12 Supporters 11 Opposers

A time to look at the facts

<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
 
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 8:46AM
List your questions and i will answer them

0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 11:04AM, Edit: 19th February 2013 at 12:47PM by noroadm
opportunity gone Norma
0 Likes 1 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 11:04AM
Here is what friends of the earth have to say

Manchester Friends of the Earth
Green Fish Resource Centre
46-50 Oldham Street
Manchester
M4 1LE
25
th
January 2013
SEMMMs Project Team
Stopford House (Fred Perry House)
Stockport,
SK1 3YQ.
Dear Sir/Madam
Please find enclosed Manchester Friends of the Earth's response to the A6 to Manchester
Airport Road (A6 – MARR) consultation.
According to the SEMMMS website this consultation is a “first phase” seeking views of the
preferred options for the scheme – largely in terms of junction layouts.
1
We also note that a

second phase will follow where we will seek your views on the preferred
scheme, prior to a planning application for the A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road. This
second phase of consultation will begin in Spring 2013.”
Manchester Friends of the Earth does not support the proposed A6-MARR and we believe
that the proposed scheme will not achieve the economic and transport benefits claimed for
the scheme. We also believe that the proposed scheme will have a wide range of detrimental
environmental, economic and social impacts effects. We will campaign for the proposed
investment to be used to support public transport and active travel schemes.
Therefore we have not responded to the questions regarding specific junction layout options.
We have briefly outlined several key areas of concern and will submit a more detailed
response to the “second phase” consultation in Spring 2013.
Yours sincerely
Pete Abel
Dr Graeme Sherriff
Manchester Friends of the Earth
1

Scope of the consultation – review of other non-road building options.
Since the original SEMMMS study, which was completed in 2001, there has been no full up-
to-date review of the need for the A6-MARR in comparison to other non-road building options
to address traffic congestion problems. This is despite a national flattening out in traffic
growth, changes to travel patterns, new legislation on air quality and climate change.
The A6-MARR would be close to other major infrastructure schemes which would affect traffic
levels and air quality and carbon emissions, including Manchester Airport City Enterprise
Zone, plans for Woodford Garden Village on land at the former Woodford Aerodrome site
south of the A6-MARR,
2
and plans for a major new settlement east of Handforth at the
junction of the A555 and the A34.
3

Air pollution
The UK Air Pollution report 2011 found that annual mean concentrations of NO2 beside busy
urban roads frequently exceed 40 μg m-3, the limit value set by the European Union to
protect human health.
4
The report showed that the Greater Manchester agglomeration had
locations with measured or modelled mean NO2 concentrations higher than the 40 μg mean
limit.
The Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) acknowledges that the European
Union requirements to meet NO2 concentration targets by 2010 have not been met, but does
not set out how transport planning decisions will enable the 2015 deadline to be met.
5
Despite
the focus on meeting EU limits on NO2, the Greater Manchester Air Quality Strategy and
Action Plan ‘made very little difference’ (LTP3 section 9.3) to NO2 concentration at most road
side locations.
6
The LTP3 also acknowledges that ‘financial penalties may have a significant
impact on future budgets’. Greater Manchester is not due to meet legal NO2 limits until 2020,
which puts the UK, and in turn Greater Manchester authorities, at risk of large fines up to
£300 million.
7
The Greater Manchester LTP 3 states that a detailed assessment and air quality modeling is
being carried out by the Greater Manchester Transportation Unit through the Greater
Manchester Emissions Dispersion project to provide a forecast for emissions for 2015/16.
However, this does not appear to be referred to in either the A6-MARR Business Case or
Environmental Scoping Report.

Major Scheme Business Case (MSBC)
The Economic Assessment Report (EAR, MSBC Appendix B6) does not provide a sound
strategic case for the A6-MARR proposal. Taken at face value, it illustrates that neither the
“with scheme” nor the “do nothing” scenarios will prevent the worsening congestion in the
study area. Manchester Friends of the Earth would therefore argue that this totally
undermines the implied EAR claim that the scheme will generate an economic benefit
2
compared with the present situation, and casts severe doubts on the estimates of GDP and
productivity growth that depend on time-savings.
Additionally, the low discount rate, combined with assumptions about income growth, means
that only about 30% of the estimated benefit are projected to accrue in the first 30 years. The
overwhelming bulk of the benefit arises so far in the future as to be of little use.

