THE ROADS (SCOTLAND) ACT 1984 THE ACQUISITION OF LAND (AUTHORISATION PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) ACT 1947 M74 SPECIAL ROAD (FULLARTON ROAD TO WEST OF KINGSTON BRIDGE) ORDERS

DescriptionM74 DECISION LETTER
ISBN
Official Print Publication Date
Website Publication DateMarch 30, 2005

    Listen

    THE ROADS (SCOTLAND) ACT 1984
    THE ACQUISITION OF LAND (AUTHORISATION PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) ACT 1947

    M74 SPECIAL ROAD (FULLARTON ROAD TO WEST OF KINGSTON BRIDGE) ORDERS

    This document is also available in pdf format (328k)

    Scottish Executive
    Enterprise, Transport & Lifelong Learning Department
    Roads Policy and Group Finance Division

    Victoria Quay
    Edinburgh EH6 6QQ

    Telephone: 0131-244 0838
    Fax: 0131-244 7281
    http://www.scotland.gov.uk

    Your ref:
    Our ref: ZFV 8/1 001

    24 March 2005

    Dear Sir or Madam

    THE ROADS (SCOTLAND) ACT 1984
    THE ACQUISITION OF LAND (AUTHORISATION PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) ACT 1947

    M74 SPECIAL ROAD (FULLARTON ROAD TO WEST OF KINGSTON BRIDGE) ORDERS

    1. This letter contains the Scottish Ministers' decision on the draft Orders listed below in connection with the M74 Special Road scheme ("the scheme"). The Scottish Ministers have decided to make the Orders, subject to a number of detailed modifications to the published draft Orders, authorising the construction of the scheme.

    Background

    1. The Scottish Ministers published the undernoted draft Orders on 24 March 2003 for:
    • The M74 Special Road (Fullarton Road to M8 West of Kingston Bridge) Special Road and Connecting Roads Scheme 200-.
    • The M74 Special Road (Fullarton Road to M8 West of Kingston Bridge) Side Roads Order 200-.
    • The M74 Special Road (Fullarton Road to M8 West of Kingston Bridge) Compulsory Purchase Order 200-.
    1. Objections to the draft Orders and related Environmental Statement that were lodged and not withdrawn were considered at a public local inquiry (PLI), held between 1 December 2003 and 3 March 2004 by Mr Richard Hickman CBE MA BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI and Mr Donald Watt LLB NP. A copy of the report of the inquiry (the report) is enclosed. For medical reasons, Mr Watt was unable to complete work on the report and Mr Hickman is therefore the sole signatory. A detailed assessment of the report is set out in Annex A.

    Evidence at the Inquiry

    1. A general description of the scheme and procedural history is at Chapter 1 of the report whilst the policy context is at Chapter 2. The evidence led by the parties to the PLI is reported between Chapters 3 and 8. Statutory objections to the compulsory purchase order are considered at Chapter 9. Those who attended the PLI are listed in Appendix 5 to the report.

    Consideration by the Reporter

    1. A compilation of the Reporter's findings of fact is at Chapter 10 of the report. His conclusions and recommendation that the Orders should not be confirmed (made) are at Chapter 11.

    Post Inquiry Correspondence

    1. Correspondence was received in September 2004 from Messrs Semple Fraser regarding a recent European Court of Justice ruling in the case of Van de Walle & Ors v Texaco Belgium SA[2004] EU ECJ Case Number C-1/103 (7 September 2004) ("Van de Walle") which relates to the treatment of soil that has been in contact with contaminating material. The Scottish Ministers have considered the matter and have concluded that the case does not introduce new evidence that requires to be examined further in reaching their decision. The matter is discussed in more detail at paragraphs 47-49 of Annex A.

    The Scottish Ministers' Decision

    1. The Scottish Ministers have carefully considered all of the evidence presented at the PLI, including the written submissions, the Reporter's findings of fact and his conclusions and recommendations thereon. They accept the Reporter's findings of fact. They do not, however, accept the Reporter's main conclusions and his recommendation. The Scottish Ministers' own conclusions are set out in Annex A.

    2. In arriving at this position, the Scottish Ministers consider that the scheme has a number of clear advantages, including reduced congestion on the M8 and local roads, social inclusion benefits resulting from reduced traffic on local roads, significant wider economic benefits, job creation in the local area and certain air quality improvements, all of which have not been given sufficient weight in the Reporter's conclusions.

    3. The Reporter has suggested at paragraph 11.101 of the PLI report that, should the Scottish Ministers be minded not to accept his main recommendation, they should implement a number of measures to minimise the adverse effects of the road and maximise the benefits. The Scottish Ministers accept the Reporter's suggestions as they are already implementing these measures, insofar as they are permitted by statute, and will continue to do so in order to progress the scheme.

    4. The environmental mitigation measures proposed in the Environmental Statement will be implemented. These measures are consistent with the environmental conditions attached to previous planning permissions. Additionally, although not the subject of this inquiry and forming no part in the Scottish Ministers' considerations in the decision process, the Scottish Ministers will work with their project partners and other agencies to ensure that environmental mitigation is enhanced and that the scheme is integrated into the wider development proposals for the corridor.

    5. With regard to assisting businesses to relocate and providing affected residences with suitable mitigation and compensation, the Scottish Executive along with Glasgow City Council, South Lanarkshire Council and Renfrewshire Council have allocated staff resources towards achieving this aim and this assistance will continue within the existing legislative arrangements.

    6. The Scottish Ministers do not, however, accept the request as expressed in paragraph 11.103 of the report, other than to agree that post construction monitoring will take place as already planned. The Scottish Ministers are satisfied that the procedures adopted in taking forward the scheme have been appropriate and in line with current best practice, and they do not see any requirement to undertake the suggested reviews.

