In
early
February
1999, Sustrans
got
cracking
on
preparatory
work
for
the
construction
of
their
cyleway
and
footpath
along
the
edge
of
the
disused
Mickle
trafford
railway.
Work
interestingly
commenced
just
behind
The
Glen,
where,
you
will
remember,
there
was
considerable-
apparently
successful-
resident
objection
to
an
access
gate.
This
open
letter
from Graeme
Lyall puts
Sustrans'
placatory
statement
that
"There
will
be
a
loss
of
saplings
along
the
very
bottom
of
the
embankment" into
its
true
light:
"Dear
City
Councillors,
I
ask
that
you
all
find
the
time
to
go
down
to
the
old
Blacon
station
/
'The
Glen'
site
and
see
for
yourself
the
wholesale
destruction
that
has
been
taking
place
in
the
past
week
in
the
name
of
installing
a
two
metre
wide
footpath
/
cycleway!
It
is
utter
madness
that
such
a
"scorched
earth"
policy
has
been
allowed
just
in
case
the
Busway
gets
through
the
public
enquiry
and
then
meets
the
even
bigger
hurdle
of
securing
the
funding
necessary
to
proceed.
Those
of
you
able
enough
should
also
walk
as
far
as
the
track
adjoining
the
cemetery
to
see
the
size
of
the
log
pile
and
the
girth
of
the
trees
they
have
cut
down.
Now
imagine
this
along
the
whole
length
of
the
track
and
the
effect
it
will
have
on
the
skyline.
The
track
that
backs
onto
to
Thirlemere
Rd
and
Chatsworth
Drive
will
be
witness
to
some
of
the
worst
destruction
in
my
opinion.
I
especially
urge
those
of
you
who
are
on
the
planning
sub
committee
to
go
and
witness
what
you
have
allowed
to
happen.
Next
week
will
be
too
late.
I
would
be
grateful
to
hear
your
responses".
"I
have
today
been
along
the
old
Railway
track
near
Blacon
and
was
appalled
to
see
the
extent
of
the
clearance
being
made
in
order
to
install
the
"Cycleway".
Let
me
remind
readers
that
this
part
of
the
old
trackbed
is
not
even
included
in
the
first
phase
of
the
Busway
proposal
(and
even
that
still
hasn't
got
planning
permission).
There
was
therefore
absolutely
no
need
to
devastate
the
vegetation
in
this
way.
We
were
advised
that
this
was
to
be
"undergrowth
&
shrub
clearance"
and
yet
trees
with
a
trunk
diameter
of
over
one
foot
have
been
felled,
which
is
certainly
not
necessary
in
order
to
install
a
footpath/
cycleway.
It
appears
that
Sustrans
have
been
"conned"
into
doing
the
Council's
dirty
work
for
them.
Given
the
extent
of
the
removal
of
the
hedgerows
and
vegetation,
there
is
going
to
be
massive
disruption
to
the
wildife
in
the
area.
To
all
readers
with
properties
adjacent
to
the
line
in
the
Hoole
area,
I
strongly
urge
you
to
have
a
look
at
what
is
being
done
in
Blacon.
IT'S
YOUR
TURN
NEXT.
Make
your
local
councillors
aware
of
how
you
feel.
To
all
our
Local
and
County
Councillors
and
prospective
candidates:
I
would
urge
you
to
have
a
look
at
the
line
too-
see
what
you
are
being
asked
to
approve
in
order
to
allow
for
future
Busway
development.
Then
be
very
clear
in
your
manifestos
as
to
what
you
believe
is
the
correct
future
for
the
line.
The
electorate
has
a
right
to
know".
We
visited
the
area
on
February
9th,
just
after
a
surprise
fall
of
snow,
and
were
indeed
horrified
at
the
destruction
that
had
already
taken
place.
After
taking
photographs-
and
some conversations
with
irate
locals-
we
contacted
the
city
council
landscape
officer
with
responsibility
for
the
old
railway
line, Tom
Walker,
in
order
to
draw
his
attention
to
the
situation.
An
interesting
conversation
followed,
during
which
the
courteous
Mr
Walker
expressed
the
opinion
that
"in
his
view
Sustrans
had
gone
'over
the
top'
with
their
clearance
work".
