By-pass hearing delayed, again

November 07, 2007

| Submit Comments | Comments (13) | Previous | Next

THE controversial Mottram-Tintwistle by-pass has been hit by a further delay after the Highways Agency discovered new errors in its revised evidence.

The hearing was dramatically halted in September when the agency admitted it had made mistakes in its evidence. They came to light after a question from an opponent of the scheme.

The agency had miscalculated the amount of traffic that would use the by-pass.

The hearing was adjourned to allow time for the mistake to be corrected.

When it resumed at Stalybridge Civic Hall yesterday, the Highways Agency asked for another adjournment after its own checks revealed mistakes in the revised evidence.

Opponents called it a `farce' and asked for the hearing to be abandoned.

Stephen Greenhalgh, Highways Agency project leader, said: "We were informed there are further anomalies, in addition to those that were identified back in September.

Implications

"It will take the Highways Agency some time to understand the implications and what actions are necessary."

He said there will be a knock-on effect on the environmental assessment, which the agency will not now be able to publish on November 30.

Asked by inquiry chairman John Watson if the agency evidence submitted since day 13 should be discarded, Mr Greenhalgh said: "The changes to the evidence on revised traffic figures, all that evidence, should be discarded and we would have to resubmit evidence based on the correct traffic forecast."

John Hall, who represents the people of Denton and Audenshaw, said he found the Highways Agency's actions `unbelievable'.

He said: "The incompetence is absolutely staggering and it is an insult to the inquiry. This is going to descend into more farce than it is at the moment."

Mr Hall repeated earlier calls for the hearing to be halted as it `was no longer credible'.

Mr Watson said: "It is an extraordinary situation, but it is not one we can't cope with."

He said he would adjourn the hearing until December 18.

The 3.5 mile by-pass would divert traffic away from the A628 and relieve congested roads in the villages of Mottram, Tintwistle and Hollingworth.

| Submit Comments | Comments (13) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 13 and replies | View All

John Hall (07/11/2007 at 10:29)

Unfortunately the M.E.N forgets the Highways Agency published its Evidence in February 2007 which was supposed to be correct scrutinised and accurate Public Inquiry evidence.
Errors were found then and the HA introduced suggested corrected errors evidence in June.
In September this June evidence was also found to have errors,so again the PI was adjourned,and so this latest declared flawed evidence,is not acceptable.The HA/Dept of Transport have vast levels of Public funds available to present over the past 2 years to have produced accurate evidence,so no longer is this PI credible.
I would think the Tameside Council costs alone already surpass £1 million of the Council Tax payers money,and the HA costs at least £1.6 million,and still the Public Inquiry is no further on than in February 2007 all due to error ridden evidence by the very people who are responsible for transport data across the UK.
Ruth Kelly MP knows about this deplorable situation costing millions without result but prefers to divorce herself from her role in this situation as Secretary of State for the Department of Transport,even though her intervention has been requested.If you enjoy seeing £millions of your money used FOR NOTHING,then so be it.

Mark, Hadfield (07/11/2007 at 15:39)

Whilst the Highways Agency fiddle about correcting traffic model data and people argue the toss about adjourning the inquiry for x months, another year passes and the residents of Longendale continue to suffer (and pay for the!) the appalling traffic conditions in the area. Let's face it....this Bypass is never going to happen. They've had 30 years to prepare data for this inquiry. It's an utter farce.

Chris, Irlam (08/11/2007 at 09:09)

Does John Hall represent the people of Denton & Audenshaw?

No he does not so kindly reword your article MEN, he represents only himself as I know plenty of folks from round there and also in the Mottram/Glossop area that have been waiting for this bypass for years and years.

STAND AND DELIVER THE BYPASS NOW!

Gary SK13 (08/11/2007 at 13:10)

Just who is responsible for this farce?, whoever it is should resign immediately.
this has been going on for over 15 years now, people in this area are sick to death of the daily traffic chaos, action needs to be taken now.
The so called eco warriors who are against this bypass do not have to put up with the horrendous traffic. And what John Hall do the people of denton have to do with this?, you do not have to live here.

Simon (08/11/2007 at 14:28)

This delay is a welcome relief to the wildlife and countryised of the are that will be permanently damaged by the Highways Agencies proposals. Despite the traffic problems in the area many many local people have objected to this bypass BECAUSE the traffic will be WORSE afterwards - not better and perhaps teh Highways Agency are realising this with their screwed up calculations!

