Airport Link Road Proposal

[birdman]

Well, hi all...

I start this morning at work knowing I have to dovetail a few letters of protest between my contractual duties.

I'm about to write to my MP, Mayor, local councillors and local newspaper with regard to build an Aiport Link Road right through the middle of my Local Patch.

Development of the new Doncaster Airport, by whatever name, is well under way, and I want to make it clear from the start that I supported (and still do) the project.

For those who are not local, the site is the former RAF Finningley Airbase, which has been left, potentially to go to ruin, for the last 7 years since the closure of the base.

With a 4 and a half mile runway, which I believe is the second longest runway in Europe, it is a resource that was criminal to let go to waste, especially with the the furore over other proposed airports, and the overwhelming local support for this project.

Doncaster (in fact South Yorshire as a whole) has suffered devastating job losses due to the closure of most of the local coal mines, as well as the loss of other manufacturing industries, and whilst we seem to be one of the call-centre hot-spots, this has made only small inroads into a desparate social situation that has been ongoing for more than 20 years.

Doncaster itself, at the instigation of the Council, is a couple of years into a 25 year regeneration plan to make the place prosperous and successful, and somewhere where families can once again live with a degree of financial security. The Airport development, when finally approved, became an integral part of this plan.

These are all Good Things, and have my wholehearted support.

Now, it is certainly true that the communications infrastructure needs to be improved to link the Airport to the local motorway system, and three (out of an original 6 or more) proposals were put forward for public approval.

The final chosen proposal was to extend a link road from an already existing Motorway junction, past the north of the satellite mining village of Doncaster where I live.

All proposals resulted in a degree of environmental and historical impact (Doncaster is a former Roman Town, and Roman sites are ten a penny round here) but the chosen option, seemed to be the best balance between environmental impact, financial cost and regional development.

Yesterday the local free paper, which contains a Community section, gave details of a possible alternative apparently with a deal of local support - one of the original options which never went to public vote.

This makes use of the same junction, but sweeps the link road south of the village, and back up straight up the middle of my local patch.

Of course I am opposed because the areas means something to me on a personal level, but I have further objections.

In no particular order, there is of course the birdlife of the area, including Skylarks and partridges, which I believe are under a certain amount of threat nationwide, as well as owls and woodpeckers, which I think are the "stars" of the show.

Also, as you might have guessed from this diatribe, South Yorkshire is a very industrial county, and whilst it is hardly the Lake District, this small area is a very pleasant area, of more than a square mile without roads or other development, and a place that many locals use for dog-walking and cycling and taking the kids out.

In addition, some of the objections to the originally chosen option are that it is a "bypass" of the village. Well I do not understand how this is anything other than a bypass in the same way.

The originally chosen option does not encourage airport users into the village. Well in my experience, travellers do not tend to call in at the local town when going to an airport, so the actual route this road takes makes no difference.

In my opinion, my village, like the rest of the immediate area, will benefit more from the introduction of new business (perhaps a business development park close to the link road) and therefore new jobs, than from any, frankly, minimal increase in "visitors" to the local shops.

There is some objection to the fact that the originally chosen option bisects a Roman fort. Well, first of all, a local road already bisects the fort, there is no obvious evidence (to the layman) of the fort, I never knew it existed - and I'm Doncaster born and bred and have lived in the town for 36 of my 40 years - and as I said before, we live in a Roman town. The public plans for the option showed that these sites are all over the place, and it is very difficult to avoid them. The southern route does avoid them, but in my opinion the welfare of today's flora and fauna, and the lifestyle of the villagers, means more to me than some anonymous antiquity.

Finally - for this rant! - there is the objection to the potential of extra traffic weaving through the village. Well, you need some local knowledge, but it would benefit very few people to join the motorway network through my village, and even those that did could readily be discouraged from weaving thorugh the housing estates by the judicious placing of some bollards - plus it seems odd to me that extra business is wanted from extra visitors, but without extra traffic. Doesn't seem to work to me.

Anyway, I now have to try and put these, and other points across to the appropriate authorities, in a manner appropriate to the task in hand. It isn't a foregone conclusion - plans have been suspended until this new option has been reconsidered - but I'm not sure what my chances are.

And of course, being British, I don't like to complain!

I'll look back here from time to time, so if you have any bright ideas that might help my cause, please feel free to post.

