SADDLEWORTH Parish Council believes work on a multi-billion pound rail project must not begin in the area as it stands.
A public inquiry has been called to cover the stretch of the Transpennine Route Upgrade (TRU) which covers the stretch between Stalybridge and Diggle.
Work to electrify the line between Manchester and York will see Greenfield Station remodelled so both platforms can finally become fully accessible.
But the impact of works on the area – with months of road closures threatening traffic chaos – plus work on bridges and landmarks to introduce overhead line equipment has brought the parish authority to form its response.
Closing Moorgate Halt level crossing is also a bone of contention to the Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO) that has been applied for.
Now Saddleworth Independent can tell how the parish authority is against the method many projects may be done – but is not against the overriding principle.
Put simply, it wants things done correctly.
In an objection document, it states: “Saddleworth Parish Council supports in principle the improvements to the Transpennine Route through the parish towards Manchester and Leeds.
“However, there are a substantial number of concerns to which the parish council objects in the strongest possible terms, based on the significant impact on public access, impact on local businesses, health and safety, community and environmental impact.
“On that basis, we consider that substantial revisions to the proposals are required before we would support the proposals to see the TWA Order granted.
“The current proposals do not guarantee any improvement in the service provision for Saddleworth.
“Instead, this proposal will result in years of disruption for the whole parish – a population of 26,000 people, with the only clear benefit being improved accessibility at the station.
“The failure to provide any further benefits for the area and its people counts significantly against the consideration of the proposals.
“The Transpennine Route upgrade is in line with Saddleworth Parish Council’s vision for the area, as stated in its forthcoming Neighbourhood Plan.
“If Network Rail do amend their proposals to address the concerns we have laid out, we would be happy to support them.”
Specifically, concerns relating a number of TRU interventions are raised, not least the closure of the main A670 road as Greenfield Station is remodelled, with a new bridge installed.
It believes it could put several businesses at risk.
It says: “The proposals include the closure of the A670 at Greenfield for an estimated minimum of 16–20 weeks. Estimates from local engineers with experience of similar projects suggest that this is an optimistic minimum.
“The TWA Order proposal as it stands does not address our significant safety concerns, nor the commercial impact on the businesses in the area.
“A closure of a minimum of five months with no agreed traffic management in place will massively impact on businesses and many will be at significant risk of closure.
“Further, the A670 is the main access route for emergency vehicles. Diversions will at best cause significant delays to emergency vehicle access, particularly at peak times.
“Without planning in place to mitigate the impact, we consider that this could have a life-threatening impact.”
Saddleworth Parish Council suggests an alternative by adding: “Due to the topography of the location, it would be possible for a temporary “bailey” bridge to be constructed at this location over the top of the existing bridge, and for the work to then be carried out underneath.”
The closure of Uppermill’s Moorgate Hat level crossing, with a diversion on to a nearby footpath – 244, has arguably been the biggest point of conflict with TRU chiefs.
And the Parish Council has formally joined the chorus of opposition by saying: “We are strongly against on the basis of maintenance of existing public rights of way, and public safety.
“The levels of foot traffic at this location are significantly higher than those elsewhere along the Transpennine Route Upgrade where Network Rail have implemented alternative access via footbridge, and the decision to remove access here is massively inconsistent with Network Rail’s own approach.
“Network Rail have not provided a disability impact assessment, as is required by their public sector equality duty under the Equalities Act 2010.
“Given the significant reservations of the footpaths officer with regards to the accessibility of PRoW 244, it is not considered that this is an acceptable alternative and does not allow people with disabilities the same access to enable them to cross the railway.
“The justification for this change from Network Rail is purely on a cost basis. However, the supporting evidence for this is extremely poor and Saddleworth Parish Council considers that it does not provide clear and convincing justification for the proposed works that outweigh any identified harm.”
Work in Diggle and how it will be accessed is also criticised as Saddleworth Parish Council continues: “There is nothing indicated in the proposals for the TWA Order to suggest that the approach respects that setting of the Peak District National Park or is sensitively located and designed to avoid or minimise adverse impacts.
“While the proposal is temporary, the development will take place over a period of a minimum of several months, and likely years, and thus we consider that the TWA Order must be revised to demonstrate how the proposals are compliant with the Neighbourhood Plan and Local Plan.”
And the introduction of 11 compounds while the project takes place throughout the area has raised concern.
Chiefly, what will happen to the areas once the TRU is complete with fears they will leave Saddleworth scarred.
The objection states: “The proposals include the removal of mature trees in a number of locations and works on areas of significant ecological importance.
“Saddleworth Parish Council consider that the TWA Order cannot be granted without a full proposal of how the impacts of the works can be offset by tree planting and works to mitigate the environmental and community impacts of the creation of the compounds.
“It should also be clear before the order is granted what works are required to reinstate the compounds to their original state afterwards, and where green space or community facilities have been lost on a permanent basis, what provision will be made to replace them.”
Individually, the parish council has fears over Greenfield’s Armit Road, a site of biological importance (SBI), as well as Friezland Church Hall car park and whether the centre will have to close during the work.
It has called for Saddleworth Rangers ARLFC’s car park to be used as a compound only while Greenfield Station is out of use – and is worried sat plans for parking and pedestrian access once it reopens.
It also believes the use of green belt land off Ladcastle Road is not required and bat roosts on land close to Saddleworth Viaduct, as well as the impact on businesses, have also raised worries,
“This compound lies in setting of the canal, surrounded by green belt and with a significant role to play in the tourist economy of the area,” the objection continues.
“Saddleworth Parish Council consider that the TWA Order should only be granted if Network Rail can demonstrate how it will mitigate the impact of the compound on local businesses and the tourist economy.
“Concerns have also been raised with Saddleworth Parish Council with regards to the identification of bat roosts at this location.
“While Network Rail have acknowledged that there are bat roosts in this area, their exact location has not been identified through initial investigations.
“Saddleworth Parish Council consider that more work is required to identify the location of the bat roosts to ensure that both the works on the viaduct, and the creation of the compound do not have an adverse impact on local bat populations.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.