Act now to stop the A628 Mottram-Tintwistle Bypass

 

Latest news

Much has happened in the last month but all it seems to have done is bring us back to square one. In March the North West region decided the £315 million bypass was not of strategic importance, de-prioritised it and postponed its start of construction for four years. This was good news as it could have allowed a re-think. However it was only advice to Government which has yet to be accepted (or rejected or amended). But it would seem that even as that advice was offered the bypass was being resurrected in a cheaper shorter version. This was not the re-think we had in mind!

Local Transport Today (517/10 April-23 April) carries an article headed 'Tameside studies low cost alternative to HA Bypass' which talks about Tameside and AGMA exploring an alternative package of measures comprising a bypass of Mottram which extends along the line of the proposed Glossop Spur to Woolley Bridge and improved bus services - and which goes on to talk about a lorry ban for through traffic in the long term. It says this would probably require the A628/A616 to be de-trunked. The concluding para, quoting Phil Calverley, Tameside's engineering development manager, is: "Calverley said Tameside would inform the Inspector later this month as to whether the council wanted to proceed with the inquiry into the Glossop Spur".

The resurrection of a new road in an amended form conflicts with the Government’s approach towards problem solving, rather than having a solution and using it wherever. Although the new shorter cheaper version of the bypass would require no infrastructure in the National Park there may well be traffic increases across it. Nor would it solve the traffic congestion in Glossop and the villages, indeed matters could be much worse for Hollingworth and Tintwistle. The road would cut through the green belt and still leave the 'motorway by stealth' hanging in the air. A lorry ban, sustainable travel town measures in Glossop and Longdendale, and investment in public transport are still the way to go!

When we met with Geoff Hoon the Secretary of State for Transport in March he too wanted some ‘fresh thinking’ and was sympathetic to the idea of a lorry ban. Coupled with travel planning to encourage smarter choices and investment in public transport, an area wide weight restriction would reduce congestion and bring environmental improvements very quickly to the area, particularly the villages, as well as avoiding road building.

Through all this the public inquiry remains ‘live’ but postponed! The Highways Agency took the decision to postpone start of construction by 4 years as a real sign of a rethink and withdrew from the public inquiry. However, the public inquiry itself has not closed and the Inspector is waiting to hear from both the Highways Agency and Tameside (who are promoting the linked Glossop Spur) what they want to do next.

The story so far…

The Mottram Tintwistle bypass (with the Glossop Spur) has been in development for nearly 20 years. The bypass started its statutory processes with the publication of a first set of draft line orders in January 2006 and a second set in February 2007. A public inquiry began in June 2007, sat for 15 days and was then postponed indefinitely due to errors made by the Highways Agency. Three deadlines for submission of revised evidence by the Highways Agency have passed (Feb 2008 May 2008 and October 2008) and a third, May 2009, is now in place.

The Highways Agency and its consultants are entirely responsible for all these delays. Their serious errors have required no less than five major revisions of the scheme. During the prolonged period of development of the scheme little has been done to alleviate the existing traffic problems. The costs of the scheme have more than doubled and are now estimated between £223-315 million.

Surely the time has come to halt prioritisation of a scheme that would worsen congestion, increase traffic flows and CO2 emissions in the long term, and impact unacceptably on National Park statutory purposes and the Greater Manchester Green Belt?

Friends of the Peak District will carry on fighting for a sustainable solution to the traffic problems and objecting to the bypass within this alliance of organisations

• British Mountaineering Council
• CPRE North West
• Campaign for National Parks
• Friends of the Earth
• North West Transport Activists Roundtable
• The Ramblers’ Association.

The Peak District National Park Authority, with Natural England, has also objected to the bypass due the severe impacts it would have on the Peak Park and the environment.

What is the problem?

A majority of local car traffic and a minority of through traffic of heavy lorries meet in the villages of Tintwistle Hollingworth and Mottram and cause congestion, air pollution and road danger. The lorries are particularly intimidating and cause damage to property. The only solution to have been rigorously assessed has been road building. But the proposed 5.7Km Mottram Tintwistle Bypass is bad news for people and the countryside. The road with its viaducts and embankments would cut through and destroy high quality upland countryside leading to:

• Tarmacking of 1.3km of the Peak District National Park, with lay-bys climbing lanes and roundabouts and a dual carriageway through the Green Belt.
• Loss of tranquillity, quiet walks in beautiful scenery, and wildlife.
• Partial destruction of the historic village of Mottram, including the Old Mill.
• Disruption to farm holdings.
• Light pollution.
• Paths diverted over a road streaming with thousands of cars and lorries.
• Visual intrusion of lorries and cars from many beauty spots.

And much more traffic - without the bypass, traffic would stay the same. Due to the Highways Agency’s errors there are no accurate forecast traffic counts available but traffic levels would rise through the National Park on the A628/A616, on the A57 to Glossop and on many other local roads on both sides of the Pennines.