[digi-birder]

Well, to me the fact that this new proposal never went to public vote makes a mockery of the whole process. If the original proposal was approved, then that should be the one that's followed. Of course, some development plans still go ahead despite public protests and opinion.

I suppose you've thought of getting a petition together with your neighbours? Obviously you're writing to all the movers and shakers involved in this. I'm sure, with your evident writing skills, that you'll be able to put the case across in a well thought-out manner. Let's hope they sit up and take notice.

As you say, Roman forts are ten a penny around there, so why reroute the road because of it. Why can't they excavate it to find out if it has anything of value? If it doesn't, then the road should go ahead.

It would be a real shame if you lost your patch for a bypass. Keep fighting and keep us updated.

[CJW]

Good luck Dave.

[pduxon]

good luck Dave

I remember when there was all this furore over Cliffe I KNEW it would be stansted because they had already announced major new transport links.

[desgreene]

Hi Birdman,
there may be other rare/endangered wildlife in this area. Have you tried contacting any other local groups?

Best of luck with your effort. I would hope you stand a good chance, as at least you are not going into it from a completely negative standpoint (not that that would necessarily be wrong!).

Des.

[Nightranger]

good luck Dave

I remember when there was all this furore over Cliffe I KNEW it would be stansted because they had already announced major new transport links.

Not quite true but I know what you mean. Everytime a JCB arrived on site at Stansted during the Cliffe appeal period, someone would ring up saying "I thought no decision had been made yet". ;) Of course, Stansted is still developing as an airport independently of the entire airport expansion business. The same applies at Doncaster (best of luck Dave and if there is any advice then I will do my best to help), Lydd and East Midlands to name but three. Alconbury is also proposed for some kind of development now that the USAF are no longer present.

[John N]

Good luck birdman, I hope you are successful. Keep us all informed.

[birdman]

Why can't they excavate it to find out if it has anything of value? My thoughts exactly!

Thanks for all the posts up to now, and the messages of support.

I'm hoping this won't be a one-man show, and hopefully there will be other local voices of support.

I'm trying to avoid the nimby stance as much as possible, but in actual fact, whatever route the link takes, it will still be in all our back yards.

It makes no sense to me to put the link along this new proposed route. I can see no advantages over the original route.

For clarity, this new route is a local proposal (although, as I said, one of the original discarded options) but I think it is totally blinkered.

There will be a price to pay, whatever the outcome, but the existing proposal seems to me to be the best balance of impacts vs benefits.

I'm going to peruse the online verion of The State of the Nations Birds, and try to find some of the hard evidence there or elsewhere to back up the anecdotal evidence of Skylark and partridge populations.

Thanks particularly for the offer of help, Ian. If I start hitting brick walls on some of the bird facts, I might drop you a pm for a few pointers.

Dave

[Bluetail]

Dave, reading between the lines, I take it that this alternative proposal is coming from some locals and has not actually been taken on board by the powers that be? All power to your elbow anyway: you certainly need to make your feelings known in the right circles. I agree that the natural environment is more important than a Roman fort - unless there is something particularly special that makes this one of unique historical importance.

Outside the office where I work construction work is currently under way. Before it commenced there was an archeological dig because the site once held a sixteenth-century merchant's house of some significance in Plymouth's history. It was all duly excavated, photographed and then filled in again. There is nothing sacrosanct about archeological remains. Each should be assessed individually on its merits.

[Andrew]

Best of luck Dave.

Do you know of any other local groups interested in other forms of wildlife such as those interested in flowers, moths, butterflies or insects as they may have knowledge of rare species in your patch. If not then the accumulated wealth of knowledge may be more potent than just stating the bird life present.

[Grousemore]

Give 'em one of your really lengthy missives,Dave...that should deter them!

Seriously,good luck for a successful outcome and keep us informed.

[birdman]

Give 'em one of your really lengthy missives,Dave...that should deter them!
Should at least delay them past decision day !!! 3:-)

[digi-birder]

Have you seen THIS SITE (http://www.doncasterfinningleyairport.co.uk/mainfset/quest.htm)? See the tiny Environmental Management link at the bottom of the page.

Have they done an Environmental Impact Assessment on the site? I work for an environmental consultancy and my colleague does these surveys. I've just been asking him about the implications if, say, bats are found on a site. Apparently, various hoops have to be jumped through if bats are present. If you have bats in the area that may be worth mentioning to someone.

[birdman]

Thanks Diane...

There are definitely bats in the area, they feed around the pond, and I've seen one chasing off a Swift at dusk one summer's evening.

