Mr James Mcmahon (Composite Objections Rebuttals
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Proof of Evidence Volume 11/1 5th September 2014 THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF STOCKPORT (HAZEL GROVE (A6) TO MANCHESTER AIRPORT A555 CLASSIFIED ROAD) COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER 2013 THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF STOCKPORT (HAZEL GROVE (A6) TO MANCHESTER AIRPORT A555 CLASSIFIED ROAD) (SIDE ROADS) ORDER 2013 THE HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 -and- THE ACQUISITION OF LAND ACT 1981 THE HIGHWAYS (INQUIRIES PROCEDURE) RULES 1994 COMPULSORY PURCHASE (INQUIRIES PROCEDURE) RULES 2007 REFERENCE: LAO/NW/SRO/2013/40 and LAO/NW/CPO/2013/41 A proof of evidence relating to the COMPOSITE OBJECTIONS REBUTTALS aspect of the A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road -of- James McMahon BSc CEng MICE on behalf of The Metropolitan Borough Council of Stockport acting on its behalf and on behalf -of- Manchester City Council -and- Cheshire East Borough Council VOLUME 1 – EVIDENCE IN CHIEF This Proof of Evidence sets out the Council’s responses to the objections to the A6MARR Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) and Side Road Order (SRO) that were submitted to the Department for Transport by the objectors to the CPO and SRO processes. The Proof is presented by the Council’s Project Director for the A6MARR scheme, James McMahon, however, the responses have been written by the relevant Expert Witnesses. The initials of the Expert Witness(es) responsible for the production of the rebuttals are provided alongside the response. Reference should be made to the individual Proofs of Evidence of the Expert Witnesses for further information pertaining to the response. The Expert Witnesses contributing to the responses to the objections submitted are as follows: Proof of Evidence Name and Expert Witness Initials Reference Number Naz Huda NH Volume 2 Nasar Malik NM Volume 3 Paul Reid PR Volume 4 Paul Colclough PC Volume 5 Jamie Bardot JB Volume 6 Alan Houghton AC Volume 7 Sue Stevenson SS Volume 8 James McMahon JMcM Volume 9 Henry Church HC Volume 10 1 1: Harrison Developments Holdings Cramond, Broadway, Bramhall, Stockport, SK7 3BR CPO Plots: 1/1 1/1A 1/1B 1/1C Agent: John Houston John Houston Consulting, 82 King Street, Manchester, M24WQ Element of Objection Response Expert objection Witness 1-01 The company acquired the Property in Our investigations indicate that according to both Land HC / CR 2005 for the purposes of carrying out Registry and the owner of the lane (Mr Brian Taylor), that residential development, for which the Harrison Developments Holdings Ltd does have any company has planning permission, and recorded right of access over Occupiers Lane. The has a right of way over Occupiers Lane, existence of a right of way is a matter of fact and law, the shown shaded green on the attached plan. onus of proof as to its existence being on the claimed beneficiary of that right. Insofar as the Council's scheme can be shown to impact on any right of way then, following confirmation and implementation of the CPO, it will be replicated or compensation assessed in accordance with the compensation code will be payable. 1-02 The company has not been served with See above. HC / CR any notices in connection with the Scheme, and a director of the company, Mr John Harrison, only came across the Schemes by chance. 1-03 The Company objects to the scheme. It is Insofar as the Company's interests are affected HC evident that the scheme will have an compensation will be payable, assessed in accordance adverse impact on the Property, with the compensation code. specifically with respect to access. 2 2: Michael E Simpson and Mrs K O Livesey CPO Plots: 1/4, 1/4A-1/4K, 2/9, 2/9A-2/9Z, 2/9AA, 2/9AB Agent: John Seed Brown Rural Partnership,29 Church Street, Macclesfield, Cheshire, SK11 6LB Element of Objection Response Expert objection Witness 2-01 No part of road, cutting or embankment is Only the land required for the scheme and its construction NH/HC intended to be placed on 2 substantial has been included within the CPO. The Council will plots shown edged/ coloured green on the demonstrate that all of this land is required to construct the attached plans. Accordingly such parts are road.9.4 ha is required in order to construct the new road not so required for the purpose of the and its earthworks, essential ecological and social mitigation construction of a highway should be and landscape bunding. Only ~1.3 ha is required for the deleted from Schedule 1 of CPO. contractor's compound and 2.4 ha for material storage. The Council would prefer to reach an agreement with the objector but no agreement has yet been reached. Until such a time as an agreement is reached the land must be retained with the Order. 