Meeting documents

To receive an update on the A358 road improvements.

The Committee received a presentation from the Strategic Commissioning Manager – Highways and Transport on the A358 Taunton to Southfields dualling scheme and the non-statutory consultation process by Highways England (HE). It was noted that the Council had campaigned to secure improvements to the whole of the A303/A30/A358 corridor and the economic benefits it would bring to the area if designed appropriately, and there was strong support for a dual carriageway improvement from the M5 at Taunton to Southfields as part of that programme.

It was explained that HE would be responsible for the design, delivery and operation of the route, and the Council was a consultee only and the scheme if progressed would be consented through the Development Consent Order mechanism used for nationally significant infrastructure projects. The role of the Council was explained as was the process of the current non-statutory stage of consultation by HE that would be used to help inform choice of a preferred route. It was highlighted that those wishing to make representations about the route were encouraged to contact HE directly.

Members heard that there had been 26 initial options (north and south) of the current road and those had been sifted down to 4 options for further assessment (diagrams/maps that highlighted the different route options were shown). HE had chosen to consult on a single option to inform development of the preferred route. The presentation focused on trying to ascertain the benefits of the proposed route and it was explained that without more information such as that relating to traffic flow analysis, journey times and congestion and links to other proposed developments within the area it made the task of trying to judge those benefits more difficult. More work and detail would be required as the scheme developed so that aspects such as: flood risk/drainage; rights of way; landscape and visual impacts; air quality and emissions; archaeology and cultural heritage; biodiversity and ecology; and noise and vibration could be better understood and addressed to minimise impacts to the local community whilst trying to maximise the benefit.        

It was stated that of the 4 options that had been considered in more detail in the Technical Appraisal Report (TAR) an early cost/benefit assessment indicated that option ‘2A/2B’ (link to Junction 25 and M5 south facing slips only) appeared to demonstrate the greatest quantified benefits. Although option ‘2A/2B’ was the most expensive option (costing an extra £40m approx.) it had an estimated present value of benefits of £529m compared to a figure of £351 for the preferred option.

The Strategic Commissioning Manager in summary noted that although the Council was supportive of the proposal for a new/improved route along the A358 there were numerous key issues that required more detail and exploration those were: the need for more information overall; the link road between the new expressway and Junction 25; the principle of a new ‘all-movement’ junction on the M5; strong community concern about the potential impact of J25a at proposed location; concern about any connection between J25a and the local road network; how to attract a greater proportion of traffic to use ‘section 1’; limited junctions on ‘section 2’. In closing he noted that the Council would seek assurances that HE would further consider the matters raised before finalising the preferred route, rather than discounting design solutions at this stage. He reflected that key concerns raised appear to be about a limited number of important issues rather than HE’s choice of route as a whole.

The Chairman invited comments from Committee Members and in the ensuing discussion the following points were made, issues raised and/or questions asked/answered including:

•           The proposals were not acceptable to the people of Taunton generally and in the affected areas specifically, why cut a swathe through pleasant countryside and ruin productive farm land, any new route should link up properly to the M5 and the park and ride at Cambria Farm, discussing the proposed route was a waste of time as it was the wrong route;

•           There was a question about the development consent order process and projected timeline and it was noted that this would most likely be delayed somewhat due to the June General Election, and it was noted that it was important for the Council to respond to this stage of consultation to set out support for the improvements whilst also highlighting issues that should be considered by HE to assist the Secretary of State in identifying a preferred route for the scheme;

•           The proposed route was described as being more of a Taunton by-pass rather than a by-pass for Henlade and it didn’t seem to achieve the stated aim of having 2 strategic routes in to the Southwest in order to improve infrastructure resilience;

•           It was suggested that the most beneficial route (bearing in mind the limited information available) appeared to be the ‘2A/2B’ route and the Council was encouraged to work with the District Councils and Somerset MP’s to secure the best outcome for Somerset and its residents and the Committee heard that the Council was already engaged with other bodies and this included meetings of a steering group of Cabinet Members from local Councils;

•           The proposed route seemed to provide a by-pass Henlade and it was noted that not all those travelling would want to go in to Taunton, many using the route would be going on to Devon and Cornwall;

•           Concerns from local residents in the Killams Green area were raised by a Member in respect of protecting the Vivary Wedge and ensuring any new proposed Junction on the M5 were appropriately located and would not have an adverse effect on local communities;

•           It was noted that it was important to ensure, in an area dependent on tourism and suffering from poor social mobility, that good transport links were maintained and improved however it was just as important to remember the area and accessibility for people and businesses to the west of Taunton, and it was noted that all of the proposed routes had indicated an improvement in journey times.        

The Chairman thanked all those for attending and contributing to agenda item 5 and sharing their views on this important project and he reminded the Committee that Highways England were consulting on this scheme, not the Council, and therefore that all consultation responses should go to Highways England. The Chairman also reminded those present that the Cabinet Member for Resources and Economic Development, who had spoken on agenda item 5, would be taking a non-key decision (scheduled for 22 June) and comments on the proposed scheme could also be submitted to him to help inform the Council’s response on the options consultation. The update was accepted.