Highways Agency - Safe roads, Reliable journeys, Informed travellers

1. Introduction

In July 1998 the government published the results of its own review in 'A New Deal for Trunk Roads'. A bypass was included as a scheme to be progressed through the preparatory stages, as there appeared to be no other feasible solution to the problems faced by the villages of Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle. However, in order for it to be included in the governments Targeted Programme of Improvements it would require further appraisal and assessment to determine whether the bypass remained the best solution compared to other transport possibilities along with subsequent endorsement by the Regional Planning Body.

The stakeholder workshop was the initial stage of the public participation process for this project. The objectives of the workshop were to both inform the Highways Agency of the key stakeholders' views and aspirations and to provide the stakeholders with an appreciation of the issues involved in the project. The information obtained will be used in undertaking further assessments which will assist in the decision making process.

As part of the participation process a public meeting was held on the 20th February 2001. The outcomes of this stakeholder workshop were presented at this meeting and further feedback from the public obtained.

Finally, feedback will be provided to both the stakeholders who attended the workshop and the public who expressed an interest in the project on how the information obtained through this exercise was used in the assessment process and in developing any proposals for Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle.

This report provides a full account of the workshop itself including the results of the morning and afternoon syndicate sessions where problems and issues and solutions were discussed respectively.

Links are provided for the following key sections:

• Agenda for the workshop
• Attendees to the meeting
• Presentation provided to stakeholders

2.1.1 Group A

2.1.1 Group A

Problems and Issues Identified	Rank
Integration
Lack of bus and rail services	1
Policies - SPITS study looking at the issues in relation to the National Park	2
Lack of sufficient freight on rail	1
Too much freight on the road	1
Too many cars on the road	1
Too many lorries on the road	1
Increasing traffic volumes on the road	1
Safety
Indirect affect of safety	2
Large numbers of children crossing the road	1
Increased impacts of accidents	1
Pensioners feel unsafe and intimidated	2
Cars park on the pavements increasing safety problems	3
Pedestrians have to walk in between cars etc	1
High accident rate figures	1
Footpaths are of poor quality	1
Children are not educated to use crossings	1
Safe route to school policy is not encouraged	1
Use of cycles with inherent increased risks	3
Economy
No up to date economic assessment done for this route	1
Thinking hasn't moved on re: economic assessment of route	3
Journey time reliability	1
Local businesses are hampered by congestion	2
Automatic assumptions that the old way of thinking is correct
Social trend towards more people living in rural area, thereby increasing the amount of commuting traffic	3
Environment
Beautiful Nature reserve - Public Transport could better serve it	2
Air quality	1
Pollution	1
Wild life	2
National park should be given priority over other road uses
Noise	1
Dirt	1
Visual intrusion	1
Accessibility
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to
Lack of pedestrian crossings	1
Poor quality footpaths	2
Traffic lights - inadequate phasing	1
Local transport - lack of local buses	1
Getting to railway is difficult	1
Unreliability of journeys- can't plan journey	1
Restricted - children not able to go to friends etc	1
Use of cycles is not safe and not utilised as much as could be	2
Severance effect on communities due to heavy trafficvolume	2

2.1.2 Group B

Problems and Issues Identified	Rank
Integration
Inability to drive/walk to railway station - traffic volumes are too high	1
Unreliable journey times	1
Insufficient car parking volumes at the railway station	2
Public transport - no integration between buses and trains	1
Location of rail station is inappropriate - could be more stations	2
Safety
Crossing the road is hazardous	1
Poor enforcement of speeds at low volume traffic flows	1
Lack of reaction to problems at high volume accidenthotspots	2
Pavements are too narrow	1
Lack of crossing points along the route	2
Car parking on pavements is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians	2
Economy
Unreliable journey times	1
Congestion	1
Increased pollution - resulting in hospitalisation	1
Lack of affordable alternative methods of moving goods	1
Cost of accidents - hospitalisations, loss of earnings, commerce	1
Unsuitability of current standard and provision of road construction	2
Volume of essential services buried in current roads requires frequent roadworks	2
Environment
Slow moving vehicles create more pollution	1
Corridor is in the Peak Park - greater environmentalimpact	2
Problems achieving a balance between the needs of commerce and the National Park	2
Buildings are damaged by vibration and dirt from slow moving heavy vehicles	2
Road surface and fabric repair causes noise and pollution	3

2.1.3 Group C

Problems and Issues Identified	Rank
Integration
Policy integration - there are 2 Regional Assemblies	2
Promotion of Public Transport - different approaches in Derbyshire and Greater Manchester	1
Inbalance of jobs and housing in Glossop	2/3
No clear hierarchy of trans-Pennine roads and railways	1
Lack of integration between education and transportpolicies	2
Safety
High accident statistics	1
Traffic speeds are high	1
Driver behaviour is poor	1
Impact of perceived safety concerns on people's behaviour	1
Economy
Regional and National impact due to delays and unreliability of journey times.	1
Importance of the natural heritage on the local and regional economy	2
Delays to and unreliability of buses	1
Impact on the local economy in Glossop due to poor road network - businesses are reluctant to locate in the area	2
Environment
High traffic volumes - vibration, noise and local kerb side pollution	1
Rat running in Broadbottom and Hollingworth (second order effect) - impact of commuter traffic	2
Smog and Ozone problems	1
Water quality due to runoff - will need to be looked at in future
Accessibility
High traffic volume causes problems crossing the road - Different impact at different times of day
Poor Public Transport provisions for access to work, school and college	1
Access to Peak Park is a problem, particularly at weekends although significant at all times	1

2.1.4 Group D

Problems and Issues Identified	Rank
Integration
Impact of the road on land use policy	1
Confusion between the various agencies including National Park	1
Need for more information - alternative transport options and cost	1
Identification of interaction of local traffic with trans Pennine routes	1
Identification of vulnerable road users ie pedestrians and cyclists	1
Safety
Intimidation of pedestrians along the road - walking next to walls	1
Speeding and congestion - the traffic either speeds through the villages or is at a grinding halt - resulting in accidents	1
Too many people injured and killed on the road	1
Economy
Destruction of local economy due to poor journey time reliability	1
Unreliability of journey times and congestion for business links	1
Lack of support for complementary initiatives eg SRB or Government Initiatives	1
Environment
Air, noise and water pollution,	1
Loss of built heritage due to dirt and vibrations	1
Impact on the landscape, local habitats and farmland. Loss of right of way and local heritage eg. Mottram Show Ground	1
Accessibility
Loss of community - financially and socially	1
Reduced access to and viability of local public transport services to the countryside and National Park	1
Lack of facilities for people with mobility problems	1
Limitations of NATA - The wider effects on Health and Education need to be considered something which appears to be overlooked by NATA

Possible solutions

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Following the identification of the problems and issues the attendees redivided into different syndicate groups, again shown in section 6 of this report, to look at possible solutions that could go some or all of the way to solving the problems identified.