2-02 The Acquiring Authorities have failed to Only the land required for the scheme and its construction HC/NH show any compelling case to take land for has been included within the CPO. The. Council will purposes that are not for the purpose of demonstrate that all of this land is required to construct the constructing thereon a highway, namely a road and for the contractor's compound and material road, and its cuttings and embankments. storage. 2-03 No provisions of the CPO authorise the The Acquiring Authority is unable to acquire the land HC taking of any land for temporary purposes required for the contractor's compound and material storage and accordingly such parts of the Plots as on a temporary basis via the CPO process. Once are not required for permanent construction of the scheme is completed then the land not compulsory acquisition should be deleted required on a permanent basis will be offered back to the from Schedule 1 to the CPO. original land owner in accordance with the Crichel Down rules. The Council would prefer to reach an agreement with the objector but no agreement has yet been reached. Until such 3 a time as an agreement is reached the land must be retained with the Order. 2-04 The Objectors believe that the Acquiring The land referred to is required for the contractor's HC Authorities' proposed taking the two parts compound and material storage. The Council would prefer of the Plots identified on the attached to reach an agreement with the objector but no agreement plans for temporary purposes only and has yet been reached. Until such a time as an agreement is contend that there is no power under the reached the land must be retained with the Order... There is CPO to do so. no provision to acquire land temporarily under compulsory purchase powers therefore the Council has no choice but to include it for permanent acquisition. Once construction of the scheme is completed then the land not required on a permanent basis will be offered back to the original land owner in accordance with the Crichel Down rules. 2-05 By paragraph 1 the CPO will authorise the The permanent land take includes land required for the new NH/ PR acquisition of "land" described in road and its earthworks, essential ecological and social paragraph 2. Paragraph 2 describes the mitigation and landscape bunding. Only the land required "land" only by reference to the "land" for the scheme and its construction has been included described in Schedule 1 shown coloured within the CPO. The Council will demonstrate that all of this pink on the CPO plan. Neither Schedule 1 land is required to construct the road. The position with the nor the map describe, in relation to the land required for the contractor’s compound is described Plots, that only a temporary possession is above. required in part of those Plots. If the intention of the Acquiring Authorities is take all parts of the Plots permanently, but then give a written undertaking to return the parts after temporary use, then this is a misuse of powers for it shows that the Acquiring Authorities cannot show a compelling case to acquire permanently the parts of the Plots required only for temporary use. If, contrary to the above, the CPO does not contain powers to take part of the Plots identified above temporarily, then the land in question should not be acquired permanently. 4 2-06 No part of the Plots should be used for Only the land required for the scheme and its construction NH/HC tipping of permanent spoil which will has been included within the CPO. The Council will severely prejudice the future use of the demonstrate that part of the land is required to construct said lands for agricultural and environmental bunds. The effects of any changing levels of development purposes. land intended to be returned to the original land owner will be considered as part of any potential compensation. 2-07 The extent of permanent land take to Plots 1/4A, 1/4B, 1/4D and 1/4E. Plots 1/4A, 1.4D and 1.4E PR/ HV provide for bunding and environmental have been included to enable a combination of mounding, mitigation works is excessive, severely woodland planting and scrub with intermittent trees to be prejudicing the future use of said lands for established with the objective of mitigating noise and visual agricultural and future development impacts for property located along the existing A6 Buxton purposes. Road. Plot 1/4B has been taken to enable replacement ponds to be provided for a pond which will require removal to facilitate construction of the road. Should a person feel that the value of their land and property has decreased or that they have suffered other losses as a direct consequence of the road scheme, they are entitled to claim compensation under the statutory compensation code and each claim will be determined on its merits.