Highways Agency - Safe roads, Reliable journeys, Informed travellers

Related pages

• 1. Introduction
• 2.1.1 Group A
• Possible solutions
• 3.1.1 group e
• 3.1.2 group f
• 3.1.3 group g
• 3.1.4 group h
• 4.1 workshop attendees feedback
• Participants
• Workshop objectives
• Mottram - tintwistle, stakeholder workshop
• Mottram -tintwistle, stakeholder workshop
• Mottram - Tintwistle, Stakeholder Workshop

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.