“The Area of Influence (AoI) is relatively small, and this is surprising considering that the benefits from the scheme are mainly to longer distance traffic. In the current business case over half of the benefits come from journeys which are longer than the diameter of the AoI. This is unexplored in the Business Case.”
Professor Wenban-Smith
“1 Modelling accuracy
The current modelling is not fully multi-modal and the consultation contains assertions based on the 2001 MMS report, in turn based on older data.
There is thus no up to date systematic analysis against identified objectives and problems, as set out in Webtag, and no up to date consideration of other solutions.
This particularly unfortunate since the assumptions on traffic growth used in 2001 have proved to be incorrect and there is good local data which shows traffic falling for at least part of the AoI.
There is no walking or cycling in the demand model, this conceals the real impact of locating the new development in the planned locations and serving them by the proposed road scheme.
The public transport forecasts are not robustly validated and thus mode choice and the impacts of the scheme are again not well represented. This means the road traffic predictions will not be robust.
In particular the mode split predicted by the model for areas where it is currently measured, such as central Manchester and surrounding areas including Stockport, is not shown for the modelled base year or future years. “
Professor Wenban-Smith
Before they spend hundreds of millions of council taxpayers’ pounds on the bypass, they should have looked into the effects the above mentioned improvements will have. They haven’t bothered. They want the bypass irrespective of whether it is necessary. They think it is a vote winner.
Greater than 53% of predicted benefits are from longer distance journeys over 15 kilometres. As Professor Alan Wenban-Smith wisely points out:
“These are the ones most likely to benefit from the Northern Hub initiative, electrification schemes which have committed funding and the plans to build a fourth platform at Manchester Airport rail station.”
George Osborne was advised by a team of experts NOT to create a commercial hub at Manchester Airport, as it would have a negative impact on nearby town centres. Stockport will be forced to spend massively to compete, and they have already begun at Grand Central.
What a pity SMBC never bother to consider rail transport. Obviously, they are worried that Airport City will deplete commerce from Stockport. Commercial development next to Stockport Station might be a good idea, but Stockport is on the wrong line for the airport. So, it takes 40 minutes from Stockport but only 20 minutes from Piccadilly.
The Stockport line actually goes underneath the A555 just before Wilsmlow Road, so they could have extended a spur into the airport along the proposed A555 route. Stockport is much closer to the airport than Manchester (5m/8m) and a train from Stockport might take only 12 minutes if they built a rail spur – much faster than taking the motorway; the proposed A555 is probably the slowest route. The Stockport/ Wilmslow track is electrified. So, fast electric trains would help alleviate the air pollution burden along the A555 corridor.
Pity SMBC never did a Web tag analysis of new rail routes despite spending £20m+ on their multimodal study.
Stephen Houston