    7. The Reporter has raised in paragraph 11.104 of the PLI report the issue of the number of heavy goods vehicle (HGV) movements that might arise as a result of the construction phase of the scheme. The Trunk Road Authority (TRA) will be required to address this issue as part of the management of the contract.

    8. The Scottish Ministers acknowledge that a scheme of this nature will inevitably generate a complex set of both positive and negative impacts on the economy, the environment and on society. However, in the case of the scheme, they are satisfied that the balance of evidence supports the positive aspects of the proposal as set out in Annex A and that it is in the public interest for the scheme to proceed.

    9. Accordingly, the Scottish Ministers hereby authorise the making of the above Orders, subject to the detailed modifications shown at Annex B.

    10. The foregoing decision of the Scottish Ministers is final, but any person who wishes to question its validity may appeal to the Court of Session within six weeks of the date on which the notice of the making of the Orders is first published.

    11. Copies of this letter and of the public local inquiry report are being sent to all parties who appeared, or were represented at, the PLI. A copy of the letter only has been sent to all those who made representations within the objection period. The report is available on the Scottish Executive website www.scotland.gov.uk. Additionally, further paper copies are available by telephoning 0131 244 0838.

    12. Yours faithfully

      FRANCES DUFFY
      Head of Division

    ANNEX A

    DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC LOCAL INQUIRY REPORT

    1. The Scottish Ministers set out below their own conclusions based on the evidence presented at the Public Local Inquiry (PLI) and the findings of fact which lead them to disagree with the Reporter's conclusions and recommendations. The section headings relate to those of the PLI report.

    Transport: Strategic Issues and Mode Share

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. The Scottish Ministers view the scheme as a key element in the central Scotland trunk road network and an important contribution to economic development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley area. The scheme is supported by the Partnership Agreement to complete the central Scotland motorway network ( "A Partnership for a Better Scotland", published by the Scottish Executive in May 2003) and the commitment to completing the M74 strategic link set out in "Working Together for Scotland- a Programme for Government" (published in January 2001 by the Scottish Executive), and requires to be seen not just in the local context but also as part of the wider development planning process and Scotland's economic growth.

    2. Amongst the outcomes expected of the scheme is the relief of congestion on the M8 motorway and on the existing local road network. The relief of congestion on the local streets will result in improved conditions for residents, pedestrians and cyclists and will benefit public transport operations.

    3. Taking account of all circumstances, the Scottish Ministers consider that the construction of the M74 Completion scheme (the scheme) will lead to immediate improvements in traffic flow on the existing road network and surrounding surface streets, and will help to reduce future levels of congestion. Improvements in traffic flow at key points on the existing road network would benefit the local communities and Glasgow City Council see the relief afforded as important to their public transport aspirations.

    4. The Scottish Ministers therefore consider that the benefits of the road for traffic flow have been understated by the Reporter at paragraph 11.14 of the report. The Scottish Ministers agree that it is likely that some of the space created by easing congestion on the M8 will be taken up by additional trips, but they also note that all projections find there will be improvements on the M8 even taking that into account. The Scottish Ministers consider these improvements to be a significant factor in arriving at their decision to proceed with the scheme.

    5. The Scottish Ministers regard as important, and give significant weight to, the finding of fact C22 that construction of the scheme would reduce traffic levels on various surface streets by between 9% and 24%, and that without it "there would be likely to be continuing and worsening traffic congestion on the general traffic road space".

    6. Scottish Executive policy to protect the environment and improve health by investing in public transport has led to a commitment to ensure that 70% of transport spending will go on public transport by the year 2006.

    7. The Reporter concludes at paragraph 11.11 of the report, that "the large cost of the M74 Completion proposal would be in fundamental conflict with the stated high level commitment of the Executive to give a 70/30 priority to spending on public transport rather than roads by the year 2006". This is based on his finding of fact C4 that the projected transport spend in the west of Scotland during the period 2004-2008 would be split approximately two thirds to roads and one third to public transport. He considered it unlikely that the overall balance of 70/30 in favour of public transport would be restored by spending on public transport in the rest of Scotland.

    8. The Scottish Ministers do not agree with this conclusion. The policy on prioritising spend on public transport applies to Scotland as a whole and the Reporter's conclusion is made in the absence of any evidence on projected spending for the whole country. The Scottish Ministers recognise that they will have to take into account the impact of this scheme in considering how to implement this policy in the future but consider that that of itself does not conflict with the policy, which is of wide application and not specific to this scheme.

    9. The Scottish Ministers take the view that the policy commitments on traffic reduction will not be threatened by the scheme, as these matters have also to be considered in the national context.

    10. The Reporter concludes at paragraph 11.13 of the report that "the completion of the M74 would be in fundamental conflict with the policy commitment to reduce vehicle use, as it would add to traffic growth which would then have to be clawed back to return to 2001 traffic levels, making achievement of the commitment even more challenging".

    11. This conclusion appears to flow from findings of fact C11, C12, C13 and C14. The Scottish Ministers do not disagree with the figures contained in those findings, but they also note the evidence of the TRA at paragraph 3.38 of the report that the increase in trips would amount to about 0.1% of the global total of road based trips throughout the Central Scotland traffic study area.

    12. The Scottish Ministers consider that the Reporter has come to his conclusion at paragraph 11.13 of the report by considering this policy for reducing vehicle use in relation to this scheme in isolation from the wider transport policies and from the rest of the Scottish road network. This policy is not specific to the scheme and any marginal increase in traffic which results from the scheme will require to be taken into account in implementing that wider policy. Extensive traffic monitoring is proposed as part of the scheme development and will contribute to the Scottish Executive's strategic overview of traffic change.

