To receive a report on the project from the Executive Member for Economy and Regeneration and the Executive Member for Climate Change.

The Chair highlighted that questions and queries had been received from the Friends of Carrington Moss group. The responses to these questions had been shared with the Committee prior to the meeting and had also been sent to the group directly.

The Director of Growth and Regulatory Services introduced the report and spoke through a presentation to illustrate the background for why the Council needed to make improvements to infrastructure. The Committee were informed and reminded that the Carrington and Partington area had been through rapid industrial expansion over the last 100 years. Despite previously being well connected areas, especially by rail, over the last 40 to 60 years, the infrastructure had eroded, and the area was left with a legacy road network with the area now isolated. The Director provided an overview of the geography of the area which caused this isolation. As such, the Director informed Committee Members that this placed significant pressure on the A6144.

The Director continued by highlighting the decision by the Council to make the area one of focus, most recently through the Places for Everyone scheme, which aimed to bring significant investment to the area, with 5000 homes by the 2040s.

As such, the Director added that this level of new development, in an area with poor accessibility compounded the need for infrastructure development. The relief road and its location had been identified in September 2021. The route totalled 3.5KM and included work to the adjacent roads. The Director then shared the funding behind the project.

The Carrington Spur which currently existed in the area, had deliberately excluded pedestrians and cyclist and had been designed in a time when car was king. The Director informed Members that the new road was being designed to encourage further support to the Council’s active travel schemes. The Director finished by sharing a draft picture of what the road would look like.

Councillor Axford understood the rationale behind the road, however, remained concerned about the implications of increased car usage on the road. Councillor Axford enquired as to why there was no bus lane on the road. Councillor Axford asked how confident the Director was of receiving the funding from the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) which was included in the report. Councillor Axford also asked how the public engagement in January had gone.

Regarding the bus lane, the Director of Growth and Regulatory Services responded that there was increasing thinking that buses should be incorporated with the main carriageway, with liaison ongoing with Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) to look at the approach which should have been taken with buses. The Director did add that discussions with TfGM did involve whether buses required their own arrangements at the junctions along the road.

The Director of Growth and Regulatory Services apologised, saying the report should have been updated regarding the public engagement. This had been due to take place in the Spring, however, due to logistical and technical reason this had been delayed, with an intention to launch in May.

The Director recognised the very clear risk related to funding, mentioned a formula which had gone to the Planning and Development Management Committee around how the Council could gather proportionate contributions from developers, which had been developed and was now active. The Director did inform Members that some public funding would be required, however, was confident that across this area of Greater Manchester, there were schemes which would support the infrastructure due to the housing and economic benefits of the project. The Executive Member for Climate Change, Councillor Williams, added that work was already being advanced to get funding from the Department for Transport, with every opportunity to receive funding being explored. 

Councillor Axford understood what the Director of Growth and Regulatory Services was saying regarding the buses, however, reiterated her disappointment. The Executive Member for Economy and Regeneration, Councillor Patel, encouraged Councillor Axford to not be disappointed, as they felt the road would hugely increase the bus link to Partington and without the new road there would have been no improvement to the service.

Councillor Carter asked whether the buses would be staying on the A6144 to service residents and workers in Carrington, rather than coming onto the new road which would bypass the area. The Director of Growth and Regulatory Service felt that with bus franchising it allowed greater influence for the Council to determine the routes they took. The Director recognised that there would be a combination, with some bus routes offering faster routes out of Partington via the new road, whilst other routes remaining and serving Carrington, with the route being calmer.

Councillor Carter asked what the level of risk would be relating to the £50Million of funding still to be secured. The Director responded that in theory there was enough funding in the development to meet the needs currently required. The risk would arise from getting the first part of the infrastructure development underway, as once this began, it would enable development to come forward.

Thirdly, Councillor Carter asked how the road would impact the peat land South of the proposed carriageway, particularly in relation to drainage. The Director of Growth and Regulatory Service shared an old image, displaying how the road ran entirely North of the peat area. Initial ground inspections, with more to follow, had shown only a very small lens of peat in one area. As such, despite being a factor, the Council was not currently concerned about peat.

Councillor Carter’s final question asked what chance there would be to reopen the old rail lines which still existed in the area. The Executive Member for Climate Change informed Councillor Carter that this was not something the Council was opposed to, however, it was not something the Council had the gift to determine. Trafford had recognised that the road was currently at capacity and to deliver the 5000 homes involved in Places For Everyone, the existing highways network would need to be upgraded. Councillor Carter encouraged the Council to make the message clear around how the establishment of railway line was not a decision for the Council to make. The Executive Member for Economy and Regeneration took the point, adding that there were plans to make use of the disused rail lines for the Council’s active travel strategy.

Councillor Frass recognised the requirement for Government to instigate the railway being reopened, however, questioned why the Council would be allowed to repurpose it as a walking and cycling route instead. As such, Councillor Frass enquired as to whether it could be repurposed as a tram route which would have Greater Manchester control. The Director of Growth and Regulatory Services informed the Committee that the railway was still owned by Network Rail and the Council had surveyed some of the structures to find them to have deteriorated. Regarding the Metrolink, the Director highlighted the rapid transit strategy which was currently being developed by TfGM. The Council was pushing for New Carrington to be included in longer term projects related to this strategy, however, recognised the demand for projects of expansion to the Metrolink due to its success.

The Chair asked if the cancelling of the Manchester HS2 expansion was going to make a difference to funding. The Executive Member for Economy and Regeneration responded that there was currently no evidence supporting the idea that this money would be put into public transport.

Councillor Holden asked whether there was sufficient expert advice, guidance, and information being sought to avoid issues going through the old petrochemical site. The Director of Growth and Regulatory Services responded that this consideration had been included within the report, with it likely to be an issue and concern. The Committee were reassured that the aim was to disturb the ground as little as possible.

Councillor Frass enquired as to where suspected contaminated drainage was going, with it being separated to prevent cross-contamination. The Executive Member for Economy and Regeneration responded that a formal remediation strategy was being worked on with the landowner and the Environment Agency, with the answer to this to come through that. The Director provided a further response referring to ensuring that the water from the road does not mingle with the ground water and its contaminants.

Chair thanked Councillors and Officers for their responses.

RESOLVED: That the contents of the report be noted.