Bypass ‘will not be built for a decade’
Aug 7 2008
by Michael Byrne, Ormskirk Advertiser
THE Ormskirk bypass will not happen in the next 10 years according to the county councillor responsible for the project.
And as the £37m project, which has existed in one form or another for 50 years, is shelved again the Advertiser can reveal the cost of trying to bring the bypass into being has topped £1.4m, without a foot of tarmac being laid.
The money has been spent by Lancashire County Council on designing the scheme, external consultations, and ecological and transport surveys since 2004.
When questioned by the Advertiser about this expenditure Councillor Matthew Tomlinson, Cabinet member for roads, admitted that the bypass was not going to be built in the next 10 years.
The latest estimate for building the road is £37m. A planning application was expected in June but has been put on hold.
Cllr Tomlinson said: “The council has spent this money because this is the type of work we have to do in preparation for a scheme like this.
“From our experience with the Heysham Bypass we don’t believe the Ormskirk Bypass will happen for the next 10 years because of the way schemes like this are prioritised.
“We have put the planning application on hold and want to look at smaller schemes in Ormskirk.”
Alan Syder, Protect Rural Ormskirk chairman, said: “We are unlikely to get the money for the bypass to be built so it’s disgraceful this amount of money has been spent.
“The government’s regional spatial strategy decides the priority order for these schemes and only those in the first quartile are likely to get the funding.
“The bypass project is only in the third quartile for priority of projects, so its unlikely to get built so they should stop spending money on it now.
“The council would have been better off spending this money on smaller schemes to ease traffic problems in Ormskirk.”
Councillor David O’Toole, chairman of the district’s Lancashire Local Committee, said: “I always question figures like this as officers generally include the time they spend on the project, and they would be working for the council anyway.
“But if this is the amount of money that has been spent then that is extortionate.
“If the bypass isn’t built then this expenditure will have been a waste of money.”
Vote shows those in favour of road are slim majority
Oct 11 2007
by Gary Stewart, Ormskirk Advertiser
AN anti-Ormskirk Bypass pressure group is claiming that the new road is not as popular as might previously have been believed.
In August Lancashire County Council conducted a public consulatation exercise to find out what West Lancashire people thought of their plans and how many were for and against.
That information has not been released by the council, and may only see the light of day as part of a planning application in November.
But a member of Protect Rural Ormskirk (PRO) who asked Lancashire County Council what percentages voted for and against the scheme did receive an answer.
Of those who expressed an opinion about the bypass 55.4% were in favour and 45.6% against, it is claimed.
While a majority supported the bypass PRO claim that such a narrow margin is not a convincing mandate for such an expensive project.
PRO chairman Alan Syder said: “Dr John Pugh (Southport MP) is recorded as saying: ‘Many schemes that the minister will have to deal with will involve an appreciable amount of local opposition, but there is zilch opposition to this scheme. Everybody in the area wants it.’
“The result of the recent vote commissioned by Lancashire County Council was 45.6% againt the bypass and 54.4% in favour.
“It seems like Dr Pugh is totally out of touch with many Ormskirk residents and one wonders how much our other offical representatives of Ormskirk understand the deep concern.”
West Lancashire MP Rosie Cooper supports the bypass as does Cllr Adrian Owens, the Conservative parliamentary candidate for the area.
County Councillor Tony Martin, in charge of roads for Lancashire, said the result showed quite the opposite to PRO’s suggestions.
He said: “I’m very pleased that the majority of those who responded are in favour of the bypass. This is despite the fact that the silent majority don’t tend to make their views known.
“You usually find that the people who are anti any major proposal will mount a strong campaign while those that are quite happy let things progress. So to get a majority of people in favour despite this is quite an achievement.
“Having said that, the purpose of the consultation is not just to ‘vote’ - it is certainly not a referendum.”
by Gary Stewart, Ormskirk Advertiser
AN anti-Ormskirk Bypass pressure group is claiming that the new road is not as popular as might previously have been believed.
In August Lancashire County Council conducted a public consulatation exercise to find out what West Lancashire people thought of their plans and how many were for and against.
That information has not been released by the council, and may only see the light of day as part of a planning application in November.
But a member of Protect Rural Ormskirk (PRO) who asked Lancashire County Council what percentages voted for and against the scheme did receive an answer.
Of those who expressed an opinion about the bypass 55.4% were in favour and 45.6% against, it is claimed.
While a majority supported the bypass PRO claim that such a narrow margin is not a convincing mandate for such an expensive project.
PRO chairman Alan Syder said: “Dr John Pugh (Southport MP) is recorded as saying: ‘Many schemes that the minister will have to deal with will involve an appreciable amount of local opposition, but there is zilch opposition to this scheme. Everybody in the area wants it.’