Unfortunately,
he
told
us
that
there
was
little
that
the
city
council
could
do
as
Sustrans
had
planning
permission,
and
we
should
therefore
direct
our
complaints
to
them.
Upon
contacting
a
harrassed-sounding Peter
Foster at
the
Sustrans
local
office
in
Crewe,
we
were
told
that
"all
necessary
precautions
were
being
taken
to
ensure
as
little
damage
as
possible
was
being
done
to
the
trees"
(?
See
illustration)
and
that
they
also
were
unhappy
about
having
to
rip
up
the
edge
of
the
embankment
when
their
normal
practise
would,
of
course,
be
to
construct
their
cycletrack
down
the
centre
of
the
old
track
bed,
where
virtually
no
damage
would
have
been
done.
This,
we
need
hardly
remind
you,
is
not
possible
here
because
of
the
stipulation
that
this
central
area
should
be
reserved
for
the
possible
future
construction
of
the
Busway.
Mr
Foster
also
told
us
that,
because
of
the
NIMBY
campaign
waged
by
the
residents
of
Cranleigh
Crescent
and
The
Glen
against
bicycle
and
foot
access
to
their
estates,
the
access
ramp
was
having
to
be
constructed
next
to
the
road
bridge
instead,
and
hence
the
extensive
clearance
work.
Nontheless,
we
gather
that
there
has
been
a
very
large
number
of
complaints
by
local
residents,
and,
at
the
planning
committee
meeting
at
Chester
Town
Hall
the
following
day-10th
February-
the
director
of
the
CDTS
scheme,
Mr Carlton
Roberts-James responded
to
these
by
declaring
before
all
the
assembled
councillors
and
members
of
the
public
that all
clearance
work
on
the
line
had
now
stopped pending
an
investigation.
Left: The Mickle Trafford-Deeside railway as viewed from Newton Lane Bridge on a frosty day back in February 1955. (Thanks to Ralph Hodgkinson- who drove trains on this route throughout his career and still lives in one of the houses on the right- for the picture).
How
very
curious
then,
that
we
should
have
been
contacted
by
residents
the
very
next
morning
to
inform
us
that
tree
felling
was in
progress
on
the
stretch
of
line
next
to
Brook
Lane!
We
visited
the
area
that
afternoon,
together
with
other
members
of
the
local
community-
and
even
the
odd
county
councillor
put
in
an
appearance-
and
saw
the
stumps
of
what
had
been
some
very
large
sycamore
trees
which
had
once
proudly
stood well
to
the
side of
the
course
of
the
planned
cycletrack.
We
were
told
that
these
had
been
removed
because
"their
branches
were
overhanging",
and
also
learned
that
orders
had
been
given
to
clear
the
area
for ten
metres to
each
side
(in
other
words,
almost
the
entire
width
of
the
track
bed
and
embankment)
to
allow
access
for
the
heavy
machinery
which
would
be
used
to
construct
a
mere
three
metre
wide
path.
The
driver
of
a
JCB
parked
nearby
denied
all
knowledge
of
any
orders
to
cease
work.
It
would
therefore
seem
that
our
planning
sub-committee
had
experienced
a
little
of
the
Busway
lobby's
'alternative'
version
of
the
truth
that
has
become
familiar
to
all
those
other
citzens
who
had
attempted
to
express
their
opposition
to
this
folly.
Mr
Carlton-James
told
them
all
work
had
stopped.
It
had
not.
What
did
this
mean?
At
he
same
council
meeting,
he
was
also
asked
about
the
legality
of
destroying
environments
where
birds
were
constructing
nests-
forbidden
under
the
terms
of
the
Wildlife
and
Countryside
Act.
He
said
he
didn't
know
anything
about
that
(isn't
it
his
job
to
know?)-
but
that
no
doubt
all
necessary
precautions
were
being
taken.
Sustrans' Peter
Foster was
clear
that
no
nesting
was
yet
taking
place,
and
that
was
why
they
were
doing
the
work
at
this
time.
Which
shows
what
he
knows.
It
may
have
been
February,
but
we
had
been
watching
the
birds
coming
and
going
with
nesting
material
for
some
time
previously.
