Fury after bypass inquiry collapses

Brian Lashley

March 25, 2009

| Submit Comments | Comments (5) | Previous | Next

THE CONTROVERSIAL Mottram-Tintwistle bypass project should be scrapped for good after a new setback, say campaigners.

The Highways Agency - which spent £20m promoting and researching the plans - announced it is withdrawing from the public inquiry into the 3.5-mile route.

It comes after the regional planning body 4NW, which decides how funds are spent on new developments, shelved the scheme for seven years. It decided earlier this month that the bypass - which could cost up to £315m - was `not a priority'.

Supporters of the project have vowed to continue fighting for the bypass. It would take thousands of vehicles and HGVs away from Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle, and link Tameside with the A628 Woodhead Pass to south Yorkshire.

A public inquiry started in June 2007 and was due to last just 10 weeks. But after mistakes in the Highways Agency's plans it was adjourned indefinitely in December 2007.

It is now almost certain the hearing will be scrapped .

Richard George, from Campaign for Better Transport, said: "The Highways Agency has had 18 months to make the case for the road - that they have finally admitted defeat should send a clear signal that there is neither the need nor the political will for the scheme."

Tameside council leader Roy Oldham said: "This decision by the Highways Agency to withdraw from the public inquiry is inexcusable. It is important to recognise that the major traffic and pollution problems in the Longdendale area will not go away on their own."

Stalybridge and Hyde MP James Purnell said: "Despite today's decision, it is important to remember that the need for the new road remains real and urgent."

Mike Flynn, of the Longdendale Siege Committee which supports the bypass scheme, said: "It is a disgrace the Highways Agency has abandoned the public inquiry after spending £20m."

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.

460

275

bBhRMD6Q8NE

false

| Submit Comments | Comments (5) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 5 and replies | View All

Danielle (25/03/2009 at 11:00)

I think Richard George should travel to and from work through Longdendale and then see if there is a need for a bypass. I travel a minimum of 1 hour from Hadfield to Belle Vue and then it normally takes longer to get home due to traffic on the M67 at Mottram roundabout. This journey at the weekend or later in the evening takes approx 20 mins

fed up with it, sale (25/03/2009 at 11:23)

how long do we have to listen to these bufoons twittering on about the odd bird being made to move its nest. havent they realised they will have died from exhaust fumes from all the traffic stood in the traffiic jams, while waiting to go to yorkshire and glossop, build the bxxxdy road and give the area some peace and quiet, with out the traffic jams 20 hours a day.

Black Flag (25/03/2009 at 11:55)

Given the huge national debt that the government has amassed, we simply can't afford to increase it by throwing money at this kind of low-value project.

The stinking kipper, pinned under the table (25/03/2009 at 12:23)

"The Highways Agency - which spent £20m promoting and researching the plans"

Bl**dy Hell! That was a bigger waste of money than the contax.

Kev9, Mottram (25/03/2009 at 18:43)

The Highways Authority's own figures show that the bypass would have increased traffic in both the immediate area of the villages and nearby.
Stick Mottram bypass into Wikipedia - the figures are simple and expose the out-of-date and flawed arguments of bypass supporters like Tameside council leader Roy Oldham.
Danielle ... your one-hour trek must be a pain, but much of that will be queuing at Denton roundabout and Debdale Park traffic lights and by congestion caused by on-street parking during rush hour by shopkeepers and customers near the new Tescos on Hyde Road at Gorton.
The bypass would have made your journey far worse, I suggest, by drawing in extra traffic from throughout the region onto the M67 and surrounding roads. It would also have created new problems - increasing traffic by 36 per cent on Roe Cross Road, the main Mottram to Ashton A-road. Would residents alongside that route be as justified as those in Hollingworth and Mottram in demanding another bypass to relieve that extra traffic? Where does it end?
The bypass was promoted years ago on the back of an unrepresentative petition and was enthusiastically supported by Coun Oldham (now aged 74 or 75) and the Highways Authority - which used old and inaccurate figures.
Coun Oldham is the same council leader who initially branded potholes a "traffic-calming" measure (MeN 3.3.06). He's the same gentleman who decided he was so locally famous he had the location of his home etched onto a bronze relief public map of the area alongside that of L. S. Lowry (MeN 27.7.07). He also felt so altruistic about reducing traffic that he drove to a congestion charge meeting in nearby Duki in his council-owned BMW (MeN 28.7.07). He also totally miscalculated his electorate's opposition (83 per cent) to the congestion charge by supporting Leese's folly. He's also increased the community charge this year by 3.15 per cent, claiming it's to keep pace with inflation (0 per cent in February according to the Retail Price Index).
Would you trust Tameside Council and the bungling Highways Authority with a bucket and spade to build a sandcastle on Southport beach ... let alone give them £315m of our money so they can dump tons of concrete on an area of natural beauty - all on the basis of flawed figures?
I wouldn't and I live in Mottram and use the A57 and the Woodhead almost daily.

()

Report

News