“The result of the recent vote commissioned by Lancashire County Council was 45.6% againt the bypass and 54.4% in favour.
“It seems like Dr Pugh is totally out of touch with many Ormskirk residents and one wonders how much our other offical representatives of Ormskirk understand the deep concern.”
West Lancashire MP Rosie Cooper supports the bypass as does Cllr Adrian Owens, the Conservative parliamentary candidate for the area.
County Councillor Tony Martin, in charge of roads for Lancashire, said the result showed quite the opposite to PRO’s suggestions.
He said: “I’m very pleased that the majority of those who responded are in favour of the bypass. This is despite the fact that the silent majority don’t tend to make their views known.
“You usually find that the people who are anti any major proposal will mount a strong campaign while those that are quite happy let things progress. So to get a majority of people in favour despite this is quite an achievement.
“Having said that, the purpose of the consultation is not just to ‘vote’ - it is certainly not a referendum.”
Ormskirk bypass plans hit by delay
Oct 11 2007
by Gary Stewart, Advertiser
THE proposed Ormskirk bypass has suffered a setback after council bosses agreed to delay plans to consider alternatives to the £37m road.
The scheme faces at least an eight-month delay, the Advertiser can reveal.
Lancashire County Council was due to submit a planning application next month but they are now looking at May or June 2008.
The reason for the change to the schedule is criticism from a government inspector over the way they handled plans for another major road project, the Heysham M6 bypass.
The inspector said that the council had failed to consider sufficient alternatives. Highways bosses are keen not to make the same mistake again with the Ormskirk bypass.
Cllr Tony Martin, the man in charge of Lancashire’s roads, said: “The Heysham M6 bypass was the subject of a planning inquiry a couple of months ago.
“As a result of that the inspector said even though we’d done everything right statutorily we hadn’t looked at non-road schemes, alternatives such as encouraging more people to use public transport, park and ride schemes. Stuff like that.
“We said fine, we thought we’d done what we had to, but we’ll take it on for the future. We’re a four-star authority but we never said we were perfect.
“Now we have another road scheme in Ormskirk, similar but not as controversial, and we’re picking up on what the inspector said so there’s less chance of the Ormskirk bypass being called in by the Government when we present it.”
The planning application, now due in May or June 2008, is likely to be granted as the planning authority is Lancashire County Council, who are also submitting the application
If it is granted there will not be a public inquiry at that stage but if the application is called in by the Government for further scrutiny there will be one
Side roads and compulsory purchases will be the subject of an inquiry because there are likely to be objections but if that were the case the route itself would already have been established and would not be subject of the inquiry
by Gary Stewart, Advertiser
THE proposed Ormskirk bypass has suffered a setback after council bosses agreed to delay plans to consider alternatives to the £37m road.
The scheme faces at least an eight-month delay, the Advertiser can reveal.
Lancashire County Council was due to submit a planning application next month but they are now looking at May or June 2008.
The reason for the change to the schedule is criticism from a government inspector over the way they handled plans for another major road project, the Heysham M6 bypass.
The inspector said that the council had failed to consider sufficient alternatives. Highways bosses are keen not to make the same mistake again with the Ormskirk bypass.
Cllr Tony Martin, the man in charge of Lancashire’s roads, said: “The Heysham M6 bypass was the subject of a planning inquiry a couple of months ago.
“As a result of that the inspector said even though we’d done everything right statutorily we hadn’t looked at non-road schemes, alternatives such as encouraging more people to use public transport, park and ride schemes. Stuff like that.
“We said fine, we thought we’d done what we had to, but we’ll take it on for the future. We’re a four-star authority but we never said we were perfect.
“Now we have another road scheme in Ormskirk, similar but not as controversial, and we’re picking up on what the inspector said so there’s less chance of the Ormskirk bypass being called in by the Government when we present it.”
The planning application, now due in May or June 2008, is likely to be granted as the planning authority is Lancashire County Council, who are also submitting the application
If it is granted there will not be a public inquiry at that stage but if the application is called in by the Government for further scrutiny there will be one
Side roads and compulsory purchases will be the subject of an inquiry because there are likely to be objections but if that were the case the route itself would already have been established and would not be subject of the inquiry
Opinions vary over bypass
Aug 23 2007by Gemma Jaleel, Ormskirk Advertiser
SHOPPERS in Ormskirk got the chance to see how the proposed £37million bypass would look.
The event was one of three organised by Lancashire County Council to show residents the plans for the bypass and the changes it would mean for the town.
The bypass will stretch over five miles in length curving around the east side of Ormskirk.
However, the plans have been met with opposition from protesters who believe the bypass should be a last resort.
Action group Protect Rural Ormskirk (PRO) were also at the consultation day held at the Clock Tower to tell shoppers their side of the argument.
