Representation by SALE CIVIC SOCIETY (SALE CIVIC SOCIETY)
- Date submitted
- 5 June 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Sale Civic Society objection: We object to the proposed scheme at Simister Island Interchange. The Government/National Highways should be seeking alternative, more sustainable solutions to reduce demand (ie rail and water-based options), rather than just increasing capacity and promoting even higher volumes of traffic at one of the busiest motorway junctions in the region. Where are the genuinely sustainable alternative options set out? This is a lazy solution to traffic congestion. It is unsustainable and expensive (not just financially but also in terms of citizen health and wellbeing, climate/carbon implications and environmental/ecological harms). It will result in increased air, dust, noise, light and vibration pollution for communities already experiencing levels that are over legal limits and the consequential health challenges (this area is already within Noise Important Areas and Air Quality Management Areas). National Highways should be seeking solutions that will reduce the current harms caused by the existing road, not exacerbating those issues by increasing capacity. Given Greater Manchester's adopted spatial plan will release more than 2,400 hectares of Green Belt for development, any additional loss of Green Belt for this scheme is not acceptable. We understand construction will take place at night (over a three- and a half-year period), causing unacceptable disturbance to local citizens, impacting many vulnerable residents and also extensively affecting those who need a decent night's sleep to be effective in their workplace, studies/examinations, including students, who have already suffered significantly because of the pandemic. Nighttime motorway closures will transfer traffic onto the local road network increasing noise and other forms of disturbance for huge numbers of local residents across a wide area surrounding the scheme boundary. We believe the scheme will lead to an increase in fatal, serious and slight casualties, causing additional costs and workload to the NHS at a time when there should be a concerted effort to reduce demand (a benefit that a genuinely sustainable solution would bring). There are no significant benefits from this NSIP, only small savings of time and modest economic growth, which results in the scheme being very poor value for money with a Benefit to Cost Ratio of just 1.17 (Low value for money according to the DfT’s guidance). Carbon emissions would be increased by 62,013 tonnes during construction, and 151,090 tonnes over a 60 year period due to the increased traffic. This makes it even harder for the UK to reach its legally binding climate targets which we are already off target to reach. Michael Riley For SALE CIVIC SOCIETY Tel: [REDACTED] Email: [REDACTED]