Not sure where they roost though.

EDIT: Unfortunately, the link doesn't seem to work

[digi-birder]

EDIT: Unfortunately, the link doesn't seem to work

Still working for me. Try this one:
http://www.doncasterfinningleyairport.co.uk/mainfset/quest3.htm

If still no luck, go to the home page and navigate to the questions page.

[birdman]

Hmmm... nope, still no luck.

Tried the homepage before with a similar outcome. Maybe there's a setting somewhere that's blocking this. I'll try from home later.

:t:

[pete1950]

You say there are Bats feeding over a pond, does the pond contain any Crested Newts? As an aside I worked in the Lucky Seven bingo hall for a while, many moons ago, is it still there, a pink building if my memory serves me.

[birdman]

Hmmm... nope, still no luck.

Tried the homepage before with a similar outcome. Maybe there's a setting somewhere that's blocking this. I'll try from home later.

:t:
Still no luck from home!

[birdman]

You say there are Bats feeding over a pond, does the pond contain any Crested Newts? As an aside I worked in the Lucky Seven bingo hall for a while, many moons ago, is it still there, a pink building if my memory serves me.
Hmmm... Lucky Seven rings a bell...

Don't think there's newts in the pond.

Might have to find out if there are Badgers close by, although I suspect that info wouldn;t be in the public domain.

I spent some time on the draft letter and so left work late. Heard on the radio on the way home that John Prescott is a birder... think I'll add him to the distribution list. Not sure if I'll get much benefit from pestering Jarvis Cocker and Vic Reeves though!

[digi-birder]

Still no luck from home!

I can't get it now. It's saying Page Under Construction. Maybe they're doing some work on it.

Have you had a look at the pages of Doncaster Council's website:
http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/searchsite.asp?search=airport&x=16&y=6

That was where I found the link in the first place, while looking at their site for something else.

[pete1950]

[QUOTE

Might have to find out if there are Badgers close by, although I suspect that info wouldn;t be in the public domain.

![/QUOTE]

Your local wildlife group will have the info, though they might not disclose it to you, if there are any; they would certainly join in any campaign to protect them.

[birdman]

Well, I've sent off my letter of protest to my local MP.

I have discovered since Tuesday that it seems there is little, if any, genuine local support for this route. I was in conversation with a resident from the other side of the village yesterday evening who was leafleting, and he had spoken to about 80 people in the street, and not one was in favour.

Also plans might be further on that is generally known. It rather looks like it is council backed, with some other ulterior motive. The small ray of light would seem to be that our MP is opposed to the plan.

(I have also sent a copy to Mr. Prescott - you never know!)

At the same time, I have contacted and will hopefully receive favourable replies from the Doncaster Naturalists Society, the Bat Conservation Trust and the South Yorkshire Badger Group.

At the very least, I hope I can get some feedback on the status of the wildlife in the area.

Anyway, there's a community meeting on Saturday to try to determine just how popular this proposal is.

[digi-birder]

Well, I've sent off my letter of protest to my local MP.

I have discovered since Tuesday that it seems there is little, if any, genuine local support for this route. I was in conversation with a resident from the other side of the village yesterday evening who was leafleting, and he had spoken to about 80 people in the street, and not one was in favour.

Also plans might be further on that is generally known. It rather looks like it is council backed, with some other ulterior motive. The small ray of light would seem to be that our MP is opposed to the plan.

(I have also sent a copy to Mr. Prescott - you never know!)

At the same time, I have contacted and will hopefully receive favourable replies from the Doncaster Naturalists Society, the Bat Conservation Trust and the South Yorkshire Badger Group.

At the very least, I hope I can get some feedback on the status of the wildlife in the area.

Anyway, there's a community meeting on Saturday to try to determine just how popular this proposal is.

Hope the residents can get a good case together - sounds like you might have a lot of support there.

Doncaster Council? Ulterior motive? There's a surprise! ;)

[Andrew]

With all that info and support I am sure you are a potent force to be reckon with. All the best. :t:

[Nightranger]

I have been taklking by PM with Birdman and I have suggested the following (this is the full title, Dave):

Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINCs)

This is one of the least known areas for protection of a site. I have a feeling that it is locally issued like the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) so it may not have the clout of a SSSI or SPA designation but it could be useful for certain applications.

[birdman]

Thanks for those, Ian...

(I'm going to have to learn a lot rather quickly, it seems!)