    Traffic Implications

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. The principal outcomes expected from the scheme included the need to reduce the severe congestion on the M8, relieve traffic congestion on local roads to allow priority to be given to public transport, cyclists and pedestrians and to improve road safety and reduce accidents.

    2. The Scottish Ministers note from the findings of fact D3 and D6, and included in the benefits of the scheme as summarised in paragraph 11.22 of the report, that the scheme will ease the severe congestion on the M8 on the north and west side of the city centre and on the southwest approach to the Kingston Bridge, and agree with finding of fact D8 that these reductions will contribute to the Scottish Executive's vision for 2021 that road traffic on all parts of the network will be flowing smoothly without congestion.

    3. Findings of fact C17-19, attributed under Chapter 3 to Strategic Issues and Mode Share, also should be considered in assessing traffic implications. The Scottish Ministers note that these findings of fact state that the scheme would reduce the loss of time due to traffic congestion and road accidents on the existing road network in the vicinity. They also note finding of fact C19, which states that traffic predictions for 2010 and 2020 indicate a more congested network even with the M74 Completion in place. In particular, the Scottish Ministers note that the finding of fact D22 highlights that due to continuing traffic growth, congestion not only on the M8 but also on the M80 and M77 is likely to become worse if the scheme is not built. The Scottish Ministers regard these findings of fact as important in achieving their aim of reducing congestion on the motorway network.

    4. The Scottish Ministers acknowledge that the scheme will have positive and negative impacts as summarised in paragraphs 11.22 and 11.23 of the report, but take the view that traffic growth in itself need not bring an erosion of benefits, as much will depend on road network capacity and the management of the network. The Scottish Ministers do not accept the weight the Reporter gives to the negative effects. The scheme cannot be looked at in isolation, and the question of other measures to restrain and reduce traffic is part of wider transport policy. The Scottish Executive is supporting major public transport projects and initiatives that will contribute to the achievement of modal shift.

    5. On local roads, the Scottish Ministers note from finding of fact C22 that the M74 Completion scheme would reduce traffic levels on various surface streets by between 9% and 24%, and that without it "there would be likely to be continuing and worsening traffic congestion on the general traffic road space" and D19 that "where traffic is reduced on main roads, it would allow more space to be devoted to bus lanes , cycle lanes, pedestrians, safer crossings facilities etc" and consider that, though some of these improvements would proceed even without this scheme, these will be important measures that will complement the commitment to provide funding for public transport improvements as outlined in paragraph 3.33 of the report.

    6. Importantly, findings of fact D20-21 state that "there would also be road safety and environmental benefits where there are traffic reductions" and that " the completion of the scheme would be likely to lead to approximately 760-975 fewer road accidents across the network during the 20 year period following the opening of the road. The Scottish Ministers consider the improvement in road safety as an important factor in arriving at their decision to proceed with the scheme.

    7. Taking account of all circumstances, the Scottish Ministers consider that the construction of the scheme will lead to immediate improvements in traffic flow on the existing road network and surrounding surface streets, and will help to reduce future levels of congestion. Improvements in traffic flow at key points on the existing road network would benefit the local communities and will also benefit public transport operations.

    8. The Reporter includes congestion at the westbound approach to the new section of the scheme at Fullarton as a negative traffic effect of the project. The Scottish Ministers note findings of fact D10 and D11, but also note the evidence at paragraph 4.9 of the report that other factors and restraints would significantly reduce queuing here under the higher growth scenario and eliminate it under the lower growth scenario, and at paragraph 4.19 that the overall situation would be worse in the worst case without the scheme. Therefore the Scottish Ministers conclude that whilst there are clearly benefits and disadvantages of the scheme at this location, these are not considered to be a critical factor in coming to a decision on the approval of the scheme.

    9. The Scottish Ministers also consider that the reduction in journey times of between 5 and 10 minutes (findings of fact D5) contribute, alongside the benefits of accident reduction, to the overall economic benefit of the scheme (detailed in evidence at paragraph 3.34 and discussed in more detail in Chapter 8 of the report). The Reporter states that financial benefits for road users are more problematic than the financial benefits of a reduction in the number of road accidents (paragraph 11.27). He states at paragraph 11.28 that "the SACTRA Report (the Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment) recognised the difficulties of attributing differential values to different types of journey" and appears to conclude that the methodology used is contradictory.

    10. The Scottish Ministers are content that best practice has been followed and that the methodology used is the accepted methodology applied throughout the UK for all such schemes and supports a consistent approach to their measurement and comparison. The Department for Transport methodology used here to value time savings has been supported by SACTRA. The SACTRA Report endorses the principle of valuing both travel time savings in the case of employers' business (working time savings) and commuting and leisure time (non working time savings) in monetary terms. SACTRA agree that all time savings and losses, large or small, should be valued at the same unit value. Therefore the Scottish Ministers are content that the reduction in journey times contributes to the overall economic benefit of the scheme and attach more weight to this conclusion that the Reporter does.

    Physical, Environmental and Community Impacts

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. The Scottish Ministers consider that through careful contract management during the construction phase, and a comprehensive range of environmental mitigation measures, the impacts of the road scheme within the route corridor will be controlled overall, to the benefit of the local communities.

    2. The Scottish Ministers consider that more weight than that given by the Reporter should be given to the positive environmental benefits of the scheme, including local air quality improvements, reduced severance on certain local roads, removal of ground contamination and the large-scale improvements to the physical fabric of the area.

    3. With regard to environmental justice, which is an element of the Partnership Agreement, the Scottish Ministers consider that the overall benefits of the scheme in relation to the local area (reduced local traffic, more effective public transport, wider air quality improvements, reduced local severance, treatment of contaminated land) will all improve conditions for the community, thereby contributing to the aims of environmental justice. The fact that the existing M74 terminates at Fullarton Road results in the channelling of motorway traffic onto local roads, producing poor environmental conditions for the communities affected. Many of these problems would be relieved by the construction of the scheme.