Bill Boylett, of Vicarage Lane, which will be bisected by the bypass if the plans go through, is heading up the campaign.
He told the Advertiser: “The presentations and discussion at the consultation meetings failed to identify the key traffic problem areas within the town.
“Having spent the money and damaged rural Ormskirk forever, the bypass will prove to be a total waste of time.”
It comes in the same week that West Lancs Tory General Election candidate Adrian Owens threw his weight behind calls for the scheme to go ahead.
He said: “I’m a long-standing supporter of a bypass. However, I’m much more skeptical than Rosie Cooper that the scheme will progress and disappointed by parts of the latest proposals.
“The scheme should have at least continued onto Pinfold as in the plans from the last Conservative government which John Prescott disgracefully cut from the road-building pro gramme in 1998.
“The current plans are all about reducing costs – look at the ridiculous plans which will sever Vicarage Lane.
“It’s only by reducing costs that the county council can have any hope at all of the bypass competing in the regional bun fight where, from past experience, the money goes to Merseyside and Greater Manchester.”
Campaigners’ form protest group
Aug 9 2007
by Gary Stewart, Ormskirk Advertiser
PROTECT Rural Ormskirk (PRO) is the name of a new action group set up by West Lancashire people to oppose the Ormskirk Bypass.
Founder Bill Boylett, who lives off Ruff Lane, told the Advertiser: “We’re proactive, we’re pro-Ormskirk and we’re pro-rural life.”
He says that congestion in Ormskirk is caused by the school run, rush hour, a poorly designed one-way system, shoppers at peak times, and the fact that it’s easier to get into Ormskirk than get out.
“If the above is generally correct then the bypass will have a minimal effect on peak traffic in the town. Ormskirk will still have congestion problems.
“Large swathes of prime countryside will have been lost forever and those individuals responsible for approving this scheme will have wasted vast sums of public money in the process.
“It’s PRO’s contention that this project is being pushed through at an alarming speed with the public consultations taking place in school holidays.
“It will be an irrevocable scar on the landscape that will be fostered on our children and our children’s children by councillors trying to score points.
“Ormskirk is a fantastic place to live, completely surrounded by farmland. As soon as they do this that will be completely destroyed. The more I think about it the more depressed I get.
“I’m on my own at the moment with just a few people but they don’t have the time to help. It’s David versus ten Goliaths. I need your help. Don’t accept it like sheep. Question it.”
At a public meeting at Westhead Village Hall on Tuesday night it was proved Bill was far from alone.
Over 100 people packed in to the small building to discuss opposition to the bypass and were joined by members of the Green Party and the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).
Ideas to oppose the bypass included cutting a road across Coronation Park to relieve traffic pressure in the town, knocking down houses to create an extra lane of traffic opposite the Parish Church, banning lorries travelling through Ormskirk and collecting a £20,000 ‘fighting fund’ to hire solicitors and experts.
by Gary Stewart, Ormskirk Advertiser
PROTECT Rural Ormskirk (PRO) is the name of a new action group set up by West Lancashire people to oppose the Ormskirk Bypass.
Founder Bill Boylett, who lives off Ruff Lane, told the Advertiser: “We’re proactive, we’re pro-Ormskirk and we’re pro-rural life.”
He says that congestion in Ormskirk is caused by the school run, rush hour, a poorly designed one-way system, shoppers at peak times, and the fact that it’s easier to get into Ormskirk than get out.
“If the above is generally correct then the bypass will have a minimal effect on peak traffic in the town. Ormskirk will still have congestion problems.
“Large swathes of prime countryside will have been lost forever and those individuals responsible for approving this scheme will have wasted vast sums of public money in the process.
“It’s PRO’s contention that this project is being pushed through at an alarming speed with the public consultations taking place in school holidays.
“It will be an irrevocable scar on the landscape that will be fostered on our children and our children’s children by councillors trying to score points.
“Ormskirk is a fantastic place to live, completely surrounded by farmland. As soon as they do this that will be completely destroyed. The more I think about it the more depressed I get.
“I’m on my own at the moment with just a few people but they don’t have the time to help. It’s David versus ten Goliaths. I need your help. Don’t accept it like sheep. Question it.”
At a public meeting at Westhead Village Hall on Tuesday night it was proved Bill was far from alone.
Over 100 people packed in to the small building to discuss opposition to the bypass and were joined by members of the Green Party and the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).
Ideas to oppose the bypass included cutting a road across Coronation Park to relieve traffic pressure in the town, knocking down houses to create an extra lane of traffic opposite the Parish Church, banning lorries travelling through Ormskirk and collecting a £20,000 ‘fighting fund’ to hire solicitors and experts.