[Bluetail]

Also plans might be further on that is generally known. It rather looks like it is council backed, with some other ulterior motive.Call me a cynic (coz I am), but I wonder whether there could be a developer in the background somewhere? I've often been amazed how councils have caved in to them in the face of the promise of local investment, jobs, housing etc etc. And a little greenfield site like yours might just fit the bill nicely. A scurrilous suggestion, of course...

[pete1950]

Call me a cynic (coz I am), but I wonder whether there could be a developer in the background somewhere? I've often been amazed how councils have caved in to them in the face of the promise of local investment, jobs, housing etc etc. And a little greenfield site like yours might just fit the bill nicely. A scurrilous suggestion, of course...


Unfortunately that's often the way.

[pauco]

Good luck birdman, fingers crossed, you get a result.:t:
bert.

[birdman]

Once again, thanks for all the help and messages of support. :t:

[pduxon]

Call me a cynic (coz I am), but I wonder whether there could be a developer in the background somewhere? I've often been amazed how councils have caved in to them in the face of the promise of local investment, jobs, housing etc etc. And a little greenfield site like yours might just fit the bill nicely. A scurrilous suggestion, of course...

I'm sure the merest thought hadn't even crossed their minds ;)

[Andy Ledger]

good luck Dave

I remember when there was all this furore over Cliffe I KNEW it would be stansted because they had already announced major new transport links.

In an interesting parallel to this, there are some in Medway who believe that Cliffe isn't actually off the table because of the construction of a new dual carriageway section of the A228 road out towards Allhallows/Grain. That's an interesting theory that doesn't take into account the amount of fatalities on the road, which does, after all, provide the only road transport link to Thamesport, and which really isn't suitable for the amount of HGV traffic on it at the moment. Personally, I always thought (hoped/prayed) that an airport at Cliffe was a sacrificial proposal due to it being so totally outrageous. Didn't stop 'em destroying the Lappell Bank on Sheppey, though, did it?

:-C

[birdman]

Community Meeting this morning... a reasonably good natured affair.

Difficult to guage the true depth of feeling either way... reckon about 60-40 south v north, but it was a meeting promoted by supporters of the southern route, and not made fully known to those who might object. Seemed to be quite a few minor officials there.

Apparently the Mayor has promised a full consultation study on all aspects of the southern route - this seemed new, but not sure.

There will be more meetings and perhaps a vote.

More writing to be done though!

[diggerin]

Hi birdman,whilst I am not an enthusiast as the members here undoubtably are,I also am interested in preseving any wild life.
I just felt I had to put my position on record,and this message should not be regarded as an attack.
I led the campaign for the airport,starting in October 1996,when we stopped the proposed prison. I don't know whether you are aware,but the southern route,was the first choice many years ago now. You will remember the Rossington Hall scenario. This is now gone. However,Rossington Parish Council,and the Rossington forum,have campaigned for the southern route,in some form,for some years now. There has been much public discussion. The only reason this route was left out of the consultation was for political reasons. Nothing to do with the route,just the involvement oif one person.
In my humble opinion,the route must go across Stripe Road,and be well south of Rossington Bridge (parrots corner to you and I-kind of appropriate). As you know,there is a major haulage company,McGregor Cory,with premises well to the south on Stripe Road. I have no doubt that their vehicles would use the new route as access to the motorway. If the route is to the north,the consequences are obvious. Added to that,any addition to the junction at Rossington Bridge is unthinkable.

I promise I do understand you concern about the southern route. I know the area,and it is simply beautiful.
All the best.

[David FG]

If you haven't already, it might be useful to contact the CPRE (address and number will be in the book) they are the environmental group who really specialise in planning matters and will certainly have a great deal of expertise in this area. (I have to declare an interest as a CPRE District chairman!)

[birdman]

If you haven't already, it might be useful to contact the CPRE (address and number will be in the book) they are the environmental group who really specialise in planning matters and will certainly have a great deal of expertise in this area. (I have to declare an interest as a CPRE District chairman!)
Thanks for the tip, David. Another avenue to pursue.