    4. At paragraph 11.33 of the report, the Reporter lists what he considers to be the main adverse environmental and community effects to be expected as a result of the scheme. He goes on at paragraph 11.34 to state that these would be mainly concentrated in four locations where there are residential uses, before concluding at paragraph 11.35 that "the combined and cumulative effect of these various adverse impacts on these communities and their residents would be likely to be very severe, particularly during construction, and then permanently after the road opens due to continuing community severance, traffic noise, visual instruction, and air pollution".

    5. At paragraph 11.36 of the report, the Reporter states that "a limited number of environmental improvements would result from the construction of the new motorway, where the outlook from nearby properties would be improved due to landscape treatments on land currently in a derelict condition".

    6. The Scottish Ministers consider that the Reporter has overstated the impact of the adverse effects listed at paragraph 11.33 and the Scottish Ministers give more weight to the local beneficial impacts of the scheme.

    7. The Reporter concludes at paragraph 11.33 that there would be a loss of about 9 ha of natural and semi-natural habitats along the route, and that there would be intrusion into the relatively quiet and semi-natural landscape at Auchenshuggle. Although the Scottish Ministers agree that this would be a negative effect of the scheme, they consider that the impact is relatively small in terms of road schemes generally, when compared to the overall landtake for the proposed scheme. They also note that those affected at Auchenshuggle would be cyclists, walkers and joggers who will be passing through the area for only a short period of time and that therefore the impact is transient in nature.

    8. The Reporter concludes at paragraph 11.33 of the report that there would be "substantial community severance at the three motorway junctions and moderate severance at other places, due to the combined width of the railway line and the motorway (in the order of 200-300m); the necessity for pedestrians and cyclists to pass beneath the motorway and to cross slip roads at the three junctions; and the elevation of much of the motorway on embankments and high structures". This follows from finding of fact E7.

    9. The Scottish Ministers consider that the Reporter has failed to distinguish between perceived community severance and actual community severance, which would arise when people were prevented from completing a journey. Perceived community severance arises when people are less inclined to undertake a journey and can be mitigated by design. In this case, Scottish Ministers consider that there is perceived rather than actual community severance as a result of the scheme. They also note that the Environmental Statement mitigation measures include the use of an open cross-section for an underpass, the use of high amenity lighting, the installation of pedestrian signals at surface level junctions and the use of urban landscaping and welcoming art forms which will go some way towards mitigating this perception. The Scottish Ministers give more weight to the mitigation measures outlined in the Environmental Statement than the Reporter does.

    10. Visual intrusion and noise impact are stated by the Reporter as being severe impacts but there would appear to be limited evidence to support this. The Environmental Statement indicates that there will be mitigation measures applied that will assist in minimising these impacts.

    11. The Scottish Ministers agree with the conclusion that there will be localised increases in air pollution within about 100m of the motorway but they also note that beyond that area there will be improvements in air quality as a result of the project. (This is discussed in more detail below at paragraph 39)

    12. The Scottish Ministers acknowledge that there will be disruption during the construction period which will have significant effects whilst it is ongoing. However, they also consider that these will be temporary and will be managed by contract specifications and construction timing and monitoring on site (including local authority inputs for noise control etc.). They also note that the impacts during construction will be minimised by the fact that the much of the work will be adjacent to major rail facilities.

    13. The Scottish Ministers note that the TRA gave evidence (recorded at paragraph 5.46 in the report) that there would be "slight reductions in community severance at locations where traffic flows are predicted to reduce, such as Rutherglen Main Street and parts of Aikenhead Road". This evidence was taken by the Reporter but not specifically recorded in the findings of fact or in the conclusions in Chapter 11. The Scottish Ministers consider that this reduction in existing community severance is important in considering the overall effect of the scheme on the community it should be taken into account as a positive local impact of the scheme.

    14. In summary, the Scottish Ministers recognise that the scheme will lead to some local disruption and adverse environmental impacts, particularly during the construction phase. However, they also consider that the Reporter has not given sufficient weight to the wider benefits in central Glasgow that will result from the scheme, and has overstated the impact on community severance/traffic noise/visual intrusion in the immediate vicinity of the road.

    Airborne Emissions

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. The wider benefits of the scheme in relation to air quality in the Glasgow Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and those areas relieved of traffic will be a significant benefit (finding of fact F23 and F24).

    2. The Scottish Ministers conclude that the wider improvements to the air quality in the study areas and the Glasgow city centre Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) are a significant benefit of the project, and are of considerable weight when compared with the localised increased air pollution levels close to the scheme, which will in any event largely remain within air quality objectives (with the exception of the area around the Kingston Bridge). The overall benefits of the reductions in air pollutants are important because they will affect people who are present within the areas for significant periods of time and will relate to a large number of properties. This has to be balanced against the effects of limited increases in pollutants in areas used by pedestrians and cyclists who will only experience this for short periods of time, and reduced air quality for residential properties adjacent to the route. Similarly, increases in the Kingston Bridge area will only be experienced for short periods of time by motorists using the area.

    3. The Scottish Ministers consider that the Reporter has not given sufficient weight to the wider improvements in air quality that the scheme would bring, and that those improvements are an important part of the overall benefits of the proposed road.

    4. The Reporter concludes at paragraph 11.39 of the report, that "a majority of residential properties (about 46%) would benefit from lower air pollution levels if the new road is built, and only a minority (25%) would suffer". (This is within the Wider Study Area - see finding of fact F13.) He also concludes at paragraph 11.40 that there are predicted to be "slight increases in concentrations of NO2 and PM10 and minor impacts from construction dust" within 100m of the new road. He further concludes at paragraph 11.41 that "an overall improvement of air quality in the city centre and the AQMA is predicted, while in the Wider Study Area there should be a reduction in the number of properties exceeding NO2 and PM10 objectives". He notes that although NO2 concentrations in the Kingston Bridge area may exceed objectives this is not attributable to the M74 Completion scheme.