Ironically,
the
very
next
day,
the
local
press
reported
the
welcome
news
that
the
pair
of
Ravens
that
have
nested
and
reared
their
young
for
the
last
few
years
on
the
towers
of
the
Town
Hall
and
Cathedral
were
back-
building
a
nest!
A
local
'twitcher'
was
quoted
as
saying
that
"Since
the
weekend
I've
been
watching
them
taking
twigs
to
the
nest..."
So
were
Sustrans
breaking
the
law?
Was
Carlton-James
lying
through
his
teeth
or
was
it
the
'experts'
paid
to
advise
him?
You
may,
along
with
us,
have
become
wearily
familiar with
numerous
references
to
the
fact
that
"three
councils
are
working
together
to carry
the
city
forward into
the
next
century".
That
is,
Chester
city,
Cheshire
county
AND
Flintshire
County
Councils.
You
may,
therefore,
have
been
as
surprised
as
we
were
to
discover
that
over-the-border
enthusiasm
for
the
great
white
elephant
was
somewhat
less
fervent
than
Cheshire
planners
would
have
had
us
believe.
In
fact,
Saltney
Green
Party
councillor Klaus
Armstrong
Braun declared
that
Flintshire
County
Council
were
"very
unlikely"
to
ever
proceed
with
developing
their
end
of
the
disused
line.
He
told
us
that,
although
the
proposals
were
being
'looked
at'
by
transport
and
highways
officers,
when
it
came
down
to
it
Flintshire
councillors
were
likely
to
be
less-than-happy
at
the
idea
of
coughing
up
millions
of
pounds
in
order
to
help
bail
Chester
out
the
problems
it
has
created
for
itself
through
years
of
backward
transport
planning.
This
view
was
largely
concurred
with
by
their
Transport
Officer, David
Blaney who
was
"most
uncertain
that
the
Welsh
end
of
the
CDTS
would
ever
go
ahead",
that
"there
would
be
no
funding
available
for
at
least
the
next
five
years
and
that
there
was
not
even
an
allocated
timescale
for
any
further
planning".
Curiously,
though,
Flintshire's
shiny-new
cycling
officer, Richard
Flood was
of
the
opinion
that
"progress
on
Phase
III
was
proceeding
as
planned".
Who
was
right?
It
all
seemed
to
make
the
acronym
CDTS,
which
of
course
stands
for
'Chester-DEESIDE
Transport
System'
suddenly
sound
rather
misleading,
what?
On March
19th
1998,
to
the
surprise
of
nobody
at
all,
the Chester
Chronicle once
again
showed
its
unbiased
openmindedness
on
the
Busway
issue
with
its
frontpage
headline:
"Why
YOU
should
support
the
Busway
bid"
together
with
a
two
page
centre
spread-
headlined
"Ambitious
£7
million
transport
system
will
provide
a
'green'
option
for
commuters
and
ease
traffic
congestion
in
busy
city
centre"-
and
featuring
those
by-now
familiar artist's
impressions of
the
completed
scheme
(seeming
to
appear
almost
as
wide
as
the
M6)
and
the
unholy
alliance
of
CDTS
steering
group
members
Bailey,
Byrne
and
Hale
hovering
over
that
scale
model
of
the
Busway
that
so
impressed
small
boys
of
all
ages
at
last
year's European
Transport
Summit.
Among
all
the
pretty
pictures
and
assurances
that
the
busway
would
mean
the
end
of
traffic
congestion
as
we
know
it
were
one
or
two
more
pertinent
facts
relating
to
the
small
matter
of
funding.
Phase
I,
we
were
told-
the
section
running
from
a
1,200
space
car
park
on
greenbelt
land
at Mannings
Lane into
the
city
centre-
would
cost
an
estimated
£7
million,
EXCLUDING
the
Park
and
Ride,
which
would
cost
a
further
£3.5
million.
The
entire
three-phase
project
running
all
the
way
to
Deeside
(Oh
yes?
see
above)
was
estimated
to
cost
at
least
£50
million
(Although
judging
by
the
contemporary
scandalous
hike
in
costings
for
the
proposed
buslane
to
the Chester
Business
Park any
such
proffered
figures
were
considered
at
the
very
least
unreliable).