[birdman]

Hi birdman,whilst I am not an enthusiast as the members here undoubtably are,I also am interested in preseving any wild life.
I just felt I had to put my position on record,and this message should not be regarded as an attack.
I led the campaign for the airport,starting in October 1996,when we stopped the proposed prison. I don't know whether you are aware,but the southern route,was the first choice many years ago now. You will remember the Rossington Hall scenario. This is now gone. However,Rossington Parish Council,and the Rossington forum,have campaigned for the southern route,in some form,for some years now. There has been much public discussion. The only reason this route was left out of the consultation was for political reasons. Nothing to do with the route,just the involvement oif one person.
In my humble opinion,the route must go across Stripe Road,and be well south of Rossington Bridge (parrots corner to you and I-kind of appropriate). As you know,there is a major haulage company,McGregor Cory,with premises well to the south on Stripe Road. I have no doubt that their vehicles would use the new route as access to the motorway. If the route is to the north,the consequences are obvious. Added to that,any addition to the junction at Rossington Bridge is unthinkable.

I promise I do understand you concern about the southern route. I know the area,and it is simply beautiful.
All the best.Thanks for your input, diggerin. I do not take this as an attack in any way, and I am happy to hear your views.

The McGregor Cory situation, is indeed a pertinent one, and I certainly cannot back up my "feeling" with any definite figures, but at the moment, I expect that any nationally southbound traffic from the haulier would go south along Stripe Road, and then either make its way to Blyth and the A1 or perhaps Maltby and the M1, What route they take northbound, I do not know.

Any access to the M18 at Jct 3 is obviously going to be attractive, but with effective traffic management, the problem of lorries coming through the village (if the Northern Route goes ahead) can be addressed.

There are already significant traffic calming measures in the village to make a "shortcut" a no-go, although this leaves the Stripe Road - Station Road option available. In my opinion efforts can and should be made to discourage (or preferably prevent) lorry access through the village. Whatever business decisions that were made by McGregor Cory that encouraged them to set up where they are, direct access to the M18 wasn't one of them, and they would be no worse off.

It has to be said, though, that Stripe Road is an awful location to join the major routes from and yours is a valid point... one of many that need to be balanced.

Incidentally, the new Environmental Dept. Flood Risk maps show an interesting result, in so much as one of the major cited problems of the Northen Route is the flooding potential of the River Torne. The new maps would seem to suggest that the risk is siginificantly greater for the Southern Route!

I do disagree that the route must cross Stripe Road, although I acknowledge your point of view. There seems to be some groundswell of opinion that the link must come from Jct 3, but it may be that the final outcome is a change to a link from Jct 4.

[Grampy Bustard]

Just don't bother going to Fillingley.....go to Leeds and use Jet2.com...it will keep me in a job!

[diggerin]

Hi again birdman. I think we have communicated on finairweb. Just a short message this time. I assume you are aware that McGregor Cory travel south,then through Tickhill and Maltby to access the motorway at Hellaby. I have no doubt they will use the link wherever it is. Incidentally,apart from Donnygate,I have no idea how they got planning permission to operate from where they are,but we are stuck with it. Neither route makes any difference to me personally,but as you say there has to be a balance. Apart from other considerations,the route from junc 4,would have similar problems to the ones you describe at Rossington,via the southern route. There are other good reasons why j4 is not suitable.

[diggerin]

Just don't bother going to Fillingley.....go to Leeds and use Jet2.com...it will keep me in a job!

Sorry,but Finningley opens on 16th.March,2005. Not very easy access to Leeds airport from Doncaster,but I really do hope you keep your job. That,for me,is what Finningley is all about.

[diggerin]

Just read one of your later messages again,birdman. You mention that the southern route is more in danger of flooding. To be honest I can't see that. Tickhill would have to be under water.

[diggerin]

Hi birdman. I checked the Environment Agency flood mao yesterday. I could not find ANY flood risk to the south of Rossington. I checked well south. To be fair,little risk for the northern route either.

Read comments on another thread re Potteric Carr. It is just worth a mention that this reserve could not be nearer to a motorway,and a railway,and is thriving. Perhaps we fear too much.

[birdman]

Hi birdman. I checked the Environment Agency flood mao yesterday. I could not find ANY flood risk to the south of Rossington. I checked well south. To be fair,little risk for the northern route either.
I will need to check both the flood map and the proposed southern route map again to be sure - the latter is the one I'm having trouble finding - but I'm sure I recall there was a certain (and I agree relatively minor) flood risk along the Torne, from Parrots corner upstream past Rossington and around the pit area. I've got to be honest and say I don't know why I put "significantly greater". Can't even blame the time of day! I try to be accurate at all times, so I would say that the risk appeared to be about the same... reiterating my caveat that I haven't been able to superimpose one map on top of the other. As the flood risk has been cited as a problem, it's only fair to note it is not confined to the northern route.