John Hall (08/11/2007 at 15:52)

To those having a go at me,engage your brain before your mouth.
To shovel thousands of extra cars and HGV from the M1 direct onto the M67,and then onto the M60 is banana`s.
To those who think they have it rough come down to Junction 24 where your extra traffic will be deposited and see what 220,000 daily volumes of cars and HGV`s look like,and ingest the air and noise from 220,000 not slow moving traffic but stop/ start from 23 directions into this interchange.
Never have I claimed to represent Denton/Audenshaw you are obviously one of those who believes every word in the press.I have certainly tried to expose what will happen in this locality because after 13 years of constant campaigning "I do know what I am talking about"
If you hear my 400 pages of evidence it will shut you up without doubt.
Yes there is a problem in the 3 villages,but the public have not observed the hidden words which are to create a direct through motorway from the M1 to the M60 and then routes all over.The bypass is for an M62 alternative,and just wait for the reality of what you want,it will sicken you
what will happen to the whole area in that region,but you have not twigged that without building up a head of steam from those in Longendale deviously,the Dept of Transport/Highways would never get away with their road proposals.
Learn the facts not the rhetoric and why should we in Denton/Audenshaw get a further 35,000 plus extra vehicles daily on to of the 220,000.If thats your logic then you are obviously one who contemplates your own naval without knowing or accepting the far worse environmental circumstances down the M67 road.

John Hall (08/11/2007 at 15:59)

Chris you spout it but tell me who all the people in Denton/Audenshaw who are backing the ByPass are???.
Perhaps you talk without knowledgerr of the fact that the 47,000 electorate in Denton/Audenshaw were deliberately denied knowledge of the Highways/TMBC proposals (no documentation was placed where almost 25% of the Tameside Electorate live,so the facts were deliberately hidden although the main impact of the ByPass will be the M67/M60/A57 interchange where 11,000 live which is even more than the population of all Longendale.
Give facts Chris not rhetoric and then I will
chew over what you say.
GIVE ME THE FACTS AND NAMES & ADDRESES of all those you know,or shut up.

Gary SK13 (09/11/2007 at 13:24)

Thank you John for your opinion, but that is all it is. For the traffic chaos already at the denton exchange, it is just as bad at mottram, the idea is to keep traffic flowing off the end of the M67, relieving the pressure of traffic trying to get into glossop. At the moment it is a daily nightmare for the people of this area, i can assure you there are more people who want this bypass than do not. Whatever happens something MUST be done to ease the traffic congestion in this area.

Chris, Irlam (09/11/2007 at 13:53)

John Hall your comments show you to be nothing but your usual NIMBY who does not want any sort of development to occur anywhere near where they live.

A real busybody who thinks they know best and closes their narrow mind to all other opinions & any contradictory facts too.

I dare you to go knocking on the doors of the folk who live in the Mottram or Glossop areas and tell them why you are so right and they are so wrong.

As I have stated recently I live right next to the A57 Irlam & Cadishead bypass and we had the NIMBYS here too who said we would all regret the building of the bypass and that it would lead to traffic chaos.

Guess what? It didn't. And neither will the Mottram bypass.

Face facts, the locals want it so it should be given to them. You do not live in the area and as such have no right to attempt to deny it to them.

Go and pursue your vendetta against the HA & Tameside Council elsewhere - if you resent the MEN stating you "represent the people of Denton & Audenshaw" then tell them to change the article!

Black Sabbath (09/11/2007 at 15:36)

John Hall - try to look beyond your own blinkered colloquial paradigm, and understand that everyone who wishes to use the road is on the same 'team'. There are no locals vs. outsiders, everyone wants to use the roads safely and with a minimum of delay. If a bypass will facilitate this then why go against it?

lewin, www.nomottrambypass.blogspot.com (09/11/2007 at 18:12)

Black Sabbath, Chris/Irlam etc - you're like stuck records. The bypass WILL NOT relieve traffic, just shift it onto adjoining roads. The figures are there if you want to read them published by the Highways Agency themselves. Visit my blog for more slaying of Holy Cows.

Gary SK13 (09/11/2007 at 19:42)

Lewin/ John Hall, i am sick of the ' green hippy brigade' constantly moaning about the impact on the environment. Lewin what are you talking about, the adjoining roads are already at breaking point, moving the traffic at the end of the M67 at mottram will ease the congestion into glossop and the surrounding area. History is littered with protests against bypasses, the most notable being the A34 newbury bypass, which has proved a resounding success, traffic will always increase, its a fact of life, but doing nothing about it is not a option.

Mark (29/11/2007 at 16:40)

These latest mistakes by the Highways Agency are very worrying when considering that congestion through Mottram and Hollingworth is already at saturation point. Also with the recent news that the Government will not intervene with National Grid's plans to use the third and last tunnel for the laying of power cables, this will finally end hope of the historic woodhead railway line being reopened along with any associated rail freight plans for HGV's to be transported through the tunnel. The removal of these current options will almost certainly add additional pressures to proceed with the proposed bypass. Even with a new bypass, congestion may well be removed from the local villages but the shear volume of HGV traffic (compound by the news of a new bypass) will congest the undulating A628 and slow down all other commuters. National Grid's plans must be opposed to avoid progression of the bypass and sources suggest that they proposed to start work as early as February 2008. The clear message hear is keep the alternatives available if you wish to avoid the construction of the bypass, although by February next year there may be none left.

()

Report

News