Thursday, 23 August 2007

Look what arrived today.

I have not had time to study these alternative proposals yet, but comments from anyone 'in the know' would be appreciated.


The real spp said...

This document highlights exactly what I have been saying all along. Read the comments from the highways agency for each alternative proposal and you will see what I mean.

We need this bypass; dont let the luddites grind you down with their phoney environmental arguments. They are not interested in the environment as a whole but just the bits that matter to them. The one who stalks me from the internet is nothing other than a NIMBY and the reason he is so vociferous is because he doesnt want the bypass spoiling his views.

Think progress and support the bypass.

Anonymous said...

So Sean, you think it is OK to bulldoze your way through a "protected" nature reserve so that people can get to work quickly?

I was hoping the TIF was going to mention Longdendale/Glossopdale in it's plans for improved public transport, but it didn't when it is much needed as a viable alternative to the bypass.

The bypass will be a sign of bad things to come when developers will use what land is left to build eyesores such as Rossington Park.

Liam said...

These "alternatives" are for creating more roads which will only add to the problem of increased pollution in the area.