Agenda item

The Cabinet is requested to consider the agenda report and its appendix and to make as set out below (a) the resolution and (b) the recommendation to the special meeting of the Council which will follow this special meeting of the Cabinet.

A - RESOLUTION BY THE CABINET

That the outputs of the work by Systra and the BABA27 community group be noted.

B – RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

(1) That in promoting a scheme to the government for inclusion in RIS2, Approach A be supported as being desirable without indicating a preference for either option ie promoting both the ‘mitigated northern route’ and the ‘full southern route’.

(2) That the ‘fall-back’ position if no approach is selected be noted.    

RESOLVED

That the outputs of the work by Systra and the BABA27 community group be noted.

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

(1) That in promoting a scheme to the government for inclusion in RIS2, Approach A be supported without indicating a preference for either option namely promoting both the ‘mitigated northern route’ and the ‘full southern route’.

(2) That the ‘fall-back’ position if no approach is selected be noted.    

The Cabinet considered the agenda report and its appendix.

An agenda supplement  had also been published for online viewing only, which contained the second background paper listed in para 13.2 of the report and a letter dated 5 June 2018 from Jim O’Sullivan, Chief Executive of Highways England to Louise Goldsmith, Leader of the Council at West Sussex County Council.

The report was presented by Mr Dignum. He said that there was almost a complete consensus in favour of one thing: achieving improvements to the A27 to ease congestion etc issues for local and through traffic. Highways England (HE) had afforded the community the opportunity to put forward, on balance, the best route by choosing between the northern and southern concepts. The consultants, Systra Limited, had advocated an off-line mitigated northern route and an on-line full southern route, which sought to address the disadvantages of these options. HE had so far neither restricted the nature and extent of improvements of on-line nor ruled out off-line routes and was prepared to consider two alternatives. The report by officers recommended Approach A ie both northern and southern concepts advanced with no preference. West Sussex County Council’s (WSCC) Cabinet Member for Highways and Infrastructure had stated that the‘mitigated northernroute’ was WSCC’s preferredoption butthe ‘fullsouthernroute’ shouldalso be developedas areasonable alternative. Mr Dignum had asked HE’s Regional Sponsor for South East England, Paul Benham, if a different submission by CDC from WSCC would present any problem in terms of consensus and was advised: ‘In response to your question, I do not see it as an issue at this stage. It will be more important to achieve a level of consensus once we have carried out our assessment of both options and arrived at our conclusions.’ HE had recently been asked by WSCC and CDC leaders to evaluate both concepts as soon as possible and it had agreed to evaluate and report on the engineering feasibility and likely cost of both options by ‘late autumn’ 2018. Systra had identified advantages and disadvantages to both routes. The issue of affordability within the likely RIS 2 budget was relevant to both routes and HE had twice emphasised to the leaders that many other schemes across the country were competing for inclusion in RIS2 and their combined cost was far greater than the likely total RIS2 budget. Of the various local surveys of opinion, the Build A Better A27 (BABA27) showed the highest support (but not a majority) for one concept only – however, respondents had not been asked to specify a preferred concept and so the balance between north and south could not be ascertained. Thus the community had not been able to agree a single choice. As Leader of the Council he was proposing that CDC should not make a single choice at this stage since it did not have all the relevant facts (which only HE could provide) and there was a risk that in choosing a single option now, which was not later accepted by HE, the A27 Chichester bypass would be excluded from RIS2. HE should fully evaluate both concepts equally and provide its analysis as soon as possible. If included within RIS2, HE would undertake detailed design work prior to a full public consultation. The eventual route announced by HE would be the subject of a development consent order for approval by a government inspector (the public would be entitled to comment). Construction would probably begin in 2023 or 2024. He acknowledged that there was a difference of opinion within even the Cabinet and obviously within the Council and a democratic debate would take place during the ensuing special meeting of the Council.

Mr Connor proposed an amendment to the recommendation to the Council set out in para 3.1 of the agenda report and in (1) on the agenda front sheet. He said that he did not believe that the Cabinet should suggest something ie Approach A ‘as being desirable’ and that those words should be deleted but otherwise leave the recommendation intact. The recommendation would, therefore, now read as follows:

‘That in promoting a scheme to the government for inclusion in RIS2, Approach A be supported without indicating a preference for either option namely promoting both the ‘mitigated northern route’ and the ‘full southern route’.’

Mr Wilding seconded Mr Connor’s proposal.  

Mr Barrow said that he agreed there should be no single choice made by CDC at this stage but he would be advocating during the ensuing Council special meeting a preference for the ‘mitigated northern route’ while exploring the ‘full southern route’ as a reasonable alternative. He would not, therefore, be supporting the proposed recommendation, as amended, by the Cabinet to the Council.

Mrs Kilby said that the issue to be determined at these special meetings of the Cabinet and the Council was one of the most difficult decisions she had faced in 30 years of local government. She sought a long-term solution to the A27 Chichester bypass rather than a short-tern fix and accordingly favoured expressing a preference for the ‘mitigated northern route’. She was unable, therefore, to support the proposed recommendation, as amended, to be made by the Cabinet to the Council.  

Mr Wilding remarked that he could not see how it was possible to express a preference until both options had been fully costed and assessed by HE.

Mr Dignum read out the amended version of the recommendation to be made by the Cabinet to the Council.

Decision

The five members of the Cabinet who were present voted by a majority of three in favour to two (Mr Barrow and Mrs Kilby) against in respect of the amended recommendation to the Council which is set out below.

RESOLVED

That the outputs of the work by Systra and the BABA27 community group be noted.

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

(1) That in promoting a scheme to the government for inclusion in RIS2, Approach A be supported without indicating a preference for either option namely promoting both the ‘mitigated northern route’ and the ‘full southern route’.

(2) That the ‘fall-back’ position if no approach is selected be noted.