Whatever the outcome, though, I hope to God the wrong decision isn't made for the wrong reason... the spectre of Donnygate still lingers!


Read comments on another thread re Potteric Carr. It is just worth a mention that this reserve could not be nearer to a motorway,and a railway,and is thriving. Perhaps we fear too much.
Perhaps... although it thrives in spite of, not because of...

[diggerin]

Morning birdman. Did you go to the Rossington meeting last night. If so what did you make of it.

[diggerin]

Incidetally,birdman. If you didn't go,why not ? The meeting was well publicised and it was on your topic. Northern route versus southern !!

[birdman]

Yes I did go, diggerin, although I didn't speak as I am far too uncomfortable to do so in public.

I have an number of opinions about the meeting, and I have expressed these views privately to the Mayor, and to our MP's representative.

I must take the opposing view about the meeting being well publicised, because I do not believe it was. I was informed by telephone from another gentleman against the Southern Route, and spread the word a little myself.

Every single person I spoke to was unaware the meeting was taking place, and I would say that 75% of those I have spoken to who (due to either the location of their property, or usage of the area on the Southern corridor) probably oppose the southern route are still unaware that the Southern proposal exists!

I do not like to be cynical, but I fear that the local councillors who are in favour of the Southern route have taken advantage of certain availability of resources to promote their view, whilst opponents have had to rely on word of mouth and leafletting.

That said, I do get the impression that the Mayor is being as impartial as he possibly can, and as I speak from a largely "environmental" point of view, I was pleased to hear him stress "Quality of Life" as an important factor in the future of the village and town.

I would like to think I would be of the same opinion had the original decision been different, but the fact that the indepent feasilbility studies did not put the southern route into the top 2 must surely be relevant, and a major factor in the Mayor's final decisionmaking.

I know I have very different views in general from Joe Public, as will many of the people who contribute to this forum, because our views are essentially wildlife/nature/environment-centric, and will necessarily influence our wider opinions on what is important in life. I hope that the Mayor feels there is enough opposition for the right reasons, to reject the southern option, be it narrow or wide.

Whatever happens, I hope to God the wrong decision is not made for the wrong reasons.

And I do wish a few more people would look past the dollar signs... but I guess that's just a fact of 21st century life.:-C

[diggerin]

BirdmanThere were some 350 people at the meeting. How did they know.

[diggerin]

With all due respect,birdman,you cannot know the politics which went into the reason the southern route was left off consultation. Phil Cole hinted at it in his tirade. He is the husband of Caroline Flint MP.

[birdman]

BirdmanThere were some 350 people at the meeting. How did they know.
Well...

I do not like to be cynical, but I fear that the local councillors who are in favour of the Southern route have taken advantage of certain availability of resources to promote their view, whilst opponents have had to rely on word of mouth and leafletting.

[birdman]

With all due respect,birdman,you cannot know the politics which went into the reason the southern route was left off consultation. Phil Cole hinted at it in his tirade. He is the husband of Caroline Flint MP.
I gathered as much, although I did not know it beforehard.

The likelihood is that out of all the readers of this thread, only you and I were at the meeting, so I think it is only fair to say that Mr. Cole was not the only speaker to engage in a "tirade".

As for me, I am not a political animal... not strictly true I guess, but I'm not a Party Political animal, so if there are any "politics" behind any of the decisions made, then they do not change my views one iota.

To be fair, again, I think you are incorrect to say the the southern route was left off consultation. It was one of 6 routes for which the consultative studies were carried out, and was third ranked of those 6. At least that's the way I understood the explanation of the consultants' representitive.

Then the top 2 plus the "do minimum" option were put to the public vote.

I would like to think I would be of the same opinion had the original decision been different, but the fact that the indepent feasilbility studies did not put the southern route into the top 2 must surely be relevant, and a major factor in the Mayor's final decisionmaking.

[diggerin]

Hello again, When I referred to consultation on the southern route,it was public consultation. The company carrying out the work for Doncaster Council,were told prior to the PUBLIC consultation,to leave out the southern one. This came from people in Doncaster,and I can tell you it had nothing to do with any feasability study carried out by the company. In effect it was related to a previous application by Rossington Hall Development Co.
There is more,but to be honest it has little to do with which is or was the best route. You may be pleased to know however,that I am willing to take odds on the northern route winning,whatever the right route may be.