    5. The Scottish Ministers consider that there will be a change in the distribution of airborne emissions as a result of the construction of the scheme. The Scottish Ministers therefore conclude that the scheme would have a positive impact on air quality in the wider area.

    6. As regards any increase in CO2 emissions, the Scottish Ministers note the conclusion of the TRA at paragraph 6.39 that the road would be expected to lead to very slight increases in total emissions. Notwithstanding the Scottish Ministers' conclusion that emissions arising directly from the scheme will be small, they recognise that there is a policy commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but consider this will be addressed within the wider strategy for implementing that policy.

    Geo-Technical, Mining and Contaminated Land

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. The scheme would allow for the significant restoration of a large area of land that is currently highly contaminated and unattractive for development. The remedial work associated with the project will make a positive contribution to the regeneration of the corridor and the wider area.

    2. The Scottish Ministers agree with the Reporter's conclusion at paragraph 11.53 of the report that "the proposed motorway construction would deliver useful spin off benefits for the treatment of contaminated land, and that there is no evidence to suggest that the motorway works would increase the contamination risks to local residents and the local environment".

    3. However, the Scottish Ministers take the view that greater weight should be given to the benefits arising from the treatment of contamination in terms of making a large swathe of land available for development.

    4. After the conclusion of the PLI and the issuing of the report of the Inquiry a letter was received by the Scottish Ministers from Messrs Semple Fraser, Solicitors dated 14 th September 2004 on behalf of a number of interested parties to the inquiry. The letter concerned the recent European Court of Justice decision in the Van de Walle case which relates to the treatment of soil that has been in contact with contaminating material. The concern raised by Semple Fraser in their letter in relation to the scheme is in connection with the remediation strategy proposed for dealing with the chromium waste which they understand exists under many parts of the scheme corridor.

    5. The Scottish Ministers have considered the content of the letter from Semple Fraser. The Van de Walle case specifically concerned the application of the Waste Framework Directive (WFD) to land contaminated by accidental spillages of waste which are within the ambit of the broad categories of waste set out in Annex 1 of the WFD. The case considered what was the extent of the waste in the case of soil or other material contaminated by it and clarifies that in the circumstances where soil is contaminated by waste spillage or leakage, the soil itself as well as the contaminants require to be regarded as waste and dealt with accordingly. What that means in practical terms is that it may require the application of the waste management framework to a larger quantity of waste. It does not give rise to any change in the application of the legislation which gives rise to that framework. There is nothing in the Van de Walle case which requires the application of the Landfill Directive to land contaminated by waste.

    6. The decision in the Van de Walle case did not consider the application of that Directive, nor was this matter raised by the interested parties at the PLI. Thus, the Scottish Ministers conclude that the decision in the Van de Walle case clarifies what is covered by waste. In view of that, the Scottish Ministers consider that the Van de Walle case does not result in any requirement for the evidence on contaminated land led at the inquiry to be re-examined and considered by the Reporter or to require the PLI to be re-opened.

    Economic Impact and Regeneration

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. One of the key intentions of the M74 Completion scheme is that it would contribute to the regeneration of a significant area of south Glasgow. The road would improve access to the area and allow for business development and job creation along with the redevelopment of residential and community areas. The scheme is regarded as critical to Scottish Enterprise funding of a range of projects including the Clyde Waterfront, Clyde Gateway and the East End Regeneration Route (finding of fact H23).

    2. The Scottish Ministers note the finding of fact H3 which refers to the Simmonds report's conclusion that there would be an increase of 20,000 jobs in Glasgow and the Clyde valley by 2030 "directly attributable to the additional competitiveness for some areas conferred by the M74 Completion scheme" and note the conclusions of the EKOS Report (finding of fact H8) of an estimated 25,000 jobs over this period and conclude that there will be a significant increase in local jobs.

    3. The Scottish Ministers do not agree with the Reporter's approach of subtracting the findings of one report from the other to arrive at an estimate of jobs attracted from other parts of Scotland on the one hand, and newly created jobs on the other. The Simmonds Report and the EKOS Report were based on different methodologies and took different approaches. Ministers consider that the Simmonds Report, which was an Economic and Location (EALI) Report as part of the Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) assessment, was based on the most appropriate methodology and provides the best available evidence on the likely impact of the scheme on the local economy.

    4. The Scottish Ministers also consider that it is unlikely that 750 local jobs will be lost as a result of the scheme. They do not consider that there is a basis in the evidence for the conclusion that the businesses affected will not be able to relocate within the proposed time frame and that these jobs will disappear (Reporter's conclusion at paragraph 11.60) and his conclusion that "these potential job losses should perhaps carry more weight than the uncertain prospect of attracting new jobs to the Glasgow area from other parts of Scotland" is not in line with standard appraisal techniques in relation to such schemes, even if it was accepted that those jobs would necessarily be lost.

    5. The Scottish Ministers agree with the Reporter's conclusions that the new road scheme would have economic benefits for the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley area, and that if it does not proceed then regeneration prospects for the local area surrounding the corridor would be harmed. The M74 Completion Project Team, which includes the Scottish Executive and the project partners, is actively engaging with those businesses and premises affected by the route with a view to ensuring that they have sufficient time to organise their relocation plans and that the impact on existing jobs is minimised.