After
discussions
with
the
Department
of
Environment,
we
were
told,
it
was
decided
that
the
scheme
was
"not
deemed
suitable"
for
a
joint
public/private
venture.
(ie
it
was
judged
likely
to
prove
embarrassingly
difficult
to
get
the
private
sector
to
cough
up
good
money
to
fund
a
white
elephant
without
at
the
same
time
allowing
them
free
rein
over
all
that
'wasted'
greenbelt
land
around
the
Park
and
Ride.
Mind
you,
if
Tescos
and
the
like
got
their
way,
this
was
likely
to
happen
anyway).
Instead,
the
project
may
be
funded
as
a
major
named
scheme,
extracting
at
least
£5
million
out
of
the
Local
Public
Transport
Plan.
What
sort
of
a
shortfall
in
funding
for
all
other
areas
of
Chester's
already-struggling
public
transport
needs
this
would
result
in
hadn't
of
course
been
mentioned.
Central
government
was
expected
to
cover
around
75%
of
borrowing
requirements
through
the
Revenue
Support
Grant,
and
local
council
tax
and
business
rate
payers
would
be
asked
to
pick
up
some
of
the
debt
repayment,
though "it
is
not
known
how
great
this
burden
will
be".
Not
much
it
wasn't.
Did
we
hear
alarm
bells
ringing?
Another
round
of
'public
consultation'
got
under
way
on
22nd
March
1998 when
glossy
leaflets
started
dropping
onto
200,000
doormats
in
the
Chester
area,
with,
interestingly,
an
entirely
different
leaflet
being
delivered
to
those
homes
situated
within
200
yards
(we
kid
you
not)
of
the
line.
In
addition,
public
exhibitions
were
held
at
two
locations
in
the
city-
25th
March
for
three
days
at
the
New
Scene
Youth
Club
in
Newton
Lane
and
then
for
five
days
in
a
caravan
parked
in
the
Town
Hall
Square
from
April
7-11th.
Officers
from
the
city
and
county
councils
were
in
attendance
"to
explain
the
scheme
in
greater
detail".
Comment
forms
were
available
at
these
exhibitions
so
members
of
the
public
were
able
to
submit
their
views
to
the
planners
and
a
decision
would
then
be
taken
whether
to
submit
a
formal
planning
application
to
Deputy
Prime
Minister John
Prescott.
The Chester
Chronicle operates
an
'archive'
search
facility
at
its website.
Tellingly,
searching
for
articles
on
20th
March
1999
under
'Mickle
Trafford',
'Busway',
'CDTS',
'Sustrans'
etc
all
yielded
the
result
"No
articles
found"...
It
was
illuminating
to
note
that,
while
the
22nd
April
edition
of
the Chester
and
District
Standard contained nineletters
of
objection
to
the
busway,
the
following
day's Chronicle contained none
at
all!
Why
should
this
have
been?
Had
objectors
given
up
writing
to
the
Chron,
knowing
that
organ's
declared
bias
upon
the
subject?
("Why
YOU
should
support
the
CDTS"
etc
etc)
Or
did
it
actually
receive
equally
large
amounts
of
mail
objecting
to
CDTS-
and
simply
chose
not
print
them?
This
obvious
imbalance
between
Busway
reporting
and
comment
in
the Standard and Evening
Leader on
one
hand
and
the Chronicle on
the
other
has
in
fact
remained
constant
throughout
the
years
of
the
Busway
struggle,
as
is
made
obvious here.
The
following
week's
edition
was
very
different
however.
When
the
story
of
the
CDTS
project
manager's
sabotaging
of
a Hoole
resident's
meeting
broke
(see
below)
the
Chron,
having
effectively
alienated
much
of
its
readership
as
a result
of
its
rabidly
pro-Busway
stance,
found
itself-
long
after
the
rest
of
the
local
press
had
got
their
stories
sorted-
having
to
ring
round
members
of
the
public
to
find
out
what
had
been
going
on.
One
of
our
regular
contributors
was
contacted
by
a reporter
attempting
to
learn
if
a new
meeting
had
been
arranged,
and
who
retorted
to
criticism
of
his
rag's
blatant
bias
by
stating,
"We
always
print
every
letter
we
get"-
and
then
abruptly
hanging
up.
