Skip to content or view screen version

Critical Mass in Lancaster

Lancaster IMC | 27.08.2004 14:32

Action against proposed bypass, which bypasses democracy and destroys the environment.

Meeting on Dalton Square, Lancaster - today (27/8-04) at 4.30pm.

See also  http://www.shiftingground.freeuk.com/critmass.htm

Reclaim the Streets Today
Reclaim the Streets Today


Adverse impacts include:

COST - now estimated at 92M (2004 prices - compare to 62.1M in 2000!). This
breaks down as 66M for northern bypass, 19M for new J34, 7M for new bridge
to Luneside. The big increase is partly due to the introduction of an
Aggregate Tax. Obviously the eventual cost (in 2010?) would be even higher

LAND TAKE - the footprint of the road covers 70 Ha of farmland.

DWELLINGS - 1-3 would need to be acquired for demolition, and a further 200
dwellings are within 100m of the new road and could therefore suffer
increased noise, vibrations, air pollution etc.

BIOLOGICAL HERITAGE SITES - encroaches on River Lune BHS twice and Lancaster
canal BHS once, and passes close to Long Bank Wood BHS and Foundry Lane
Verges BHS. However, impacts are not thought to be very significant.

WIDER LANDSCAPE - major impact. Possible effects on species with wide ranges
such as birds, bats, otters - road kill, habitat severance, disturbance.

HEDGEROWS - major impact. Destruction of 94 hedgerows totally 11 km in
length. 87% of these are supposed to be protected by hedgerow regulations.
Hedgerows are key habitats, provide food, hibernation & breeding sites and
navigation routes for small birds and mammals, and support a wide variety of
invertebrates.

VETERAN TREES - major impact, can't be mitigated. A valuable resource
throughout the northern route, though total number affected (by felling,
changes to drainage and root damage) not known yet.

MARSHY GRASSLAND - moderate impact. Areas supporting nationally and
regionally important fungi will be destroyed.

IMPROVED GRASSLAND - moderate impact. Species-poor, but important for some
Biodiversity Action Plan bird species (e.g. lapwing, skylark).

INDUCED DEVELOPMENT - presence of road may encourage future pressure for
development along the route.

SALT AYRE SPORTS FIELDS - the road would cut through this, necessitating
'remodelling of the sports pitches and cycle track'

Alleged benefits include:

TRAFFIC LEVELS - reductions in City Centre of between 1/6 and 1/4 (but some
roads would increase - not least the new road itself which is forecast to
have an Annual Average Daily Flow of 33,700 - 39,500 in 2010. This is close
to the maximum optimal capacity for a dual carriageway (39,000), but the
reports are curiously silent on the issue of how long it would take for the
new bypass to become congested, and there is no discussion at all (that I
could see) of induced traffic.

TRAVEL TIMES - reduced by around half (typically something like 10 minutes
compared to 20 minutes) from locations on the peninsula to the motorway
junctions. Of course these are only travel times by car - there is no
consideration of journey times by foot/bike/bus. And presumably these time
savings will reduce as more and more people travel by car, encouraged by the
extra road space. Traffic levels are growing by

ROAD CASUALTIES - reduction of 4 fatal/serious and 25 slight casualties per
year.

BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO - estimated at 5.7 (not including casualties). I am
deeply sceptical about this and would like to know more about how it is
calculated - there is not much info in the reports although strangely the
cost used is 79M not 92M (adjusted to 1998 levels). Does anyone know what
happened to the New Approach To Appraisal (NATA)? Last time we went through
a public inquiry about the bypass, I understood that Cost Benefit Analyses
(COBA) were being phased out as too crude, and that big transport projects
would have to be assessed on other criteria in future - Access, Integration,
Safety, Economy and Environment. There is no mention of this at all in the
reports - is this another Labour Government promise that has been quietly
ditched in pursuit of the usual economic growth crap?

As usual there is no consideration anywhere in these reports of any other
(non-road building) ways of reducing traffic/improving access locally. Also
nothing at all about impacts on CO2 emissions.

There is more info about the history of the Heysham-M6 link road on the
Lancaster & District Green Party website at:
 http://www.lancastergreens.nshc.co.uk/bypass.htm

Lancaster IMC

Comments

Display the following 2 comments

  1. Excellent — Commenter
  2. and there's more... — anarchoteapot