Say No to the Stockport Bypass!
Proposals are currently being made for a bypass around Stockport and
through the Goyt valley.
More information can be found at:
Here is our response to the consultation on the bypass:
|
Dear Sir,
I am writing in response to the current consultation on the Stockport
Bypass. There are a number of angles on which I would like to take issue
with this scheme.
The first is the consultation itself. Although I enclose a completed questionnaire,
I do not agree with the way this consultation has been done. The document
has been described by local activists as a 'hard-sell' on the road scheme.
I would agree. It says nothing about the environmental, social or financial
costs of the scheme. It gives no alternatives, such as congestion charging.
Instead those consulted are left with a lame question that asks if the
road is needed to help give traffic relief to local communities and businesses.
This is two questions in one - a very unsatisfactory practice in questionnaire
writing. I would like to see local communities and businesses benefit
from decreased levels of traffic, but I do not support doing this in a
way the way proposed, which moves the traffic elsewhere at substantial
environmental cost.
On the design itself, whilst the map on the consultation document is inadequate
to see any detail, it is clear that it would cause serious permanent damage
to the countryside in the Goyt Valley. This is not mentioned in the consultation
document. The fate of this much prized area of Stockport's green heritage
is glazed over with an anodyne sentence pledging to 'make sure that the
route is developed in a way that is as environmentally sensitive as possible.'
To sell this scheme on the basis of quality of life in Stockport but fail
to mention the extent to which it would impoverish one of the area's key
recreational resources is to ask Stockport residents to make this decision
with their eyes closed.
I am not satisfied that the design takes into the account the effects
on surrounding areas. Although the roads will allegedly be designed not
to increase overall traffic levels, it is not at all clear how this can
be achieved. Surely decades of road building has demonstrated that new
roads fill up with traffic, bringing with it more pollution. And even
if that road building is out of the way of major conurbations, the pollution
will still contribute towards global climate change - and its local ramifications.
Moving the traffic to somewhere else does just that: it moves the problem;
it does not remove it.
The SEMMMS report, from which the 'justification' for the road stems,
considers 'congestion charging' briefly but dismisses it as having only
a slight effect on behavioural patterns. I would request that this is
revised in light of the recent success in London where 'congestion charging'
has been more successful than expected. It would be wrong therefore to
continue to use the information from modelling prior to the report' publication
in September 2001.
In summary, Manchester Friends of the Earth does not support this development
and opposes it on environmental and transport planning grounds. We want
to see a reduction in traffic levels and improvements in local quality
of life but believe that this road comes at too high a price environmentally
and is at best a short-term sticking plaster. We ask that this proposal
be re-evaluated and that we have the opportunity to be represented at
any inquiry related to the proposals.
Yours sincerely,
Manchester Friends of the Earth
|