There are still things happening in Doncaster that are really frightening,and if we had a good local press,would at least be less likely.

Anyway,good luck to you all. I wish you no harm.

[birdman]

Hello again, When I referred to consultation on the southern route,it was public consultation. The company carrying out the work for Doncaster Council,were told prior to the PUBLIC consultation,to leave out the southern one. This came from people in Doncaster,and I can tell you it had nothing to do with any feasability study carried out by the company. In effect it was related to a previous application by Rossington Hall Development Co.
There is more,but to be honest it has little to do with which is or was the best route.
You clearly know more about the history of this than I do, so I am happy to take you at your word. I certainly know very little about the Rosso Hall Development Co.

I am aware of previous (ongoing?) plans to turn the area (at least my specific patch) into a Country Park (which I would broadly be in favour of) or a Golf Course (which I would be broadly ambivalent to).


You may be pleased to know however,that I am willing to take odds on the northern route winning,whatever the right route may be.

Not so sure... but before the meeting I thought the southern option was a done deal...

There are still things happening in Doncaster that are really frightening,and if we had a good local press,would at least be less likely.
Again, the former I'll take your word for... the latter I agree with.


Anyway,good luck to you all. I wish you no harm.
Likewise and likewise. :t:

[justkate]

First of all Hi :-) this is my first post on this forum


I must take the opposing view about the meeting being well publicised, because I do not believe it was. I was informed by telephone from another gentleman against the Southern Route, and spread the word a little myself.

Every single person I spoke to was unaware the meeting was taking place, and I would say that 75% of those I have spoken to who (due to either the location of their property, or usage of the area on the Southern corridor) probably oppose the southern route are still unaware that the Southern proposal exists!


I have to agree with you, because I only heard about the meeting after the event. And it is only after reading this board that I had an idea of the route of each suggested road. All the official bumpf just refers to a Northern or Southern route which seems a bit vague.

Personally, I prefer the southern route, because I fear the northern one would bring a huge increase in the levels of traffic passing through this part of the village. Yes, I know traffic calming could be brought into play, but how effective this would be is debatable. The current road safety improvements have simply diverted traffic onto quieter streets, well, they were quieter LOL

Having said that, I can see your point. We are fortunate that this village is surrounded by beautiful countryside, and any new road is going to impact on that, whatever it's route.

bye,
Kate

[birdman]

Welcome to BirdForum, and "Hi" Kate.

Thanks for posting your views here.

Yes, after all the efforts that were made to publicise the original public vote, it seems similar efforts were not forthcoming subsequently and almost everyone who picked anything up has done so by word of mouth.

Also, I'd like to agree with you regarding the current traffic calming measures which do seem to encourage drivers to cut through the quieter streets, as you say.

Clearly to be a useful measure any traffic calming has to be fully considered as part of the whole solution.

That has a little more relevence now and I (and all the other residents in the village, so I guess you too Kate) have received a letter from the Mayor today, to say that the plan is to go ahead with the Northern route, adding a spur to the pit area to keep lorries out of the village guiding them straight onto the motorway.

It is not a complete "victory" for me and the likeminded as our Mayor has left open the possibility of future consultation and "development" of the area to the south of the village for the improvement of the village, but it is certainly good news for now.

As and when any future proposals are put forward, then I shall have to state my case again, if the reasons are still sound (I am confident they would be), but for the time being I shall continue to enjoy my birding.

Kate, if you are a birder (and even if you are not) why not spend some time around the duck pond..? See what you can see.


All the best :t:

[birdman]

Well it was late at night as I posted last to this thread.

This morning, I have been pondering the reasons behind the Mayor’s decision, and I think it is fair to say that available funding was high on the list of factors for him making a decision which, at least publicly, he has said differs from his personal opinion.

However, I would like to think that the actions and opinions of some of the residents of the village, myself included, have contributed in some small way to the decision he has made.

If I am going to take some credit, then I must of course acknowledge and thank all of you who helped me put together “my case”, either in this thread or by private message.

I hope you will forgive me for mentioning no names, but any advice and help given in this thread is there for all to see, and to those who contacted me privately, I will continue respect you privacy.

Suffice it to say that all help and advice was gratefully, and I hope graciously, received and I would like to express my sincere thanks to you all.

Likewise to those who lent moral and verbal support, I too send my grateful thanks.

Dave

:t: :t: :t: