THE delay-hit public inquiry into a controversial bypass is unlikely to resume until next year.
The hearing into the Mottram to Tintwistle bypass was adjourned indefinitely in December because of errors in evidence from the Highways Agency.
Now the agency has been branded a `disgrace' after the new evidence, expected by inquiry chairman Insp John Watson by the end of May, failed to turn up.
Transport campaigner John Hall, from Denton, said: "This has got to be the biggest disgrace in public inquiry history.
"It is scandalous that a major government department cannot produce evidence for a public inquiry."
Mike Flynn, of the Longdendale Siege Committee, which supports the bypass, said: "This is a disgrace. They seem to be ignoring the welfare of the people living in the area who are affected by the traffic which is getting worse and worse.
"Something needs to be done about it urgently."
Fifth attempt
The Highways Agency, which is making its fifth attempt to get its case in order, says the new evidence won't be ready until October.
A spokesman for the agency said: "Our current developing programme still indicates that revised evidence will be available in October."
He said the scheme had incurred additional costs for design and legal fees.
Once the evidence is submitted, opponents of the bypass will need time to scrutinise it, and at least one will request six months to do so - pushing the inquiry back into spring 2009.
The proposed 3.5-mile bypass will divert traffic from the A628 and congested roads through Mottram, Tintwistle and Hollingworth, on the edge of Tameside.
In January the M.E.N. revealed the bypass had cost £13.7m of public money without a foot of Tarmac being laid. The figure has now reached more than £15m.
The inquiry at Stalybridge Civic Hall started last June and was expected to take just 10 weeks.
In January Coun Roy Oldham, leader of Tameside council, said he would meet with Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Tom Harris to express his concerns and seek assurances about support for the project.
A spokesman for Tameside council said the meeting has not yet taken place.
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 14 and replies | View All
PW, Manchester (20/06/2008 at 08:05)
This is the start of 2 routes to West Yorkshire (Woodhead and Snake), as well as a connecting road to the City of Manchester for many thousands of local residents - bus travellers as well. The inertness of this machinery is breath-taking.
Karney for head of GMPTA(formerly MC Spanner) (20/06/2008 at 08:52)
Highways Agency - Yet another government body wasting money
Black Flag (20/06/2008 at 09:32)
Mike (20/06/2008 at 09:42)
Chris, Irlam (20/06/2008 at 09:59)
You're right - they should ignore the NIMBY & green brigade and get it built ASAP.
the beer baron (20/06/2008 at 10:01)
Black Flag (20/06/2008 at 10:16)
Surely in this case, the NIMBY brigade would be the people who want the bypass built, because they want the traffic that is near them moved somewhere else.
Audenshaw Bob (20/06/2008 at 12:19)
MARK MY WORDS.
Gary SK13 (20/06/2008 at 13:08)
John Hall, Tameside (20/06/2008 at 19:35)
So its 100,000 is it,well the three villages Tintwistle
Hollingworth and Mottram which includes a slice of Mottram have in total 9,000.and they are the ones the HA base their not yet credible case on.So what about the other 90,000 ?
This intended road is a proven con,its nowt to do with easing traffic,look up the new M62/Mk11 road,or The Northern Road Route or the NETA Road Scheme they are all the same and will bring through Longendale vast numbers of HGV`s on the direct route from Ireland,Liverpool Docks,Motorways to Manchester then onto the M67 direct through via the ByPass to the M1,then onto Humberside Ports,from there onto Europe ie Germany,Balkans,Netherlands etc etc.
Most of these poster no nowt about the real now known plans for a parallel M62 route,and Longendale won`t know whats hit them.
Please on this subject Posters start doing some factual research,why the hell do you think the Highways case started crumbling when the cat was let out of the bag,and the ByPass is an absolute con for the Tintwistle,Hollingworth and Mottram Folk and the proof will be proven 100% when the HA crawl back to the Inquiry
if they do ??????
PW, Manchester (21/06/2008 at 13:31)
There is already a horrendous problem for the population of that area. It's long overdue for addressing.
Kev9, Tameside (21/06/2008 at 14:51)
I use the A57-A628 all times of the day and night, to Yorkshire and Manchester. I've lived in Mottram for 20-odd years and am often a pedestrian in Hollingworth and Tinwistle too. The traffic is nowhere near as bad as it's made out to be. There are other routes just as bad if not worse in the North West.
It's not a case of being a NIMBY. Congestion has dramatically decreased with the rise in the price of petrol. It's just not worth destroying a very beautiful valley for such little reward. Even the Highways Agency's botched figures - long before the recent fall in traffic - forecast only a four and five per cent traffic decrease at Mottram Moor and Hollingworth, but with a massive increase on other local routes including up to a staggering 36 per cent.
Weigh it up and it's just not worth it.
Please don't think all the villagers want the bypass - many don't, and the polls show that. Politicians rely on a petition which was not taken round all the homes and was nearly ten years ago - long before the flawed figures were actually worked out.
Ask the local shopkeepers who will lose passing trade. Ask Mottram residents who will face a detour of nearly two miles to get to Manchester. Ask the many people who like to go up on the moors and admire the views and the wonder of nature. I know their answers because I live here.
The bypass is an obsession of Tameside Council leader Roy Oldham. He's the elderly councillor who believes pot-holes should be left unfilled because they are "traffic calming measures." He believed he was so important he had his home pinpointed on a £3,000 historic map of Mottram - alongside the likes of an actually famous former resident, L. S. Lowry. He also put the borough's support behind the congestion charge - without consulting the electorate.
Would you trust the same man with the fate of a beautiful stretch of countryside which we should be preserving in our quest to stay Green?
steve bagshaw (22/06/2008 at 18:41)
I have lived in the valley all my life and confirm that the previous comment from Kev9 regarding local support/opposition is spot on.
Every poll taken has gone against those who want to degrade the local environment by smothering it in concrete. The numbers of objections to the H.A. itself have always been well ahead of supporters, despite manipulated attempts to suggest otherwise.
Nevertheless, this is not the issue right now.
Whilst the tone of this debate so far is one of 'We want to build it'...'Oh no we don't' the real issue is whether the Public Inquiry should be abandoned or not, due to protracted delays that emanate from the incompetency of the Highways Agency itself.
It is simply not acceptable that the H.A. should be given any amount of time to rejig their figures during the course of the Inquiry. There is nothing in the rules and guidelines with respect to P.I.'s that allows such conduct.
You can read my full comments here
http://tintwistleandhadfieldresassoc.blogspot.com/2008/06/mottram-tintwistle-public-inquiry.html
I think that M.E.N. should take the lead on this and start a poll asking the simple question:
Should the Mottram-Tinsle P.I. be terminated with immediate effect?
Simon (30/07/2008 at 09:06)
SCRAP IT NOW