Additionally the syndicates noted in tabular form which of the problems and issues would be tackled or resolved to some extent through the implementation of the solutions identified.

The discussions and conclusions drawn by the syndicate groups are included on the following pages.

• 3.1.1 Group E
• 3.1.2 Group F
• 3.1.3 Group G
• 3.1.3 Group H

. . . or skip to conclusions

3.1.1 group e

3.1.1 Group E

This syndicate identified that to be successful a number of solutions needed to be implemented as one as shown below:

Freight on rail

• More freight from road to rail

Bypass

Complemented by:

• Removal of existing road space and implementation of high quality design in existing centres (traffic calming etc)
• Better enforcements of traffic speeds (could be done now for safety reasons)
• Much more tunnelling - Rights of Way, Swallows Wood etc

Concerns were raised as to the Bypass' ability to solve the following problems:

• Local traffic associated congestion and delay
• New development pressure
• Encouragement of SPITS and the subsequent transfer of traffic
• Induced traffic growth

Much better integration

• Links and improved accesses to railway stations
• New Public Transport infrastructure
• Better existing railway services (Glossop - Manchester)

Education

• Attitudes to transport
• Hearts and minds work (promote public transport)

In addition the syndicate noted a requirement for increased openness by both the HA and Government with the local communities. This will ensure that the implications of different options are well understood.

They also noted that although PROBLEMS MAY REMAIN they MUST NOT GROW and that the PROBLEMS MUST BE MOVED AWAY FROM PEOPLE.

The syndicate evaluated this solution against the problems identified in the morning session, this is shown over leaf.

They also noted continuing problems that would not be negated or reduced, these are listed below:

• Land Use - Development pressure / National Park Policy
• Air quality - is improved in some places and not in others
• Landscape - even if the construction is in tunnel

Finally they noted some short-term solutions that could be implemented to overcome some of the problems identified, namely:

• Better enforcement - speeding, pavement parking
• More crossings on existing road
• Light phasing
• Early release of funding for these

The syndicate group completed the table in order to show which problems would be tackled or resolved by the solution they had developed. The key for this table is shown below and the table included below.

Key:

• high impact
• medium impact
• low impact

X - solution tackles or resolves this problem

	Option	A
Problems Identified	Rank	Bypass and complimentary measures
Integration
Inability to drive/walk to railway station - high traffic volumes	1	x
Unreliable journey times	1	x
Insufficient car parking volumes at railway station	2
Public transport - no integration between modes	1	x
Location of rail station is inappropriate	2
Impact of the road on land use policy	1	x
Confusion between the various agencies including National Park	1	x
Need for more information - alternative transport options and cost	1
Identification and interaction of local traffic with trans Pennine routes	1
Identification of vulnerable road user i.e. pedestrians and cyclists	1	x
Lack of bus and rail services	1	x
Policies - SPITS study looking at the issues in relation to the National Park	2
Lack of sufficient freight on rail	1	x
Too much freight on the road	1	x
Too many cars on the road	1	x
Too many lorries on the road	1	x
Increasing traffic volumes on the road	1	x
Policy integration - there are 2 regional assemblies	2
Promotion of Public Transport - different approaches in Derbyshire and Greater Manchester	1	x
Imbalance of jobs and housing in Glossop	2/3
No clear hierarchy of trans Pennine roads and railways	1	x
Lack of integration between education and transport policy	2
Safety
High accident statistics	1	x
Driver behaviour is poor	1	x
Traffic speeds are high	1	x
Crossing the road is hazardous	1	x
Poor speed enforcement at low volume traffic times	1	x
Lack of reaction to problems at high volume accident hotspots	2
Pavements are too narrow	1	x
Lack of crossing points along the route	2	x
Car parking on pavements is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians	2	x
Intimidation of pedestrians- walking next to walls	1	x
Speeding and congestion - traffic either speeds through the villages or grinds to halt - accidents. Too many killed on roads	1
Indirect affect of safety	2
Large numbers of children crossing the road	1	x
Increased impacts of Accidents	1	x
Pensioners feel unsafe and intimidated	2
Cars park on pavements increasing safety problems	3
Pedestrians have to walk in between cars etc	1	x
High accident rate figures	1	x
Footpaths are of poor quality	1	x
Children are not educated to use crossings	1	x
Safe route to school policy is not encouraged	1	x
Use of cycles has inherent increased risks	3
Impact of perceived safety concerns on people's behaviour	1	x
Economy
Regional and National impact due to delays and unreliability of journey times	1,2	Neutral
Delays to and unreliability of buses	1	x
Impact on local economy in Glossop - business reluctant to locate in the area	2
Unreliable journey times	1	x
Congestion	1	x
Increased pollution - resulting in hospitalisation	1	x
Lack of affordable alternative methods of moving goods	1
Cost of accidents - hospitalisation, loss of earning, commerce	1
Unsuitability of current standard and provision of road construction	2
Volume of essential services buried in current roads requires frequent roadworks	2
No economic assessment done for this route	1	x
Thinking hasn't moved on re: economic assessment	3
Journey time reliability	1	x
Local businesses are hampered by congestion	2
Social trends towards people living in rural areas, thereby increasing commuting traffic volumes	3
Destruction of local economy	1	x
Unreliability of journey times and congestion for business links	1	x
Lack of support for complementary initiatives e.g. SRB or Government initiatives	1	x
Environment
Slow moving vehicles create more pollution	1	x
Corridor is in Peak Park - greater environmental impact	2
Achieving balance between needs of commerce and the National Park	2
Building damage due to vibration and dirt	2
Road surface and fabric repair causes noise and pollution	3
Cars parking on pavements causing danger for pedestrians	3
Beautiful nature reserve - Public Transport could better serve it	2
Air quality	1	x
Pollution	1	x
Wild life	2
Noise, dirt and visual intrusion	1	x
High traffic volumes - vibration, noise, local kerb side pollution	1	x
Rat running in Broadbottom / Hollingworth (second order effect) - impact of commuter traffic	2
Smog and Ozone problem	1	x
Accessibility
Local community feels intimidate- they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to
Lack of pedestrian crossings	1	x
Poor quality footpaths	2
Traffic lights - inadequate phasing	1	x
Local transport - lack of local busses	1	x
Getting to railway is difficult	1	x
Unreliability - can't plan journey	1	x
Restricted - children not able to got to friends etc	1	x
Use of cycles is not safe or utilised as much as could be	2
Severance effect on communities due to heavy traffic volume	2
High traffic volumes causes problems crossing road - different impact at different times of day	1,2,3
Poor Public Transport provisions for access to work, school and college	1
Access to Peak Park is a problem, particularly at weekends	1	x
Loss of community - financially and socially	1	x
Reduced access to and viability of local public transport services to the countryside and National Park	1	x
Lack of facilities for people with mobility problems	1	x

