Agenda item

Blyth Relief Road

          The report provides members with :

•         An overview of progress to date on the development of the business case for a new relief road for Blyth which will significantly improve access to the town by all modes.

•         A recommendation for the preferred route alignment to be taken forward to a public engagement exercise.

•         An update on the business case which includes emerging costs, benefits and programme for the scheme.

This report was considered by Cabinet on 12 April 2022. Cabinet request that full Council endorses sign off by the s151 Officer of the Outline Business Case, noting the required County Council match funding commitment and future approval gateways as set out in paragraphs 13 to 15 of the report.

Blyth Relief Road

The report provided members with :

•         An overview of progress to date on the development of the business case for a new relief road for Blyth which will significantly improve access to the town by all modes.

•         A recommendation for the preferred route alignment to be taken forward to a public engagement exercise.

•         An update on the business case which includes emerging costs, benefits and programme for the scheme.

The report had been considered by Cabinet on 12 April 2022, and Cabinet requested that full Council endorse sign off by the s151 Officer of the Outline Business Case, noting the required County Council match funding commitment and future approval gateways as set out in paragraphs 13 to 15 of the report.

The report was introduced by Councillor Ploszaj and he moved the recommendations, which were seconded by Councillor Dickinson.

Councillor Watson commented that Blyth people were very frustrated that this was taking so long, so she welcomed the report. Route five had previously included a cross town route, but this seemed to have disappeared. Residents were concerned about what had replaced it, because it was felt that it wouldn’t help reduce congestion on Cowpen Road, and she sought assurances that this wouldn’t be the case. She also asked the Administration to lobby for further investment for a foot and cycle bridge across the river to provide access for workers to the British Volt and JDR Cables plants.

Councillor Ploszaj replied that he had been reassured by Highways officers that the design would provide relief for Cowpen Road and Laverock Hall Road, and there would be a public engagement event at the end of the month. The bridge between Blyth and Cambois had been considered as part of the previous discussions about the relief road and there had been some negative feedback from the Environment Agency about that, but he would ask officers to look at it again and respond in writing.

Councillor Morphet was concerned that the report focussed on reducing congestion rather than minimising traffic. He asked if the relief road would have a priority lane for buses, would there be a footway which satisfied Equality Act widths and gave priority to pedestrians at junctions, and would the cycle path include provision for priority to cyclists at junctions. Councillor Ploszaj replied that the priority matters would be part of the detailed design study but he would respond fully in writing.

Councillor Reid referred to the estimate of £44m and asked what element of optimism bias had been included. If it had not been included, he asked when it would be. Councillor Ploszaj replied that there were some contingencies included in the cost but he did expect cost increases to the project as it progressed. Mr Murfin advised members that new business cases did now have to factor in provision for optimal and negative bias.

Councillor Nisbet supported the proposals which would help small businesses which had been suffering from reduced footfall as a result of road closures.

Councillor Reid commented that this had been going on a long time. He felt this was the least worst option and was not really a relief road but would make getting out of Blyth from the south end easier. He did feel £44m was optimistic and the time taken to draw the plans up seemed excessive. Completion was still a very long way off and he urged the Administration to make progress as quickly as possible.

Councillor Watson asked that the residents of Blyth be kept informed, including about the consultation at the end of July.

Councillor Wearmouth commented that submitting a planning application within a year given all that was involved was a reasonable timeframe and officers had done an excellent job on the various iterations of the route.

Councillor Gallacher commented on the impact of the congestion on the A189 and suggested that better signage was needed, working with local residents.

Councillor Riddle commented that there was a 3m wide cycle path included in the proposals and agreed there would some necessary disruption during workings, but it would be kept to a minimum.

Councillor Dickinson felt this was a great story for Blyth and he urged members to work together to ensure it was delivered for the residents and businesses of Blyth. A lot of funding was needed and he welcomed the residents’ consultation on the latest plans.

Councillor Ploszaj urged members to support the recommendations. This was a very important project for Blyth.

RESOLVED that:-

(a)      Council note the progress of the project to date;

(b)      Council note the decision of Cabinet to confirm the revised Route 5 as the preferred option to take forward to a public engagement exercise; and

(c)      Council endorse the sign off by the s151 Officer of the Outline Business Case, noting the required County Council match funding commitment and future approval gateways as set out in paragraphs 13 to 15.