to improve the A350 at Westbury, but this scheme will fall into a further round of government funding, which is unlikely to begin until 2025.

 

Wiltshire Council would not be able to fund a scheme of this type from its own resources. It would be necessary to bid for funding from the Department of Transport (DfT) and to make the case for the scheme by preparing a business case which would include the cost and economic benefits.

 

The decision regarding funding for the scheme would be made by the DfT after considering the business case. If approved, and depending on the choice of route, the scheme could cost in the region of £135 million.

 

There will be a need for local contributions to the cost of the scheme, and typically DfT require 15% local contributions. 

 

The Outline Business Case submission will need to set out the economic case for the scheme. This will consider the cost compared to the benefits through reduced accidents and reduced vehicle operating costs. A more expensive option may have higher benefits and may be a better investment.

 

At this early stage of the scheme development a risk allowance is included in the estimated scheme cost to provide a contingency item and to allow for unknown costs. As the scheme design progresses the costs become better defined and the risk element reduces. At the construction stage any cost overruns are likely to have to be met by the Council, which is why care is taken to ensure the cost estimate is as accurate as possible prior to construction starting.

 

 

Q10. Michelle Donelan MP - As the local MP, wants constituents views to be heard.  Echoes concerns regarding the length of consultation period and that this is taking place during lockdown.  Indicates that in reality this will bring forward housing development which will see Melksham potentially double size.  Believes this should be discussed more so local people can provide input.  Wants the option that will work best for the local community.

 

Is there a possibility of extending consultation due to new circumstances?

 

The Area Board Chair requested indicated that the MP may wish to approach the Leader to discuss further.

 

Post meeting response:

 

This non-statutory consultation is due to run until 30^th November 2020.  Further opportunities for public engagement will come forward as the scheme progresses, including statutory consultations.  We will monitor the response rate to the on-line questionnaire and other correspondence over the next few weeks and consider if it would be appropriate to extend the consultation period.  This does, however, need to be balanced against the programme requirements for the completion and submission of the Outline Business Case work to the Department for Transport.  As always, we want to make meaningful and timely progress to help remove uncertainty surrounding route choice as quickly as possible. 

 

 

Additional written question received by Cllr Seed form Mark Jeffery:-

 

Received 20:52 05/11/20:-

 

1.    Michelle Donelan said that she expected that Melksham would double in size as a result of this bypass .Having read the scheme Q&A I can see no reference to this other than some “jargon “re local plans ,Core Strategy etc .For transparency ,central to the Boards and Councils stated aims ,can this  be clarified. The prospect of a doubling in the size of Melksham is an unwelcome and raises bigger questions re sustainability and infrastructure.

 

2.    I understand a budget if £135m has been allocated. If the cost was greater than this who would pay the difference and how would this be funded?

 

Post meeting response:-

 

The future housing allocations in the county will be determined through the emerging Local Plan process which is currently underway. At this stage there is no certainty about the level of housing needing to be accommodated in Melksham or in the other towns. The bypass proposals will need to be considered in the context of any confirmed housing allocations in due course.

 

 

A specific budget has not been allocated for the scheme. The initial work carried out indicated that a scheme costing £135m could be viable. The cost of the scheme would be compared to the potential economic benefits, taking into account the environmental impacts, before the scheme is finalised. It is possible that a more expensive option may offer better benefits and could be a better investment than a cheaper one. The Outline Business Case would be considered by the Department for Transport before deciding whether to award funding.