3.1.2 group f

3.1.2 Group F

Syndicate F identified a number of solutions that would solve the problems identified, these are listed below:

Solution A - Improve public transport

• Build the by-pass
• Extend the Metrolink
• "Integrate project" with other schemes in the area
• Consider an appropriate railway station location
• Provide a Trans Pennine Rail at Woodhead
• Improve local public transport services
• Provide a park & ride facility

Solution B - Alternative freight strategy

• Invest in rail
• Provide improved interchange facilities

Solution C - Small scale measures

• Provide Quality Freight Corridors
• Provide Quality Bus Corridors
• Provide safe routes to school
• Undertake local safety schemes
• Provide cycle measures
• Change the priorities at traffic signals
• Re-educate the public regarding public transport
• Undertake a route management strategy

Solution - Change Road Hierarchy

• Provide a strategic freight route
• Downgrade the A628/A57 - detrunk

Solution E - Land Use

• Encourage industrial investment
• Limit housing allocation
• Provide new housing with no parking facilities
• Provide jobs but do not allow parking
• Support urban renaissance

Solution F - Tolls On:

• Workplace parking
• On/off street parking
• Residential permits
• Cross National Park Toll

Solution G - Build By-Pass

Consider:

• Dual carriageway
• Complementary measures
• Single carriageway
• Alternative routes

These seven options listed were then evaluated against the problems and issues identified in the morning syndicate sessions and the table completed. The results of this evaluation are included below.

Key:

Integration, Safety and Accessibility:
X = problem would be tackled

Economy:
-ve = adverse effect, 0 = neutral and +ve = benefit

Environment:
Positive impact = +1
Balance or no effect = 0
Negative impact = -1

Other solutions considered at a high level not taken forward by the syndicate group, are:

Modal Shift (could be incorporated as part of the improvement to public transport)
Local Safety routes

	Option	A	B	C	D	E	F	G
Problems Identified		Improve PT	Alt freight strategy	Small measures	Change road hierarchy	Land use	Tolls	Build Bypass
Integration
Inability to drive/walk to railway station - high traffic volumes	1	x		x
Unreliable journey times	1				x		x	x
Insufficient car parking volumes at railway station	2	x		x
Public transport - no integration between modes	1	x
Location of rail station is inappropriate	2	x		x
Impact of the road on land use policy	1	x		x	x	x	x	x
Confusion between the various agencies including National Park	1
Need for more information - alternative transport options and cost	1
Identification and interaction of local traffic with trans Pennine routes	1
Identification of vulnerable road users ie pedestrians and cyclists	1			x	x		x	x
Lack of bus and rail services	1	x
Policies - SPITS study looking at the issues in relation to the National Park	2
Lack of sufficient freight on rail	1		x
Too much freight on the road	1		x
Too many cars on the road	1	x					x
Too many lorries on the road	1		x				x
Increasing traffic volumes on the road	1	x	x		x		x	x
Policy integration - there are 2 regional assemblies	2
Promotion of Public Transport - different approaches in Derbyshire and Greater Manchester	1
Inbalance of jobs and housing in Glossop	2/3					x
No clear hierarchy of trans Pennine roads and railways	1				x		x	x
Lack of integration between education and transport policy	2	x		x
Safety
High accident statistics	1			x			x	x
Driver behaviour is poor	1		x	x	x			x
Traffic speeds are high	1		x	x	x			x
Crossing the road is hazardous	1		x	x	x		x	x
Poor speed enforcement at low volume traffic times	1			x
Lack of reaction to problems at high volume accident hotspots	2			x
Pavements are too narrow	1		x	x	x	x		x
Lack of crossing points along the route	2			x	x			x
Car parking on pavements is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians	2			x		x	x
Intimidation of pedestrians- walking next to walls	1		x	x	x	x	x	x
Speeding and congestion - traffic either speeds through the villages or grinds to halt - accidents. Too many killed on roads	1			x	x		x	x
Indirect affect of safety	2	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Large numbers of children crossing the road	1		x	x	x		x	x
Increased impacts of Accidents	1	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Pensioners feel unsafe and intimidated	2	?	x	x	x	x	x	x
Cars park on pavements increasing safety problems	3
Pedestrians have to walk in between cars etc	1			x			x
High accident rate figures	1	x	x	x		x	x	x
Footpaths are of poor quality	1			x	x	x	x
Children are not educated to use crossings	1			x
Safe route to school policy is not encouraged	1			x		x		x
Use of cycles has inherent increased risks	3		x	x	x	x	x	x
Impact of perceived safety concerns on people's behaviour	1			x	x	x	x	x
Economy
Regional and National impact due to delays and unreliability of journey times	1,2	0	x	-ve	-ve	0	0	+ve
Delays to and unreliability of buses	1	+ve	0	+ve/-ve	+ve	0	+ve	+ve
Impact on local economy in Glossop - business reluctant to locate in the area	2	+ve	0	0	+ve or -ve	-ve	+ve or -ve	+ve
Unreliable journey times	1	0	0	+ve/-ve	+ve/-ve	0	+ve	+ve
Congestion	1	0	+ve	+ve/-ve	+ve/-ve	0	+ve	+ve
Increased pollution - resulting in hospitalisation	1	+ve	+ve	0/-ve	+ve/-ve	0	+ve	+ve
Lack of affordable alternative methods of moving goods	1	0	+ve	0	0	0	0	0
Cost of accidents - hospitalisation, loss of earning, commerce	1	+ve	+ve	+ve	+ve	0	+ve	+ve
Unsuitability of current standard and provision of road construction	2	0	0	-ve	0	0	0	0
Volume of essential services buried in current roads requires frequent roadworks	2
No economic assessment done for this route	1
Thinking hasn't moved on re: economic assessment	3
Journey time reliability	1	+ve	0	-ve/+ve	-ve/+ve	0	+ve	+ve
Local businesses are hampered by congestion	2	+ve	0	-ve/+ve	-ve/+ve	0	+ve	+ve
Social trends towards people living in rural areas, thereby increasing commuting traffic volumes	3	+ve	0	+ve	-ve/+ve	0	-ve	+ve
Destruction of local economy	1
Unreliability of journey times and congestion for business links	1
Lack of support for complementary initiatives e.g. SRB or Government initiatives	1	+ve	+ve	+ve	+ve	+ve	+ve	+ve
Environment
Slow moving vehicles create more pollution	1	0	+1	-1	+1	0	+1	+1
Corridor is in Peak Park - greater environmental impact	2	0	+1	0	+1	0	+1	-1
Achieving balance between needs of commerce and the National Park	2	0	+1	0	+1	0	0	0
Building damage due to vibration and dirt	2	+1	+1	+1	+1	0	+1	+1
Road surface and fabric repair causes noise and pollution	3	+1	+1	0	+1	0	0	+1
Cars parking on pavements causing danger for pedestrians	3	+1	0	+1	+1	0	+1	0
Beautiful nature reserve - Public Transport could better serve it	2	+1	+1	0	+1	0	+1	-1
Air quality	1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	-1
Pollution	1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	-1
Wild life	2	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	-1
Noise, dirt and visual intrusion	1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	-1
High traffic volumes - vibration, noise, local kerb side pollution	1	+1	+1	0	+1	+1	+1	-1
Rat running in Broadbottom / Hollingworth (second order effect) - impact of commuter traffic	2	+1	0	+1	+1	+1	-1	+1
Smog and Ozone problem	1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	-1
Accessibility
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to				X	X			X
Lack of pedestrian crossings	1			x
Poor quality footpaths	2			x
Traffic lights - inadequate phasing	1			x
Local transport - lack of local busses	1	x		x
Getting to railway is difficult	1	x		x
Unreliability - can't plan journey	1	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Restricted - children not able to got to friends etc	1			x	x			x
Use of cycles is not safe or utilised as much as could be	2			x
Severance effect on communities due to heavy traffic volume	2	x	x		x	x	x	x
High traffic volumes causes problems crossing road - different impact at different times of day	3
Poor Public Transport provisions for access to work, school and college	1,2,3	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Access to Peak Park is a problem, particularly atweekends	1	x		x
Loss of community - financially and socially	1	x	x					x
Reduced access to and viability of local public transport services to the countryside and National Park	1			x		x
Lack of facilities for people with mobility problems	1	x	x					x
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing	1	x		x		x