    6. The economic appraisal indicates that the projected overall economic impacts of the scheme are highly positive. The Reporter has assessed the economic impacts entirely in terms of local economic impacts rather than on the basis of the appraisal evidence for net national impacts. This evidence indicates that the net national economic impacts are highly positive. The benefit to cost ratio of the scheme is very high at around nine, as stated at paragraph 3.34, making it one of the highest returns of any transport scheme in Scotland. The Scottish Ministers consider this is sufficient to outweigh any non-quantifiable costs associated with the scheme.

    7. Objectors to the scheme have questioned the appraisal methodology adopted, particularly the valuation of journey time savings. However, the Scottish Ministers consider that the appraisals undertaken for the scheme have followed national best practice as required by HM Treasury and their own guidance on transport appraisal at the time and have been consistent with SACTRA advice (Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment). It is their view that the appraisal is a key element of policy making and that the results should be at the forefront of any consideration of the merits of a scheme. The appraisal examined the impacts of the scheme in terms of the Executive's five criteria of accessibility, economy, environment, integration and safety.

    8. Within the context of STAG, full separate Transport Economic Efficiency (TEE) and Economic and Location Impact (EALI) studies were undertaken as part of the appraisal of the scheme. The purpose of these two reports is, between them, to summarise the full extent of economic impacts resulting from a proposal. The full economic impacts of the scheme are assessed through the TEE analysis. This covers the benefits ordinarily captured by standard cost-benefit analysis and compares them with the costs. The second analysis, EALI, allows the impact of schemes to be expressed in terms of their effects on the local economy. Whilst there is a particular interest in the local economic impacts of the M74 Completion, and local regeneration is one of the objectives of the scheme, this is only a partial analysis focussing on the impacts on the local economy. The full national impacts are assessed in the TEE and it is these national economic, safety and traffic grounds that are due considerable weight in the scheme assessment.

    9. While the Scottish Ministers accept the Reporter's conclusion that there will be economic benefits and jobs created in the area served by the M74 Completion corridor, and that this could be at the expense of other areas, they do not believe that the highly positive wider national economic implications have been given sufficient weight in the Reporter's conclusions.

    Formal Objections to the Proposed Compulsory Purchase Order

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. As noted by the Reporter at paragraph 11.66 of the report, the scheme would affect around 190 properties, although by the end of the PLI only 25 objections to the compulsory purchase order (CPO) had been maintained. The Reporter states at paragraph 11.68 of the report that the test applied is whether acquisition is necessary in the public interest, in the context of the counter arguments put forward by the objectors. The Scottish Ministers note that in only 5 of the properties would there be serious relocation difficulties (paragraph 11.74).

    2. While the Scottish Ministers accept that there will be disruption to local businesses as a result of the construction of the scheme, they do not accept the Reporter's conclusion at paragraph 11.78 of the report, that the scheme would result in severe damage to the local and Scottish economy. As noted at paragraph 9.60, Glasgow City Council and South Lanarkshire Council have agreed to provide additional voluntary support for affected businesses, and with the participation of Scottish Enterprise they have set up a central business location team to cover the whole corridor. The team has a budget of £900,000 to assist with feasibility studies and existing statutory provisions on compensation will provide assistance

    Performance Against Scottish Executive and Local Government Commitments, Objectives and Policies

    The Scottish Ministers' Conclusions

    1. The Scottish Ministers consider that the scheme is supported by a range of national and local policies and will contribute positively to a number of objectives (Chapter 2 and finding of fact B1-B13). The scheme is included in the Partnership Agreement and is seen as a key element in the trunk road network, contributing to Scotland's economic growth and the regeneration of the area.

    2. The Reporter concludes that "it is evident that the proposal would be supportive of some central and local government commitments, objectives, and policies, such as the completion of the M74 and the promotion of economic development, but would be likely to be in serious conflict with others, such as traffic restraint, the priority to improve public transport, CO2 emissions, and some local environmental protection policies" (paragraph 11.93). The Scottish Ministers have considered the impact this scheme would have on various policy objectives and whether, if it does not have support from some policies, there are good reasons to depart from those policies. However, in this case, the Scottish Ministers do not agree with the Reporter's conclusions on the policy background to the scheme.

    3. At paragraph 11.83 of the report, the Reporter concludes that the project would contribute to the policy to ease congestion on trunk roads to some extent, but that the benefits of it would be progressively eroded by the continuing traffic growth facilitated and induced by the new road. The Scottish Ministers' views on the question of traffic growth are clear and stated earlier at paragraph 13 above. They consider that the evidence shows that the links and junctions are sufficient to deal with traffic growth under both the high growth scenario and the low growth scenario. Without the road, the congestion problem would be worse in the future in the worst case scenario.

    4. Paragraph 11.84 of the report refers to the high level commitment to spend 70% of the Scottish transport budget on public transport projects by the year 2006. The implications of this scheme for that policy have already been discussed in this letter at paragraph 9 above. Similarly, paragraph 11.85 of the report deals with the objective to reduce traffic levels to 2001 levels by 2021 and that too has been discussed above.

    5. The Scottish Ministers accept the Reporter's conclusion at paragraph 11.86 of the report that the proposed scheme can be expected to make a positive contribution to the economy in support of a range of public policies specified in Chapter 2 of the report. Their view on the potential level of job creation has already been expressed at paragraphs 51-54 of this Annex.

    6. Paragraph 11.87 of the report deals with social inclusion policies and states that the road would lead to increased community severance As already explained in paragraph 32 of this Annex, the Scottish Ministers do not accept that it would increase actual severance which is already caused by the mainline railway. They also consider that community severance will be decreased by the removal of traffic from local roads.

    7. With regard to environmental protection and improvement policies as discussed at paragraph 11.88 of the report, the Scottish Ministers acknowledge that there will be some detrimental effects to the environment, particularly during the construction period and if the high traffic growth materialises in the long term. However, they have also concluded that the road will bring many positive environmental benefits such as improvements in wider air quality and treatment of contaminated land. They consider that the road will contribute to the implementation of environmental policies.