Many
long-term
objectors
to
CDTS
and
other
local
planning
idiocies
recognised
this
as
an
absurd
claim,
but
nontheless,
the
message
seemed
to
have
sunk
in,
as
the
letters
section
of
the
30th
April
edition
devoted an
entire
page,
to
reader's
criticisms
of
the
busway- including
those
retrieved
from
the
wastebasket
which
had
already
appeared
in
other
papers
over
the
last
few
weeks.
We
warmly
welcomed
the
Chron
to
the
REAL
debate,
and
looked
forward
to
their
continuing
recognition
of,
and
respect
for,
the
views
of
the
overwhelming
majority
of
its
readers
regarding
the
folly
that
is
CDTS,
but
such
an
event
never
occured
again.
Around
this
time,
posters
appeared
around
the
Hoole
area
informing
the
local
populace
that
a
public
meeting
to
explore
the
many
issues
associated
with
the
planned
conversion
of
the
disused
Mickle
Trafford-Deeside
railway
into
a
guided
busway
was
to
be
held
at
Newton
County
Primary
school
on 28th
April
1999.
Early
in
the
morning
on
the
day
before
this
meeting
was
due
to
take
place,
we
were
contacted
by
a
concerned
resident
informing
us
that
it
had
been
cancelled
"at
the
request
of
the
organisers"
due
to
the
fact
that
the
head
teacher
of
the
school, Eileen
Harding,
had
been
made
aware
of
possible
'problems'
arising
as
a
result
of
the
high
degree
of
public
feeling
over
the
issue.
A
phone
call
to
the
school
secretary
(the
headmistress
was
unfortunately
'unavailable')
assured
us
that
"the
school
had
absolutely
no
part
in
cancelling
the
meeting
and
had
no
knowledge
of
the
circumstances
leading
to
this
decision".
How
interesting,
therefore,
to
discover
that
the
project
manager
of
the
CDTS
scheme, Mr
Carlton
Roberts-James had
shortly
before,
"at
the
request
of
candidates
and
local
members"-
taken
it
upon
himself
to
telephone
Mrs
Harding-
without
first
attempting
to
contact
the
organisers-
allegedly
to
'find
out'
about
the
meeting:
"We
understood
there
had
been
a
public
meeting
organised...
but
the
county
did
not
hear
about
it
formerly
or
receive
any
invitations". Were
they
expecting
one? (He
has
stated
that
County
Councillor Molly
Hale made
this
request
of
him-
a
claim
which
she
flatly
denied.
Cllr
Hale
had
nontheless
succeeded
admirably
in
stirring
up
local
feelings
about
the
Busway
as
a
result
of
her
abruptness
in
dealing
with
people
attempting
to
express
their
concerns
to
her
about
it-
to
the
degree
of
turning
her
back
and
walking
away
when
challenged
on
the
issue)
Patently
miffed
about
not
being
invited
to
the
party,
and
during
the
course
of
a
"clear
and
frank
discussion"
(his
words),
Roberts-James
then
took
the
trouble
to
enlighten
the
head
teacher
upon
matters
such
as:
- Health and safety issues
- What did she know of the 'responsible organisers'?
- What arrangements had been made for the control of potentially large numbers of people?
- Was this an appropriate use of school premises? (ie Council property?)
In
addition,
it
appears
that
hints
were
dropped
to
the
headmistress
that,
due
to
the
divisive
nature
of
the
subject
under
discussion,
there
would
be
a possibility
of
'trouble'
arising
during
the
course
of
the
meeting:
"It
was
suggested
that
pro-CDTS
supporters
may
turn
up
and
cause
a 'volatile
situation'"
(sounds
more
like
an
old-fashioned
football
match
than
a gathering
of
civilised
citzens-
and
not
too
complimentary
to
CDTS
supporters
either,
If
any
such
actually
exist.
Or
was
he
referring
to
councillors?)
References
were
made
by
him
of
problems
arising
at
an
earlier
meeting,
which
was
"attended
by
250
people"-
the
nature
of
which
were
entirely
mysterious
to
us.
Roberts-James
stated
that
"No
attempt
was
made
by
him
to
persuade
her
to
cancel
the
meeting"
and
the
school
is
equally
adamant
that
it
was
"The
decision
of
the
organisers
to
take
this
step".