3.1.3 group g

3.1.3 Group G

Syndicate G identified six solutions that would go some way to solving the problems identified, these are listed below.

Solution A - Do nothing

Solution B - Rail / Bus maximisation

Solution C - Bypass

Solution D - Traffic management

Solution E - Routeing strategy

Solution F - Demand management / land use

Again these six solutions were evaluated against the problems and issues identified in the morning syndicate sessions and the table completed. The results of this evaluation are included below

Key:
X - solution tackles or resolves this problem

	Option	A	B	C	D	E	F
Problems Identified		Do Nothing	Rail / Bus maximisation	Bypass	Traffic Management	Routing Strategy	Demand Mngmt / land use
Integration
Inability to drive/walk to railway station - high traffic volumes	1			x
Unreliable journey times	1			x
Insufficient car parking volumes at railway station	2
Public transport - no integration between modes	1		x
Location of rail station is inappropriate	2
Impact of the road on land use policy	1						x
Confusion between the various agencies including National Park	1
Need for more information - alternative transport options and cost	1
Identification and interaction of local traffic with trans Pennine routes	1					x
Identification of vulnerable road users ie pedestrians and cyclists	1
Lack of bus and rail services	1		x
Policies - SPITS study looking at the issues in relation to the National Park	2
Lack of sufficient freight on rail	1		x
Too much freight on the road	1					x
Too many cars on the road	1			x			x
Too many lorries on the road	1			x		x
Increasing traffic volumes on the road	1						x
Policy integration - there are 2 regional assemblies	2
Promotion of Public Transport - different approaches in Derbyshire and Greater Manchester	1
Inbalance of jobs and housing in Glossop	2/3						x
No clear hierarchy of trans Pennine roads and railways	1
Lack of integration between education and transport policy	2						x
Safety
High accident statistics	1
Driver behaviour is poor	1				x
Traffic speeds are high	1
Crossing the road is hazardous	1				x
Poor speed enforcement at low volume traffic times	1
Lack of reaction to problems at high volume accident hotspots	2
Pavements are too narrow	1
Lack of crossing points along the route	2				x
Car parking on pavements is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians	2
Intimidation of pedestrians- walking next to walls	1			x		x
Speeding and congestion - traffic either speeds through the villages or grinds to halt - accidents. Too many killed on roads	1				x
Indirect affect of safety	2
Large numbers of children crossing the road	1				x
Increased impacts of Accidents	1
Pensioners feel unsafe and intimidated	2				x
Cars park on pavements increasing safety problems	3
Pedestrians have to walk in between cars etc	1
High accident rate figures	1
Footpaths are of poor quality	1
Children are not educated to use crossings	1
Safe route to school policy is not encouraged	1
Use of cycles has inherent increased risks	3
Impact of perceived safety concerns on people's behaviour	1
Economy
Regional and National impact due to delays and unreliability of journey times	1,2
Delays to and unreliability of buses	1
Impact on local economy in Glossop - business reluctant to locate in the area	2
Unreliable journey times	1			x
Congestion	1			x
Increased pollution - resulting in hospitalisation	1		x
Lack of affordable alternative methods of moving goods	1
Cost of accidents - hospitalisation, loss of earning, commerce	1
Unsuitability of current standard and provision of road construction	2
Volume of essential services buried in current roads requires frequent roadworks	2
No economic assessment done for this route	1
Thinking hasn't moved on re: economic assessment	3
Journey time reliability	1
Local businesses are hampered by congestion	2
Social trends towards people living in rural areas, thereby increasing commuting traffic volumes	3
Destruction of local economy	1
Unreliability of journey times and congestion for business links	1
Lack of support for complementary initiatives e.g. SRB or Government initiatives	1
Environment
Slow moving vehicles create more pollution	1			x
Corridor is in Peak Park - greater environmental impact	2
Achieving balance between needs of commerce and the National Park	2
Building damage due to vibration and dirt	2			x		x
Road surface and fabric repair causes noise and pollution	3			x		x
Cars parking on pavements causing danger for pedestrians	3				x
Beautiful nature reserve - Public Transport could better serve it	2
Air quality	1			x		x
Pollution	1
Wild life	2
Noise, dirt and visual intrusion	1
High traffic volumes - vibration, noise, local kerb side pollution	1
Rat running in Broadbottom / Hollingworth (second order effect) - impact of commuter traffic	2				x
Smog and Ozone problem	1					x
Accessibility
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to
Lack of pedestrian crossings	1				x
Poor quality footpaths	2
Traffic lights - inadequate phasing	1			x	x
Local transport - lack of local busses	1
Getting to railway is difficult	1
Unreliability - can't plan journey	1
Restricted - children not able to got to friends etc	1
Use of cycles is not safe or utilised as much as could be	2
Severance effect on communities due to heavy traffic volume	2
High traffic volumes causes problems crossing road - different impact at different times of day	3
Poor Public Transport provisions for access to work, school and college	1,2,3
Access to Peak Park is a problem, particularly at weekends	1
Loss of community - financially and socially	1
Reduced access to and viability of local public transport services to the countryside and National Park	1
Lack of facilities for people with mobility problems	1
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to	1

3.1.4 group h

3.1.4 Group H

Syndicate H identified five solutions that would solve or partially solve the problems identified, these are described below.

Solution A - Freight - Sustainable distribution policy

• Woodhead railway - reopen to encourage better use of rail
• Change of behaviour - Requires major investment nationally
• National policy on local produce etc

Solution B - Better public transport

• Integration
• More frequent and cheaper public transport
• Better, more frequent, reliable, affordable and integrated buses, trains and trams
• New railway stations

Solution C - Quality bypass

• One that will last (not agreed by all)
• Tunnels - Should be tunnelled as far as possible
• Needs to be good quality, fit for the future, including spur roads - but shouldn't promote more car travel.

Solution D - Traffic Management

• Calming
• Road pricing
• Move crossings
• Better traffic signals
• De-trunking

Solution E - Reduce overall need to travel

• Needs national policy change and change of behaviour
• School policy - safe routes to schools / modal shift
• Land use policy
• Better balance of jobs
• Housing - work from home

Again these five solutions were evaluated against the problems and issues identified in the morning syndicate sessions and the table completed. The results of this evaluation are included overleaf.

Key:
X - solution tackles or resolves this problem

	Option	A	B	C	D	E
Problems Identified		Freight	Better PT	Bypass	Traffic management	Reduce need to travel
Integration
Inability to drive/walk to railway station - high traffic volumes	1		x			x
Unreliable journey times	1		x	x	x	x
Insufficient car parking volumes at railway station	2
Public transport - no integration between modes	1		x
Location of rail station is inappropriate	2
Impact of the road on land use policy	1					x
Confusion between the various agencies including National Park	1		x
Need for more information - alternative transport options and cost	1
Identification and interaction of local traffic width trans Pennine routes	1	x		x
Identification of vulnerable road users ie pedestrians and cyclists	1
Lack of bus and rail services	1		x
Policies - SPITS study looking at the issues in relation to the National Park	2
Lack of sufficient freight on rail	1	x
Too much freight on the road	1	x
Too many cars on the road	1		x		x	x
Too many lorries on the road	1		x		x	x
Increasing traffic volumes on the road	1		x		x	x
Policy integration - there are 2 regional assemblies	2
Promotion of Public Transport - different approaches in Derbyshire and Greater Manchester	1		x
Imbalance of jobs and housing in Glossop	2/3
No clear hierarchy of trans Pennine roads and railways	1	x		x
Lack of integration between education and transport policy	2
Safety
High accident statistics	1	x		x	x	x
Driver behaviour is poor	1	x			x	x
Traffic speeds are high	1				x
Crossing the road is hazardous	1				x
Poor speed enforcement at low volume traffic times	1				x
Lack of reaction to problems at high volume accident hotspots	2
Pavements are too narrow	1			x	x
Lack of crossing points along the route	2
Car parking on pavements is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians	2
Intimidation of pedestrians- walking next to walls	1	x		x	x
Speeding and congestion - traffic either speeds through the villages or grinds to halt - accidents. Too many killed on roads	1				x
Indirect affect of safety	2
Large numbers of children crossing the road	1
Increased impacts of Accidents	1	x		x	x	x
Pensioners feel unsafe and intimidated	2
Cars park on pavements increasing safety problems	3
Pedestrians have to walk in between cars etc	1
High accident rate figures	1	x		x	x
Footpaths are of poor quality	1			x	x
Children are not educated to use crossings	1			x	x
Safe route to school policy is not encouraged	1			x	x
Use of cycles has inherent increased risks	3
Impact of perceived safety concerns on people's behaviour	1
Economy
Regional and National impact due to delays and unreliability of journey times	1,2	x		x	x?
Delays to and unreliability of buses	1		x			x
Impact on local economy in Glossop - business reluctant to locate in the area	2
Unreliable journey times	1	x		x		x
Congestion	1	x	x	x	x	x
Increased pollution - resulting in hospitalisation	1	x	x	x	x
Lack of affordable alternative methods of moving goods	1	x
Cost of accidents - hospitalisation, loss of earning, commerce	1		x	x	x	x
Unsuitability of current standard and provision of road construction	2
Volume of essential services buried in current roads requires frequent roadworks	2
No economic assessment done for this route	1
thinking hasn't moved on re: economic assessment	3
Journey time reliability	1		x		x
Local businesses are hampered by congestion	2
Social trends towards people living in rural areas, thereby increasing commuting traffic volumes	3
Destruction of local economy	1					x
Unreliability of journey times and congestion for business links	1		x	x
Lack of support for complementary initiatives e.g. SRB or Government initiatives	1
Environment
Slow moving vehicles create more pollution	1	x	x	x		x
Corridor is in Peak Park - greater environmental impact	2
Achieving balance between needs of commerce and the National Park	2
Building damage due to vibration and dirt	2
Road surface and fabric repair causes noise and pollution	3
Cars parking on pavements causing danger for pedestrians	3
Beautiful nature reserve - Public Transport could better serve it	2
Air quality	1	x	x	x*		x
Pollution	1	x	x	x*		x
Wild life	2
Noise, dirt and visual intrusion	1	x	x			x
High traffic volumes - vibration, noise, local kerb side pollution	1		x	x	x	x
Rat running in Broadbottom / Hollingworth (second order effect) - impact of commuter traffic	2
Smog and Ozone problem	1		x			x
Accessibility
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to					X
Lack of pedestrian crossings	1				x
Poor quality footpaths	2
Traffic lights - inadequate phasing	1			x
Local transport - lack of local busses	1		x
Getting to railway is difficult	1	x
Unreliability - can't plan journey	1		x
Restricted - children not able to got to friends etc	1				x
Use of cycles is not safe or utilised as much as could be	2
Severance effect on communities due to heavy traffic volume	2
High traffic volumes causes problems crossing road - different impact at different times of day	3
Poor Public Transport provisions for access to work, school and college	1,2,3	x			x	x
Access to Peak Park is a problem, particularly at weekends	1		x
Loss of community - financially and socially	1
Reduced access to and viability of local public transport services to the countryside and National Park	1
Lack of facilities for people width mobility problems	1		x
Local community feels intimidated - they would like to walk to places but don't feel able or willing to	1

This syndicate group noted that the bypass may not resolve the problems of air and noise pollution but may just move the problems to the site of the bypass.