    8. The Scottish Ministers accept the Reporter's conclusion at paragraph 11.89 of the report that the scheme would reduce traffic levels on the local road network with an associated improvement in environmental quality and provision for pedestrians, cyclists and bus measures. The Scottish Ministers conclude that this is an important benefit of the scheme which supports a number of their policies on transport, environment and communities.

    9. The Scottish Ministers do not agree that the Reporter's statement at paragraph 11.90 of the report, that the scheme would be in breach of environmental justice. The removal of extraneous traffic, particularly HGVs, from local roads will reduce local community severance and will enhance the environment and safety of the people most directly affected by the scheme.

    10. The Reporter concludes at paragraph 11.91 of the report, that the road would be expected to have little adverse impact on airborne emissions (except for a limited area at Kingston which is not directly attributable to the M74 Completion scheme). The Scottish Ministers' views on airborne emissions have already been expressed in paragraphs 39-42 above, with their conclusion that the road would have an overall positive effect on air quality.

    11. Although there will be local increases in traffic and CO2 emissions if high traffic growth occurs, thereby appearing to breach commitments on reducing emissions and traffic reduction, these have to be seen in the overall context of national emissions. It is also necessary to take into account the fact that the Scottish Ministers are pursuing a range of policies and infrastructure projects aimed at curbing traffic growth and achieving modal shift.

    March 2005

    ANNEX B

    M74 COMPLETION SCHEME - MADE ORDERS - TABLE OF MODIFICATIONS TO DRAFT ORDERS

    The following indicates the changes made to the Draft Orders.

    1. The M74 Special Road (Fullarton Road to M8 West of Kingston Bridge) Special Road and Connecting Roads Scheme 2004

    No changes.

    2. The M74 Special Road (Fullarton Road to M8 West of Kingston Bridge) Side Roads Order 2004

    2.1 Part 4 - PRIVATE MEANS OF ACCESS TO BE STOPPED UP

    Schedule item 4. has been modified as follows:

    ", then in a north-easterly, then in an easterly direction for a distance of 295 metres or thereby then bifurcating a) in a northerly direction for a distance of 30 metres or thereby and b) in an easterly direction for a distance of 100 metres or thereby then bifurcating c) in an easterly direction for a distance of 30 metres or thereby and d) in a southerly direction for a distance of 20 metres or thereby" is deleted and replaced with "direction for a distance of 90 metres or thereby then from a point 660 metres or thereby northeast of the junction of Ballochmill Road and Cambuslang Road in an easterly direction for a distance of 70 metres or thereby".

    Reason for modification - Agreement with landowner (Corus PLC) following discussions to allow access to transformer station and to clarify extent of stopping up to same.

    2.2 Part 5 - NEW MEANS OF ACCESS TO BE PROVIDED

    Schedule item 4. has been modified as follows:

    "340 metres or thereby to the existing Railway Signal Box then bifurcating a) in a southerly direction for a distance of 15 metres or thereby and b) in a westerly direction for a distance of 35" is deleted and replaced with "130".

    Reason for modification - Agreement with landowner (Network Rail) following discussions to modify accommodation works and extent of track.

    3. The M74 Special Road (Fullarton Road to M8 West of Kingston Bridge) Compulsory Purchase Order 2004

    Modifications have been made to the Schedule as per the attached table.

    In addition to these modifications Owners and Occupiers and Registered Title Numbers have been updated in the schedule in accordance with normal practice since the publication of the draft Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO).

    Where the plot size has increased it should be noted that the revision has not resulted in the inclusion of any land that was not included in the draft CPO.

    Plot Number

    Description of modification

    Reason for modification

    11

    Plot area reduced from 1,022 square metres to 399 square metres.

    Plot area reduced following discussions with owner Strathclyde Passenger Transport.

    20

    Plot area reduced from 2,896 square metres to 2,831 square metres.

    Incorrect area was quoted in draft CPO - boundary of plot and land take unchanged.

    31

    Plot removed.

    Plot Acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    36

    Plot area reduced from 18 square metres to 12 square metres.

    Revision to this plot as a result of changes to adjacent plot 37.

    37

    Plot area reduced from 235 square metres to 54 square metres.

    Revision to this plot as a result of discussions with owner Westbridge Gardens Ltd.

    38

    Plot area reduced from 2,075 square metres to 1,214 square metres.

    Revision to this plot as a result of discussions with owner Westbridge Gardens Ltd.

    40

    Plot area reduced from 6,837 square metres to 6,418 square metres.

    Revision to this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail.

    45

    Plot area reduced from 2,755 square metres to 1,584 square metres.

    Reduced area with agreement of owner Keyline Builders Merchants Ltd.

    49

    Plot area reduced from 67 square metres to 2 square metres.

    Residual area of original plot not acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    50

    Plot area reduced from 502 square metres to 501 square metres.

    Voluntary acquisition of Plot 49 has resulted in amendment to plot boundaries.

    51

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    52

    Plot area reduced from 2,610 square metres to 2,284 square metres.

    Plot area revised due to increased size of voluntarily acquired adjacent plots.

    54

    Plot area reduced from 464 square metres to 461 square metres.

    Plot area revised due to voluntarily acquired adjacent plots.

    56

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    57

    Plot area reduced from 795 square metres to 657 square metres.

    Plot area revised due to increased size of voluntarily acquired plot 56.

    62

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    63

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    64

    Plot area reduced from 3,739 square metres to 2,906 square metres and changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Revision to this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land. Refer to plots 228 & 229.

    72

    Plot area revised from 658 square metres to 668 square metres

    Minor revision to plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries of adjacent plots.

    73

    Plot split into plot 73, 246 and 247 following confirmation of titles. Plot 73 area reduced from 3,392 square metres to 2,511 square metres.

    Revision to Plot. Two split plots 246 & 247 created.

    79

    Plot area increased from 2,226 square metres to 2,277 square metres.

    Incorrect area stated in draft CPO. Land take boundary unaltered.

    82

    Plot area reduced from 4,308 square metres to 2,688 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    83

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    86

    Plot split into plot 86 and plot 241. Plot 86 area reduced from 1,170 square metres to 1,048 square metres. Plot 86 acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers. Tenant interests remain. Portion of draft CPO plot 86 not acquired now Plot 241.

    87

    Plot removed.

    Incorporated into plots 88 and 92 following examination of title.

    88

    Plot area increased from 775 to 895 square metres due to incorporation of part of plot 87.

    Part of Plot 87 incorporated

    92

    Plot area increased from 976 to 1,070 square metres due to incorporation of part of plot 87.

    Part of Plot 87 incorporated

    97

    Plot removed.

    Plot Acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    107

    Plot area increased from 39,529 square metres to 39,636 square metres.

    Incorrect area stated in draft CPO. Land take boundary unaltered.

    118

    Plot area reduced from 64 square metres to 31 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail and occupier Alstom (West Coast Train Care).

    124

    Plot area increased from 17 to 51 square metres due to incorporation of plot 210.

    Plot 210 incorporated into this plot

    131

    Plot removed

    Plot removed following discussion with Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    132

    Plot removed.

    Plot removed following discussion with Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    133

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    137

    Plot area reduced from 10,618 square metres to 69 square metres.

    Residual area of original plot not acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    146

    Plot split into plot 146 and plot 243. Plot 146 reduced from 794 square metres to 778 square metres.

    Revision to plot as portion of title in ownership of Taylor Woodrow. Refer to plot 243.

    154

    Plot split into plot 154 and plot 244. Plot 154 reduced from 487 square metres to 327 square metres.

    Revision to Plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries. Refer to plot 244.

    160

    Plot area reduced from 10,266 square metres to 7,574 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    168

    Plot area revised due to voluntary acquisition of adjacent plot 170. Area increased from 2,297 square metres to 2,299 square metres.

    Plot revised due to voluntarily acquired adjacent plot.

    170

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    175

    Plot area reduced from 27,114 square metres to 22,120 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    178

    Plot removed.

    Plot acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    179

    Plot removed.

    Part acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    180

    Plot area reduced from 295 square metres to 83 square metres.

    Plot revised due to voluntary acquired adjacent plots.

    181

    Plot removed.

    Plot Acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    182

    Plot removed.

    Plot Acquired voluntarily by Scottish Ministers.

    190

    Plot area reduced from 3,679 square metres to 2,924 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    191

    Plot area increased from 13,960 square metres to 14,685 square metres.

    Revision to Plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries. Refer also to adjacent plot 225.

    194

    Plot area reduced from 71,616 square metres to 70,900 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Corus PLC.

    196

    Plot area increased from 14,468 square metres to 14,882 square metres.

    Revision to plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries. Refer also to adjacent plot 198.

    198

    Plot area reduced from 10,472 square metres to 10,058 square metres.

    Revision to plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries. Refer also to adjacent plot 196.

    203

    Plot area reduced from 2,386 square metres to 2,345 square metres.

    Minor revision to plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries.

    206

    Plot area reduced from 3,679 square metres to 3,674 square metres.

    Revision to plot as portion of title in ownership of BP. Refer Plot to 242

    208

    Plot removed and replaced with plot 232.

    209

    Plot area reduced from 1,036 square metres to 1,008 square metres and changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Revision to this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land. Refer to plot 233.

    210

    Plot removed.

    Plot incorporated into plot 124.

    211

    Plot split into plot 211 and plot 245. Plot 211 area reduced from 1,493 square metres to 1,484 square metres.

    Revision to plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries. Refer to plot 245.

    212

    Plot area reduced from 1,192 square metres to 1,035 square metres.

    Plot area reduced to avoid encroachment into adjacent property.

    215

    Plot changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Change as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land.

    216

    Plot removed.

    Plot incorporated into plot 217 and 234.

    217

    Plot area increased from 537 square metres to 1,752 square metres.

    Incorporates part of Plot 216. Revision to this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail in regard to operational railway land. Refer to plot 216 and 234.

    219

    Plot area reduced from 1,039 square metres to 135 square metres.

    Reduced area in this plot as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail. Part of plot incorporated into plot 235.

    225

    Plot area reduced from 12,739 square metres to 12,014 square metres.

    Revision to plot following clarification of, and adjustment to, title boundaries. Refer also to adjacent plot 191.

    228

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 64.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    229

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 64.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    230

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 175.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    231

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 190.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    232

    Plot replaces plot 208. Plot 208 area reduced from 1,373 square metres to 1,335 square metres and changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    233

    New plot created from part of draft plot 209.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    234

    New plot created from part of draft plot 216. Plot changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    235

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 219. Plot changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    236

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 219. Plot changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    237

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 160. Plot changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    238

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 160. Plot changed from acquisition to servitude.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    239

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 160.

    Plot created as a result of discussions with owner Network Rail

    241

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 86.

    Portion of residual area of draft CPO Plot 86 following partial acquisition by Scottish Ministers.

    242

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 206.

    Split plot from 206 .

    243

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 146.

    Split plot from 146 .

    244

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 154.

    Split plot from 154 .

    245

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 211.

    Split plot from Plot 211 .

    246

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 73.

    Split plot from Plot 73.

    247

    New plot created from part of draft CPO plot 73.

    Split plot from Plot 73.