He
added,
"I
have
experience
in
organising
public
meetings,
and
there
were
reservations
expressed
about
the
numbers
turning
up".
Reservations
expressed
by
whom?
And
how
was
he
to
know
what
numbers
would
turn
up?
Nontheless,
soon
after
his
'little
talk',
an
approach
was
made
by
the
school
to
one
of
those
residents
involved
in
calling
the
meeting-
unconnected,
naturally,
with
the
fact
that
his
children
attend
the
school
and
his
wife
is
employed
by
them-
questioning
his
wisdom
in
continuing
with
the
event,
in
the
light
of
this
new
knowledge
regarding
large
numbers
of
attendees
including
potentially
'unruly'
elements.
Right: This evocative photograph shows the old railway as it appeared on a snowy day back in February 1955 as locomotive 62661 roars towards us after passing under Newton Lane Bridge.
Wishing
merely
to
give
local
people
a chance
to
express
their
views
upon
the
proposed
busway
scheme-
independent
of
the
Town
Hall
and
its
widely-distrusted
and
discredited
'consultation'
exercises,
and
aiming
to
commence
a process
of
organised
neighbourhood
opposition
to
the
CDTS-
but
sensing
the
potential
folly
of
crossing
the
'powers
that
be' regarding
the
well-being
of
his
family,
this
individual
seemingly
concurred
with
the
newly-acquired
concerns
of
the
headmistress
and
unilaterally
cancelled
the
meeting.
Much,
needless
to
say,
to
the
frustration
of
those
many
other-
and
unconsulted-
members
of
the
community
who
had
much
to
contribute
to
and
learn
from
it-
but
allowing
the
school
and
council
to
deny
that
the
decision
to
cancel
was
theirs.
We
wondered
at
the
role
of
the
school's
governors-
who
were
responsible
for
the
hiring
out
of
the
premises
in
the
evening
and
at
weekends-
in
all
this.
Were
they
ever
consulted
regarding
this
decision
to
exclude
members
of
their
local
community
from
the
premises
in
this
shabby
fashion?
As
a result
of
the
short
notice
of
cancellation,
around
70
people
actually
turned
up
at
the
school
expecting
to
attend
the
meeting.
As
it
was
a lovely
evening,
many
stayed
for
an
hour
or
more
getting
to
know
each
other,
comparing
views
and
exchanging
phone
numbers,
email
adresses
and
websites,
so
the
evening
turned
out
to
be
far
from
a waste
of
time.
So
here
we
had
a
snapshot
of
the
sorry
state
of
local
democracy
in
the
city
of
Chester
during
the
final
year
of
the
Twentieth
Century.
Glossy
leaflets,
exhibitions
in
the
Town
Hall
Square
and
unlimited
budgets
for
the
proposers.
Lies,
fear-mongering
and
veiled
threats
for
the
opposers.
And,
despite
years
of
obverwhelming
opposition
to
CDTS
within
the letters
pages of
the
local
press
and
elsewhere,
a
mere
handfull
of
councillors
with
the
courage
to
represent
them.
Did
you
notice how
prospective
candidates
in
the
1999
council
elections
seemed
to
be
reluctant
to
knock
on
doors
to
listen
to
our
views
and
concerns,
preferring
instead
to
sling
mud
at
each
other
in
the
local
press
and
scuttle
around
under
cover
of
darkness,
shoving
scraps
of
paper
througth
our
mailboxes?
Were
they
no
longer
bothered
about
talking
to
those
they
aspired
to
represent-
or
were
they
just
getting
more
of
an
ear
bashing
on
matters
such
as
THAT
Busway-
than
they
were
used
to
this
time
around?
But
then,
what
is
the
point
of
debate
when
party
lines
must
prevail?
And
was
it
not
outrageous
that
any
mention
of
CDTS-
surely
the
number
one
issue
in
the
Hoole
and
Newton
areas-
was
so entirely
absent from
any
of
their
election
material?
Tory
candidate
for
Newton, John
Ebo told
a
packed
anti-CDTS
meeting
the
evening
before
the
election
that
he
was actively
opposed to
the
Busway-
the
only
elected
or
prospective
councillor
to
publicly
do
so-
and
successfully
took
the
seat
largely
as
a
result.