4.1 workshop attendees feedback

4.1 WORKSHOP ATTENDEES FEEDBACK

Following the afternoon syndicate session each of the syndicates fed back to the workshop as a whole. They presented the solutions that they had discussed and the reasons for their selection to be evaluated.

The attendees made the comments shown below regarding the presentations provided and these will be taken into account by the study team.

• Risk of providing "motorways by Stealth" across the Pennines if a dual carriageway by-pass is constructed
• Encouraging more industry into the valley could become a double-edged sword since it could lead to the destruction of the valley
• A Tunnel would be a great improvement on an open road for the bypass solution

Other points were noted following the feedback session and these are included below for completeness:

• Some of the attendees felt that they have been given very restricted options for the bypass route
• It was noted that the proposed Spur road is a necessity in order to relieve Hollingworth of its congestion.
• However it was also noted that the proposed spur road would go through a flood plain and that this has incumbent problems associated with it
• The SPITS proposals would increase the bypass traffic- has/will this been taken into account?
• Tameside believe a bypass is required NOW with or without SPITS
• Why do Glossop travellers not go via Stockport Road - a dual carriageway without any of the congestion on the A57 route? Could this not be encouraged?
• Liverpool - Hull freight can't be moved to Rail without major work being undertaken in Manchester and this would take a considerable period of time to achieve

4.2 CHAIRMAN'S CLOSING REMARKS

The chairman noted that the workshop had brought together 30 or so participants with a cross section of different perspectives on the issues surrounding the current situation in Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle.

He summarised the problems that had been discussed by the attendees at the workshop, as shown below:

• Congestion /unreliability
• Conflict - and the impact of that conflict on people in terms of 'intimidation'
• Suppression of Business Opportunities
• Impact on Built Heritage and the Natural Environment
• Safety - both real and perceived
• Poor integration with Public Transport alternatives
• Planning integration was a hindrance to action (2-3 regions involved etc)

In addition he noted that the attendees had come up with a large and wide ranging collection of initiatives which they felt could in whole or in part improve the current conditions in the villages. He added that the solutions presented by the workshop were seen very much as a package of solutions, not in any way exclusive of each other and that they could be grouped broadly under nine brackets, namely:

• Freight onto Rail - alternative rail strategies and routeing issues
• Quality Bypass - Accept knock on effects, including the larger use of tunnelling and improving the quality of the existing bypassed road
• Better Integration on Transport - Rail/Buses, Operations Infrastructure
• Sociological Issues - Education, Demand Management
• Movement Across Pennines - Peak Park Planning and Road Hierarchy Issues
• Reduce Problems on People
• Quick Win Solutions - small-scale measures/ safety schemes and Traffic management opportunities
• Land Use Changes - sociological changes
• Do Nothing - NOT AN OPTION

Finally he thanked the attendees for their participation in the process and the valuable insights and suggestions that they provided. These would be used in the assessment process to be undertaken over the next few months.

Participants

Participants

The workshop participants were:

Name	Organisation
Mrs Lillian Burns	Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Ms Janet Cuff	Greater Manchester Pedestrians Association
Mrs Edna Gill	Road Haulage Association
Mr George Graham	Tameside Age Concern
Ms Pat Ellison	Alternative Proposals on Transport
Mr Paul Fawcett	Rail User Consultative Committee for North Western England
Mrs Anne Robinson	Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Mr Chris Smith	South Pennines Integrated Transport Strategy (SPITS)
Ms Lesley James	Friends of the Earth
Ms Heather Crocker	Freight Transport Association
Mr Neil Chadwick	Steer Davies Gleave
My Terry Perkins	Ramblers Association
Inspector J Wray	Traffic Management Unit, Heywood
Mr John Young	Stagecoach
Mr EW Schofield	Tintwistle Parish Council
Mr Peter Johnston	Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive
Mr Barry Holt	Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council
Mr W Johnson	Longdendale Heritage Trust
Mr Manifold	Mottram and District Agricultural Society
Mr Mike Flynn	Longdendale Siege Committee
Mr Stuart Murray	Transport Resource Unit
Ms Charmayne Brierley	Tintwistle Church of England Primary School
Ms Nicola Walsh	Tintwistle Church of England Primary School
Mr Gareth Lloyd Jones	Mottram Evangelical Church
Mr Tony Kershaw	St Michaels Church
Mr Adrian Fisher	High Peak Council
Jim Seymour	Derbyshire County Council
David Hogg	Longdendale High School
Martin Arnold	Road Haulage Association
Bob Brisbourne	Association of Greater Manchester Authorities
John Perkins	Government Office for the East Midlands

These attendees were divided into syndicate groups in both the morning and the afternoon as follows:

Morning

Syndicate A	Charmayne Brierley
Lillian Burns	Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Jim Seymour	Derbyshire County Council
George Graham	Tameside Age Concern
Heather Crocker	Freight Transport Association
Terry Perkins	Ramblers Association
John Young	Stagecoach
Bob Brisbourne	Association of Greater Manchester Authorities
Syndicate B	Edna Gill
Janet Cuff	Greater Manchester Pedestrians Association
Paul Fawcett	Rail User Consultative Committee for North Western England
Inspector J Wray	Traffic Management Unit
Mr. E Schofield	Tintwistle Parish Council
Mike Flynn	Longdendale Siege Committee
John Perkins	Government Office
Chris Smith	SPITS
Syndicate C	Sergeant David Constantine
Peter Foster	Sustrans
Anne Robinson	Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Lesley James	Friends of the Earth
Barry Holt	Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council
Stuart Murray	Transport Resource Unit
Nicola Walsh	Tintwistle Church of England Primary School
Gareth Lloyd Jones	Mottram Evangelical Church
Syndicate D	Neil Chadwick
Pat Ellison	Alternative Proposals on Transport
Peter Johnston	Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive
Tony Kershaw	St Michaels Church
Bill Johnson	Longdendale Heritage Trust
Mr. Manifold	Mottram & District Agricultural Society
Adrian Fisher	High Peak Council
Martin Arnold	Arnold Road Hauliers

