Committee member, Lorraine Eagling, reviews the agenda item relating to the plan for the Carrington Relief Road, which was discussed at Trafford’s Scrutiny Committee on 13^th March 2024.  A link to the recording (from 47:49 minutes) can be found here and the report is available here.

The new part of the relief road will be constructed across farmland, parallel to the A6144 between Isherwood Road and the Carrington Spur.  In the presentation to the Scrutiny Committee the new road was described as ‘not a big road’ (despite previous suggestions that it would be a dual carriageway).  The main carriageway that carries motor traffic will be 7.3 metres wide and there will be 5 metres on either side for active travel (2.5m for pedestrians and 2.5m for cyclists), so a total of 17.3 metres wide.  

It is really encouraging to see that pedestrians and cyclists are given so much consideration, but would residents want to walk, let alone cycle beside a major road that carries over 3,000 heavy goods vehicles a day, along with a huge number of cars? 

Would an active travel corridor that runs parallel to the existing road be a better option?  We think it would!

And what about horse riders, we have over 1,000 horses stabled on and around Carrington Moss!  We have repeatedly raised their needs with Trafford and yet they still don’t even get a mention in this presentation!  At least one of the stables provides services to children with special educational needs.  Those children will not be able to ride near to the thousands of motor vehicles that will be travelling along the Carrington Relief Road every day, the noise alone will be an issue.  They currently have lots of options for circular routes along the very safe and very quiet public rights of way, short circuits or longer rides.  The road is going to fracture their routes and reduce the opportunities for these very vulnerable members of our community.

The Scrutiny Committee were given a presentation on the history of New Carrington, which showed that since the closure of the railway line in the 1980’s, Partington and Carrington have become increasingly isolated and car dependant.  Several Councillors raised the question of why sustainable options aren’t being re-introduced like re-opening the old railway bridge to allow for a light rail or full rail link between Irlam and Timperley.  Councillor Holden explained that this idea has been around for some considerable time because a bridge was built in Broadheath so that this train line would remain viable.  We know that former MP, Kate Green, with the backing of the residents of Partington and Carrington, lobbied Parliament about re-opening the line, so it is not new to Government. 

Now that HS2 has been scrapped, shouldn’t this be something the GMCA and Trafford Council actively pursues? Especially when New Carrington is the largest development in the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (frustratingly, New Carrington is described by executive members as ‘one of the largest brownfield sites in Greater Manchester’, which is highly misleading given the majority of the brownfield land already has planning approval and 169 hectares of greenbelt will be released for the development of housing, warehousing and roads, affecting a 335 hectare peatmoss, Grade 2 agricultural land, woodland and wetland habitats).

Interestingly, Stockport Council, which pulled out of GMCA’s Places for Everyone (PfE) Plan in order to protect its greenbelt, is now in talks with TfGM and GMCA to have the Metrolink extended to their new transport interchange. 

So, as the largest site in the PfE Plan, why isn’t New Carrington being prioritised for such sustainable transport investment, especially when it is described as the ‘Western Gateway’?

In a recent traffic survey, carried out by Friends of Carrington Moss, during peak times we recorded approximately 50% of the traffic coming from the M60 going towards Carrington and less than 50% of the traffic from Carrington headed towards the M60.  In fact, approximately 50% of the traffic coming from the M60 is headed towards Sale West and over 60% of the traffic from Carrington and Partington headed towards Flixton.  Full details of our survey can be found in my previous blog here.

During term time, peak time traffic increased by approximately 500% and there was significant traffic queuing from the M60 to Sale West and from Sale West to the M60.  There was no queuing traffic in other directions or at other junctions.

In essence, only half of the traffic surveyed used the existing A6144, which the new road aims to relieve!  It is evident that the main cause of congestion is school traffic which could be reduced by reviewing Trafford’s school admissions policy and providing school buses.  Shouldn’t the Council tackle this issue instead of spending £76.5 million on a road that only 50% of existing traffic will use and that will offer no relief to the residents of Partington and Sale West as explained in my previous blog?

At the Scrutiny meeting, Councillors also raised the issue of how the Council will raise in excess of £54 million of public money for the relief road.  The Council’s Director of Growth & Regulatory Services, Adrian Fisher, acknowledged the risks and explained that when the planning committee addressed all of the infrastructure needs of New Carrington, which includes all roads, schools, playing fields etc, they decided that in theory there is enough funding from developers to meet needs.  He explained that the main issue is with the sequencing of the funding, that where the main risks arise is getting the first bit of infrastructure up and running.

Sequencing is definitely an issue, as it’s the chicken or the egg scenario.  Developers’ contributions are based on all development completed, but they won’t develop all sites unless the relief road is built!  Mr Fisher describes the site as the biggest in Greater Manchester and it will not able to deliver houses unless the road is built!

So, at what point will the developers make their contribution?  Trafford have recently had their fingers burnt when it comes to developers Section 106 contribution.  Also, as mentioned in the meeting, the developer contributions are not only for this road, but for other roads that will be needed for this huge site, for schools and other community facilities.  Will the developer contributions be enough for all this infrastructure?  The answer is a definite NO!

Councillor Carter asked how the new road would impact the peat land to the south of the proposed carriageway, in particular relating to drainage.  Mr Fisher acknowledged that there is significant peat in the south part of the site and that this will be an issue when it comes to development in that area and will be an important consideration.

We know how important peat moss is, so much so that the Government is investing in peat restoration to fight climate change.  With this in mind, why would Trafford Council give planning permission to build on this precious habitat?  The answer is that they are wedded to building a road, rather than advancing more sustainable options and, if they don’t give planning permission, they will not get the developers’ contributions towards the costs of the road.

Councillor Holden raised the issue of extensive contamination, and now there is the recent discovery of PFAS (Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances) on the site.  Mr Fisher acknowledged that this will be addressed when building the new road and this is why the costs of the road has increased significantly.  He explained that a separate drainage system is needed to avoid contamination of groundwater as a result of run off from the road.  It was confirmed that the Council will be working with the land owner/developer and the Environment Agency to come up with a solution that avoids flushing out contaminants into local watercourses and environment.  We know that this area is particularly sensitive for the water environment given its location above a principal aquifer and nearby surface waters including the River Mersey and Sinderland Brook, so it is vital any contamination risks are appropriately remediated.

So, what will the true cost of the Carrington Relief Road be? Not just in financial terms but in relation to the ecology and biodiversity of the area, in relation to the health and wellbeing of residents and in relation to climate mitigation issues that will impact future generations, our children and our grandchildren? 

The overall price tag is ENORMOUS!!!