Accuracy of Traffic modeling
The supporting documentation available does not seem to provide an analysis against
identified objectives and problems, as required in the Webtag methodology. Walking or
cycling is not included in the modeling, which conceals the real impact of locating the new
development in the planned locations and accessing them primarily by road.
The public transport forecasts do not appear to be robustly validated and thus mode choice
and the impacts of the scheme are not well represented.
In particular the mode split predicted by the model for areas where it is currently measured,
such as central Manchester and surrounding areas including Stockport, is not shown for the
modelled base year or future years.
Some of the Department for Transport guidance does not appear to have been followed, for
example there is no options report nor an analysis of time costs and savings by size.
It is also important to note the limits of the traffic forecasting, which does not consider induced
traffic. Induced traffic occurs when a greater volume of traffic is generated as a result of extra
road capacity, and evidence of this has been well documented.
8
9
The 1994 report by the Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment, entitled
“Trunk Roads and the Generation of Traffic” stated that:
“Considering all these sources of evidence, we conclude that induced traffic can and
does occur, probably, quite extensively, though its size and significance is likely to vary
widely in different circumstances. (Conclusion 10)”
and that:
“These studies demonstrate convincingly that the economic value of a scheme can be
overestimated by the omission of even a small amount of induced traffic. We consider
that this matter is of profound importance to the value for money assessment of the
Road Programme.” (Conclusion 12)
and:
“We therefore recommend that scheme appraisal must be carried out within the
context of economic and environmental appraisals at the strategic area-wide level
which take account of induced traffic through variable demand methods. Much more
emphasis needs to be placed on the strategic assessment of trunk routes within a
3
corridor or regional or urban context. (Conclusion 17)
10
If induced traffic is not fully included in the assessment of the scheme, the traffic and resultant
air pollution and carbon emissions will be underestimated which further undermine that
projections included in the A6-MARR supporting documentation.

Climate Change legislation.
The Climate Change Act 2008 introduced a binding reduction target requiring the UK to
reduce its emissions by at least 80% by 2050 against 1990 levels and a reduction of at least
34% by 2020.
11
The Government has set out plans for achieving the emissions reductions committed to in the
first four carbon budgets up to 2027 in ‘The Carbon Plan’ published in December 2011.
12
Emissions for the transport sub-sector, which accounts for 24% of overall UK emissions, are
dominated by the car: 58% car, vans 12%, Heavy Goods Vehicles 17%. The Plan requires
that sustainable travel choices are a key element of any developments to de-carbonise travel.
At the NW regional level, the North West Climate Action Plan outlines a vision for a low
carbon region by 2020.
13
The action plan outlines how by 2020 public transport and car
sharing are the mode of choice for many journeys and walking and cycling will be preferred
for short journeys. As a result of this approach,
which clearly excludes road-building
, the
action plan says that road congestion and health will be improved.
At the Greater Manchester level, the GM Climate Strategy outlines a plan to build a low
carbon economy by 2020 and reduce collective carbon emissions by 48%.
14
Cheshire East Council has produced a Carbon Management Plan which sets out how it will
reduce emissions from its own operations.
15
Tackling climate change is a priority of the
council’s Corporate Plan 2010-2013
16
and a key aim of the Sustainable Community Strategy,
“Ambition for All”.
17
A6-MARR impacts on climate change.
The Major Scheme Business Case (MSBC) states that other measures which would have a
positive impact on carbon reduction – such as new bus services and modal shift to cycling –
have not been included
in the modeling. It would inform appraisal of the contribution of the
scheme to carbon reduction objectives if it were possible to compare this with the greenhouse
gas impacts of a public transport improvement and cycling and pedestrian infrastructure only
option, without the A6-MARR.
Table 4.3 Appraisal of impacts shows that the scheme will lead to a projected increase in
carbon emissions over a 60 year period of approximately 10,300 tonnes. The scheme has
been appraised to have a ‘neutral’ impact on climate change emissions. However, in the
context of the UK’s legal commitment to reduce greenhouse gases by at least 80% by 2050,
4
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 12:52PM
Even the professors agree with me


Professors urge smarter transport planning
Posted on January 29, 2013     

23 January 2013: Thirty-two transport professors have warned ministers that trying to build our way out of congestion is a dead end.

Co-ordinated by the Transport Planning Society and supported by the Royal Town Planning Institute, the letter, sent to the Secretary of State for Transport yesterday, is signed by 32 professors working in transport and planning for 19 different academic institutions.

Read more at the Campaign for Better Transport blog ….. here …. http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/blogs/roads/210113-profs-letter
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 12:53PM, Edit: 19th February 2013 at 12:54PM by noroadm
Alan   and Kwn agree too

Towards the end of the year the Planning Inspector will be holding a Public Inquiry into the SEMMMS Airport to A6 road. Following the Inquiry the Inspector will prepare a report recommending or not recommending the scheme to the Secretary of State for Transport who has the responsibility to make the final decision. The Inspector will be taking evidence from various organizations including PAULA the local Poynton group of residents against the scheme.

PAULA can now announce that two top experts in road transport and urban development have been engaged and are preparing evidence against the road; Professor Alan Wenban-Smith who coined the term ‘brownfield’ in the 70s and Keith Buchan who is currently Chairman of the Transport Planning Society.

Public Inquiries by their nature, challenge the evidence for and against on a rather technical level and it can be very difficult for voluntary organisations running on tiny budgets to tear away the paper that covers the cracks filled with fudge in the Council’s case for the road. Not surprisingly it costs at least many thousands of pounds to effectively challenge the piles of consultants’ reports that have cost the Council (SMBC) £20M to generate. But PAULA from the very start has been working closely with North West Transport Activists Roundtable and Campaign for Better Transport both dedicated to improving our transport infrastructure and the way we go about our lives.

Since 2007 Lush Cosmetics have supported grassroot groups through their ‘Lush Charity Pot’. NWTAR with the help of CfBT put together a very comprehensive and successful application for a grant to challenge SEMMMS and save some cherished countryside from the bulldozer.

PAULA says the case for the road is untenable;

-An East/West road cannot improve congestion on local roads that is caused by slow moving traffic in the North/South direction and the Council’s own analysis shows this. It just moves traffic around a bit -some roads improve while others get worse.

-the Council predicts traffic on the A34 will to go up when the road opens. This is bad news for Wilmslow and bad news for Manchester where pollution sensors on the A34 already exceed EU (and World) limits.

-They also predict traffic on the A6 will to go up through Disley when the road opens, even though pollution has been recorded 50% higher than EU limits.

-The Council even predicts serious road injuries will go up when the road opens! Road schemes should be designed to reduce serious accidents.

-The road attracts development of mega estates on green belt land; Woodford, Handforth Dean and Dean Row which in turn will increase local traffic. This is known as ‘induced traffic’ for which there are limitations in road planning law.

-The road runs roughshod through environmental statutory constraints . Carr Wood is a 1000 year old woodland protected in planning law as ‘Ancient Woodland’. It will wipe Carr Wood off the map. Cheshire in particular has been depleted of most of this ‘irreplaceable’ habitat.

-The Council, contrary to their statutory obligation, have not pursued the alternatives; they have failed to protect the disused track bed from development which could have brought the Metrolink down to Hazel Grove from Stockport, losing the benefits for reducing congestion and pollution levels on the A6 which like the A34 already exceed statutory limits.

N.B. The air pollution referred to above is Nitrogen Dioxide which is probably responsible for 15 to 30% of new asthma cases in children. More damaging are small particles emitted from modern diesel engines. There are only a small number of sites around Manchester where they are being measured. The smaller particles can enter the bloodstream raising the risk of heart attacks and strokes. They have also recently been classified as Class I carcinogens with no practical safe limit.

PAULA has an online petition against the road. Go to the PAULA website http://www.saveourgreenbelt.uk.com
Posted in Uncategorized     | Tagged climate, transport planning society, transportation     | Leave a reply
Poynton Town Council’s recent views on the proposed Airport link road
Posted on January 21, 2013     
A6 to Manchester Airport Relief RoadConsultation

The Town Council met late last yearto decide on its response to this public consultation. The key point is that the Council is not in favour of the new road unless it includes a Woodford/Poynton Relief Road . In terms of its preferences for the key junctions, the Town Council favours roundabouts rather than light-controlled junctions, and prefers Option 1 for all Locations, especially for Location 6 ( Macclesfield Road , Hazel Grove). Option 2 at that location would start to erode the ‘green gap’ that exists between Hazel Grove and Poynton.

The first phase of publicconsultation on the A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road continues until 25thJanuary 2013. You can respond online at http://www.semmms.info/, by e-mail to semmms.relief.road@stockport.gov.uk, by post to: SEMMMS Project Team, Stockport Council, Stopford House, Stockport SK1 3YQ, or phone 0161 474 2055 for more information. The Town Council would urge you to respond, and make your views known.

Posted in Uncategorized     | Tagged Poynton Town Council, SEMMMS     | Leave a reply
The Campaign to Protect Rural England – standing up for your countryside
Posted on January 21, 2013     

The CPRE have a view on this Government’s road building programme. Read about it here:

http://www.cpre.org.uk/what-we-do/transport/roads/update/item/3115-new-road-building-a-developing-threat


Posted in Uncategorized     | Leave a reply
Can car sharing eliminate city traffic jams?
Posted on January 21, 2013     

Read how one city scheme is actively reducing car traffic, and tapping into the increasingly popular car sharing trend:

The logic behind the scheme is simple.

    If drivers share rather than own cars, the overall number of vehicles in the city is reduced. Each car in a car sharing scheme results in 10 cars leaving the street, according to consultants Frost & Sullivan.
    Shared cars that are actively used most of the day do not clog up parking places while on the move.
    Cars that are directed quickly to vacant parking places have less of a negative impact on the city’s congestion and air pollution.

Read more here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20638779

Posted in Uncategorized     | Leave a reply
Unbelievable! Minister for Climate Change backs new roads in own constituency
Posted on January 21, 2013     

But apparently true. The UK’s Minister for Climate Change is backing roadbuilding in his own constituency at the same time as he claims to be reducing emissions ……… see here for more details:

http://postmag.org/minister-for-climate-change-backs-new/




Posted in Uncategorized     | Leave a reply
Manchester Air Pollution results
Posted on January 21, 2013     

Here are the 2008/9/10 annual average Nitrogen Dioxide concentrations in Manchester. The EU legal limit is 40ug/m3 !

NO2 Manchester
You can see most measurement sites are above the limit. No road scheme can be allowed to potentially worsen sites that are already failing the limits.
If the A6 to M56 SEMMMS road is not built (the so called ‘do nothing’ scenario), traffic through Disley rises 10% by 2017 from a 2009 baseline.

If the A6 to M56 SEMMMS road is built, traffic through Disley rises 44%.
In 2009 toxic Nitrogen Dioxide at a Disley monitoring location reached a yearly average of 62 micro grams per cubic metre of air compared to the EU limit of 40 micro grams. This is a very high figure for the Manchester area and can only be expected to rise pro rata with a 44% increase in traffic.
All these figures are from Council data.
Poynton and Cheshire Councils do not support the road in its present form.
Does Disley Council hold the same opinion?
Posted in Uncategorized     | Leave a reply
The future of mobility
Posted on January 21, 2013     

The rise of the smartphone and new forms of car mobility are forcing change at a rapid pace.

The current economic climate presents significant challenges to all businesses, but is also a catalyst for innovation across many industries.

For our market sector (car hire), the response to such trends centres on attitudes to car ownership and the impact of smartphone technology.

The West has had a love affair with the car since the 1950s, but in the richest cities and especially in their centres, car ownership and use is declining.

Read more from Michel Taride, President, Hertz International here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20671090
Posted in Uncategorized     | Leave a reply
SEMMMS Blight ……….
Posted on January 21, 2013     

SEMMMS route

A PAULA supporter is currently going through the process of purchasing a development property in Cheshire, and as part of the mortgage finance package, the mortgage provider required a valuation of their current property on Woodford Road.

The mortgage provider, the Halifax Bank replied:

“with the proposed A555 road development, we are unable to offer any current valuation on this property until the effects of the new road are established”

If the road goes ahead, it will now be almost impossible for any of us to sell or buy properties for the next 5/10 years, within the catchment area of the new road, as the mortgage lenders are unwilling to borrow against our properties due to the possible effects of the road.

No mention of any increased property values as a benefit to the new road being built…….only negatives!!!
Posted in Uncategorized     | Leave a reply
PAULA


0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 12:55PM
Kim Barett will agree with me


Dual carriageway paves way for Manchester Airport expansion
Posted on January 10, 2013     

4 December 2012: Kim Barrett from campaign group PAULA explains why you should join her in opposing the A6 to Manchester Airport Link Road.

A6-Manchester Airport Link Road banner

When somebody wants to sell you something, they’ll go to the ends of the earth to convince you that you need it. Sadly, much of what the current government is trying to sell us could actually bring about the end of the earth.

Cheshire East Council has recently begun switching off street lighting at night, to reduce carbon emissions, yet it is allowing a completely pointless dual carriageway to be built through its green belt. This is not a joke.

The A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road is being presented under the banner of SEMMMS, a multi-modal scheme designed to ease local congestion to the south east of Manchester, of which road-building was one small element. Among the core aims was encouraging people to use their cars less and it was emphasised that the scheme would only work if all the varying aspects were introduced.

Collective amnesia has since struck the councils involved – Manchester, Stockport and Cheshire East – and what they’re proposing now is the least useful bit, a dual carriageway which ploughs through ancient woodland, as well as green belt, before grinding to a chaotic halt at the single carriageway A6, which is already heavily congested. There will be no easing of local congestion with this road – it will actually get worse – and this is now nothing more than a route to the airport, George Osborne’s massively expanded airport with its Enterprise Zone and World Logistics Hub.

I should concede that there is one town that will probably see a drop in traffic and that’s Wilmslow, in the constituency of … George Osborne.

PAULA (Poynton Against Unnecessary Link-Roads to the Airport) has called for an immediate suspension of the public consultation, which was launched a good fortnight before all the relevant information was available. The local exhibitions have been presented with a comedy value of which Michael McIntyre would be proud.

Let me give you a couple of examples: Me: What does a noise increase of 5db or more mean? Is that 6db or 600? Stockport Council rep: I have no idea. It could be tearing a piece of paper or a jumbo jet taking off. Me: The A6 through Disley, which is already an Air Quality Management Area – this road will make air quality worse there. Aren’t you supposed to be improving it? Stockport Council rep: Yes, that’s unfortunate. It’s not a legal requirement, though.

The Business Case has more holes than Jim Royle’s vest and the traffic modelling is a delightful work of fiction. There is one road in particular, already at a standstill during rush hour, that will see a 23% increase in daily movements. Stockport Council has turned that into a 1% increase because, they say, there would be 22% more traffic if the road weren’t built. However, their spokeswoman has unwittingly showed us exactly where they’re going wrong. The graph she sent us reveals they’re using a study period of 1993 to 2010, to try to justify their projection of a huge increase in traffic but the graph also shows a dramatic fall since 2007.

The first of the consultation leaflets – they really aren’t making this process easy – proclaims that when they last asked residents about this road, 92% were in favour. Unforgivably, they’re quoting figures for a very different scheme – the actual number in favour of building the road they’re proposing now was 26%.

It’s true that they have consulted before, because this road has been proposed, in one form or another, since the 1930s. The question is, if it were so important, why hasn’t it been built already? The answer is simple: it’s not important at all. As David Rutley, MP for Macclesfield, admitted recently, as he stood and gazed at the stunning area by Mill Hill Hollow that will be obliterated by the road, if it weren’t for the current economic situation, they wouldn’t even be considering building it now.

So every avenue leads us to one conclusion: the Government is trying to build itself out of trouble and this road is just another ingredient in George Osborne’s half-baked plans for Manchester Airport, which in turn will lay the foundations for a third runway. Sorry, did I say that out loud?





PAULA is urging everyone who is concerned about the Link Road and the plans to expand Manchester Airport to respond to the consultation with a resounding ‘no’.
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 12:56PM
For all other news visit

http://saveourgreenbelt.uk.com/
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
noroadm
Banned
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 12:57PM
I now take leave   of this forum

I have done all i can
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
cllrkevinhogg
Hazel Grove Councillor

cllrkevinhogg
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 6:55PM
Yes let`s look at some facts
There has been a massive consultati8on undertaken on this scheme with 85,000 properties consulted
17 days of exhibitions, information on the dedicated website and dedicated phone numbers and email address.
Of the replies 71.4% are in favour of the scheme whilst only 10.3% of overall respondents are against the remaining 18.3% have no feeling either way
it is also on facebook and twitter
A total of 1887 people signed in to the exhibitions

Thes people have been informed of the facts and therefore overwhelmingly (7 to 1) in favour of this road.

I really do hope noroadm keeps his/her promise thois time as every time I look he is postinhg to himself and is in danger of becoming boringly repetative
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
Hjohnnycash
Unverified

Hjohnnycash
Re: A time to look at the facts
19th February 2013 at 8:18PM
Cllr Hogg,
You are missing a very important fact here, so I feel obliged to state the obvious.
What Nora states is factual and accurate, with clear research and to the point.
What the planners and the council present is no more than if, buts, maybe's and inaccurate facts based on way outdated stats. Do you actually have a clue what is going on?

If you did you may wish to pay some attention to the pot holed A6 and the standstill traffic it holds that will most certainly get far worse if this goes ahead. I also found out today that even more services in our schools are being cut in Stockport part of the 500 redundancies Stockport Council are making. Common sense at its finest, cut the services that make a real impact because you can't fund them yet waste 300 million on a white elephant! Go Stockport council go, clearly know what you are doing. I sincerely hope Labour get back in as they seem to invest in schools and not waste money on things that will be detrimental to the tax payer and the environment.
0 Likes 0 Dislikes Reply Reply Quote Quote Report Report  
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
 

Related Discussions

No related discussions found.

Tagged With..

No tags added

 

More about SEMMMS / Hazel Grove & Poynton Bypass / A555 MAELR

Top

Main

Places

Opinions

Create