Afternoon

Syndicate E	Bob Brisbourne
Janet Cuff	Greater Manchester Pedestrians Association
Lesley James	Friends of the Earth
Bill Johnson	Longdendale Heritage Trust
Mike Flynn	Longdendale Siege Committee
Stuart Murray	Transport Resource Unit
Gareth Lloyd Jones	Mottram Evangelical Church
Syndicate F	Inspector J Wray
Barry Holt	Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council
Edna Gill	Road Haulage Association
Anne Robinson	Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Chris Smith	Peak District National Park
Neil Chadwick	Steer Davies Gleave
John Young	Stagecoach
Tony Kershaw	St Michaels Church
Syndicate G	Jim Seymour
Nicola Walsh	Tintwistle Church of England Primary School
Pat Ellison	Alternative Proposals on Transport
Heather Crocker	Freight Transport Association
Mr. E Schofield	Tintwistle Parish Council
Peter Johnston	Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive
Mr. Manifold	Mottram & District Agricultural Society
Terry Perkins	Ramblers Association
Syndicate H	Adrian Fisher
Lillian Burns	Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Peter Foster	Sustrans
George Graham	Tameside Age Concern
Paul Fawcett	Rail User Consultative Committee for North Western England
Sergeant David Constantine	Derbyshire Police
Charmayne Brierley	Tintwistle Church of England Primary School
Martin Arnold	Arnold Road Hauliers

The Workshop Team

Name	Organisation	Role
Gwyn Drake	Highways Agency	Chair
Emma Major	CVRL	Facilitator
Annelize van de Merwe	CVRL	Assistant
John Yellowley	Highways Agency	Project Sponsor
Andrew Withington	Highways Agency	Assistant Project Sponsor
Irvin Peacock	Mott MacDonald	Presenter
Paul Durkin	Mott MacDonald	Consultant
John Ryde	Mott MacDonald	Consultant
Anne Dalley	RPS Consultants	Environmental Consultant

Workshop objectives

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

The specific objectives of the stakeholder workshop were to:

• Inform the Highways Agency of the stakeholders' views and aspirations
• Provide the stakeholders with an appreciation of the issues involved in the project

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The project objectives seek to meet the National objectives under the New Approach to Appraisal (NATA) criteria of integration, safety, economy, environment and accessibility by:

1. Integration

Looking for local multi-modal opportunitiesSupporting regional and local transport strategies with particular reference to the South Pennines Integrated Transport Strategy (SPITS)

2. Safety

Improving safety for all road users in the villages of Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle

3. Economy

• Reducing congestion and delays to through and local traffic
• Improving journey time reliability

4. Environment

• Effecting a net improvement in the built and natural environment, by improving the local environment of Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle, and minimising the impact of the project with particular reference to the Peak District National Park

5. Accessibility

• Reducing community severance
• Enhancing facilities for vulnerable and non-motorised users
• Improving access to local public transport

AGENDA

Agenda for THURSDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2001
09.30	Assemble - Coffee/Tea
10.00	Welcome - Highways Agency
10.05	Introduction - CVRL
	Objectives of the Workshop
	Format of the day
	Introductions
10.30	Presentations:
	Project Overview and status - Highways Agency
	Objectives, Problems and Issues - MottMacDonald
10.50	Questions and Answers
11.00	Coffee/Tea
11.15	Syndicate Working - Problems and Issues In pre-determined syndicate groups:
	Review the problems and issues under each of the objective (NATA) headings (see section 3)
	Rank the problems and issues according to their impact
12.30	Feedback from the syndicate groups on problems and issues
13.00	Lunch
14.00	Syndicate Working - Possible Solutions In pre-determined syndicate groups:
	Determine possible solutions for the problems listed under each of the objective (NATA) headings
15.45	Feedback from the syndicate groups on possible solutions
16.15	Way Forward - Highways Agency
16.30	Close

Mottram - tintwistle, stakeholder workshop

Mottram - Tintwistle, Stakeholder Workshop

GWYN DRAKE (CHAIRMAN)
Highway Agency
Network Customer Services
Divisional Director Midlands

Background
Purpose of Public Participation Exercise
Stages in the process
Workshop
Public Meeting
Feedback

Stakeholder Workshop Introductions

The workshop team:

• Gwyn Drake - Chair
• John Yellowley - HA Project Sponsor
• Andrew Withington - HA Assistant Project Sponsor
• Irvin Peacock- Mott MacDonald
• Paul Durkin - Mott MacDonald
• John Ryde - Mott MacDonald
• Anne Dalley - RPS Clouston

Project Objectives

1. Integration

• Looking for local multi-modal opportunities
• Supporting regional and local transport strategies with particular reference to the South Pennines Integrated Transport Study (SPITS)

2. Safety

• Improving safety for all road users in the villages of Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle

3. Economy

• Reducing congestion and delays to through and local traffic
• Improving journey time reliability

4. Environment

• Effecting a net improvement in the built and natural environment, by improving the local environment of Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle, and minimising the impact of the project with particular reference to the Peak District National Park

5. Accessibility

• Reducing community severance
• Enhancing facilities for vulnerable and non-motorised users
• Improving access to local public transport

Mottram -tintwistle, stakeholder workshop

Mottram -Tintwistle, Stakeholder Workshop

EMMA MAJOR,CAPITAL VALUE AND RISK LTD (CVRL), Workshop Facilitator

Workshop Objectives and Agenda

Introduction to Stakeholder Workshop Objectives & Agenda

• Workshop Objectives
• Format of the day
• Introductions

The specific objectives of the stakeholder workshop are to:

• Inform the Highways Agency of the stakeholders' views and aspirations
• Provide the stakeholders with an appreciation of the issues involved in the project

Stakeholder Workshop Agenda

09.30	Assemble - Coffee/Tea
10.00	Welcome - Highways Agency
10.05	Introduction - CVRL
	Objectives of the Workshop
	Format of the day
	Introductions
10.30	Presentations:
	Project Overview and status - Highways Agency
	Objectives, Problems and Issues - MottMacDonald
10.50	Questions and Answers
11.00	Coffee/Tea
11.15	Syndicate Working - Problems and Issues In pre-determined syndicate groups:
	Review the problems and issues under each of the objective (NATA) headings (see section 3)
	Rank the problems and issues according to their impact
12.30	Feedback from the syndicate groups on problems and issues
13.00	Lunch
14.00	Syndicate Working - Possible Solutions In pre-determined syndicate groups:
	Determine possible solutions for the problems listed under each of the objective (NATA) headings
15.45	Feedback from the syndicate groups on possible solutions
16.15	Way Forward - Highways Agency
16.30	Close

Workshop Rules

• Everybody contributes fully
• Political and seniority barriers are ignored
• Everyone tables all their ideas or reservations
• The focus and correct level of detail is maintained
• Everyone participates in the decisions
• It is a 'No Blame' culture. We are looking for solutions
• Attend for the whole duration
• Switch off all mobile phones and pagers
• Give others the chance to speak without interruption

Syndicate Groups - Problems and Issues

Workshop discussion groups 11.15 - 12.30pm

• Divide into the syndicate groups indicated
• Review and record the problems and issues under each of the objective (NATA) headings
• Rank the problems and issues according to their degree of impact.(1 - high, 2 - mid range, 3 - low impact)
• Agree the feedback to be presented to the workshop forum - the major problems

Workshop discussion groups 11.15 - 12.30pm

• Divide into the syndicate groups indicated
• Review and record the problems and issues under each of the objective (NATA) headings
• Rank the problems and issues according to their degree of impact.(1 - high, 2 - mid range, 3 - low impact)
• Agree the feedback to be presented to the workshop forum - the major problems

Syndicate Group feedback session 12.30 - 13.00pm

Workshop discussion groups 14.00 - 15.45pm

• Divide into the syndicate groups indicated
• Take each objective (NATA) heading in turn and determine possible solutions to the highest impact problems and issues
• Complete the Evaluation Spreadsheet for each possible solution
• Agree the feedback to be presented to the workshop forum - the top 2 or 3 solutions

Syndicate Group feedback session 15.45 - 16.15pm

Mottram - Tintwistle, Stakeholder Workshop

Irvin Peacock, Mott MacDonald Ltd (Consultants Project Manager)

Defining the Problem

Definition of problem under the five headings from the White Paper 'A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone' issued in 1998.

Integration
Looking for multi-modal opportunities supporting regional local transport strategies

Safety
Improving safety for all road users in the villages

Economy
Reducing congestion and delay

Environment
Improve the natural and built environment

Accessibility
Reduce community severance, improve access to public transport

Background

• A57(T) & A628(T) connects Manchester with S Yorks
• Core route carries commercial, tourist & local traffic
• 36,000 vehicles AADT on Mottram Moor in 2000
• Heavy Traffic in Mottram, Hollingworth & Tintwistle
• The route severs the communities
• Roads are narrow and steep
• Conflict between pedestrians and vehicles

Trans-Pennine Travel Modes

Estimated daily passenger flow by mode between A66 and A52

Typical Weekday 12 Hr Flows

A628(T) Market Street, Hollingworth

A57(T) Hyde Road, Mottram

 

M67 Junction 3 to eastern end

 

Integration - The Problem

• Compatibility with Transport Policies, Programmes and Proposals and Plans (Local, Regional and National)
• Compatibility with Land Use Proposals

Safety - Background

• Accident rate in Tintwistle are more than twice national average
• Number of fatal accidents in 5 years - 3
• Number of serious accidents in 5 years - 11
• Number of slight accidents in 5 years - 119

Safety - The Problem

• How to improve safety in the communities for:
      - Pedestrians
      - Cyclists
      - Vehicle Users
• Reduction in Road Traffic
• Traffic Speed Control
• Pedestrian Crossings
• Cycle Facilities

Economy - Background

• 36,000 vehicles daily on Mottram Moor in 2000
• A628(T) Tintwistle includes 28% Heavy Goods Vehicles
• Peak flows as high as 34% HGVs
• Peak traffic queues upto 2km from Mottram Crossroads
• Morning queues reach Millbrook Bridge on the A628(T)
• In the evening queues extend along the M67 motorway

Economy - The Problem

• Heavy traffic and queuing cost money
      - Fuel costs
      - People's time
      - Vehicle running costs
      - Road repairs
• What is the most efficient transport solution?
• How to reduce journey times for:
• Road traffic
• Bus users
• Train users

Environment - Background

• 435 houses fronting A57/A628
• 27 shops fronting A57/A628
• 2 schools front the A57/A628
• 3 Churches front the A57/A628
• 2 Clinics front the A57 in Mottram
• More than 2500 houses within 300 metres of A57/A628
• Noise problems for residents
• Air pollution problems for residents
• Dust and dirt problems for residents
• Environmental problems made worse by steep hill on Mottram Moor

Environment - The Problem

How to improve the environment for people living and working in Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle

• Reduce traffic noise
• Reduce air pollution
• Reduce traffic borne dust and dirt
• Improvements to built environment
• Reduce severance caused by traffic volumes

Accessibility - Background

• 36,000 vehicles AADT on Mottram Moor in 2000
• A628(T) Tintwistle includes 28% HGVs (2440/12 hr day)
• Communities in Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle suffer severance due to traffic on A57/A628
• Accessibility to local amenities

Accessibility - (Public Transport)

Glossop-Manchester trains
Journey time:	31 min
Frequency:	3 per hour
Leeds-Manchester trains
Journey time:	1 hour
Frequency:	3 per hour
Glossop-Manchester buses
Journey time:	83 min
Frequency:	2 per hour
Leeds-Manchester buses
Journey time:	1 hour
Frequency:	2 per hour

Accessibility - The Problem (1)

Existing congestion hinders accessibility

• For pedestrians
• With public transport

Existing congestion hinders opportunities to:

• Provide Bus facilities (bus lanes)
• Provide better access for pedestrians
• Provide facilities for cyclists

Opportunities for improved train services

Accessibility - The Problem (2)

Accessibility concerns all modes of transport:

• Pedestrians
• Cyclists
• Public transport
• Vehicle users

How can access to bus stops be improved?

How can access to local amenities be improved?

Summary

People living and working adjacent to the existingA57/A628 suffer:

• Traffic noise
• Air pollution, dust and dirt
• Community severance

Traffic congestion on the A57/A628 causes:

• Costly delays to journeys
• problems with accessibility to local amenities

High traffic flows cause:

• Higher than average road accident rates
• Reduced opportunities for improved public transport

SOLUTIONS?

Mottram -Tintwistle - Stakeholder Workshop

THE NEXT STAGE
Report from Workshop to attendees.
Public Meeting
Feedback / Public Information Leaflets.