Following
some
sour
grapes
implications
from
defeated
opponents,
he
said
the
following:
"For
the
sake
of
greater
clarification,
I
am
issuing
this
note
on
my
stance
on
the
proposed
busway,
commonly
known
as
the
'CDTS'.
I
am
advised
that
my
views,
as
expressed
in
my
electoral
address,
demonstrated
an
apparent
weakening
of
my
opposition
to
the
proposal.
Nothing
could
be
further
from
the
truth.
My
position
on
the
busway
is
and
remains
quite
clear: I
oppose
the
development..
- As being irrelevant to the needs of the local residents
- As a costly development which will not allevaite traffic congestion
- As a lost opportunity for a safe traffic-free zone through a highly built-up area
- Which does not have the support of local people
- Which is likely to increase traffication near to the accident black spot that is the A41 roundabout
- Which is likely to create parking problems near to the proposed intermediate stop at Newton Lane Bridge
- Which is likely to effect existing bus services detrimentally.
I
believe
that
the
battle
is
there
to
be
won
by
dint
of
public
opposition
outside
the
Council
Chamber
and
opposition
within. I
am
the
only
candidate
who
opposes
the
busway.
This
is
not
a
time
to
sit
on
the
fence;
one
is
for
the
busway
or
against
it.
I
am
against
the
busway"Bravo. Mr Ebo will doubtless now be under pressure from a worried and angry electorate to ensure he remains as good as his word: Active opposition- the abstention practised by the rest of his party will not do.
And
just
how
much
of
our
money
have
the
city
and
county
councils
squandered
upon
this
business
so
far?
What
cost
those
thousands
of
man-hours
spent
preparing
plans
and
exhibitions,
doing
surveys,
shuffling
documents-
staffing
the
'CDTS
Hotline'
for
heaven's
sake?
And,
of
course,
dealing
with
a
stroppy
public:
also
on
the
payroll,
and
a
new
one
on
us,
is Neil
Anderton,
who
now
fulfills
the
vital
role
of CDTS
Objections
Manager.
Just
what
that
may
involve
we're
really
not
sure,
but
it
sounds
to
us
like
a
full-time
job.
Expenditure
to
date
must
be
in
the
region
of
several
hundred
thousand
pounds-
at
least.
And
that's
just
for
starters.
Many
feel
that
when
it's
moneymoneymoney
for
the
construction
industry
and
property
speculators
and
jobsjobsjobs
for
the
boys
at
Backward
Hall,
the
sky,
it
seems,
is
the
limit.
But
when
it
comes
to
we
lowly
citzens
getting
together
to
discuss
a
matter
that
will
affect
us
and
our
children
deeply-
for
good
or
ill-
for
years
to
come,
we
are
seemingly
not
to
be
trusted
to
do
so
without
the
event
threatening
to
turn
into
some
sort
of
riot.
In
the
words
of
one
correspondent
to
Mr
Roberts-James,
"
Frankly
I
am
very
disappointed
that,
having
spent
so
much
of
the
Council's
(ie
ours,
the
tax
payers')
money
on
your
exhibitions,
you
seem
to
be
panicked
by
the
prospect
of
a
local
resident's
meeting
which
might
have
given
some
indication
of
the
true
depth
of
opposition
to
the
CDTS".
Letters apologising to would-be attenders of the Newton school meeting and explaining the shabby circumstances behind the organiser's reluctant decision- and the role of the Chester-Deeside Transport System's project manager in same- duly appeared in the Chester local press, and sterling efforts resulted in the rapid rescheduling of the meeting, which eventually took place at Hoole All Saint's church hall on 5th May 1999, attended by around 250 people and a second, equally-packed meeting was held at the same venue on 19th May.
Northgate Village Beware! A notice appeared in the local press on 7th May 1999 informing us of the council's intended so-called disposal of the extremely attractive and well-maintained green open space behind the village- a Granada TV green award winner- in readiness to concrete it over as part of their insane scheme.
We
wonder
if
you
were
aware
of
the
planning
application
for
120
caravans
and
60
tents
on
55
acres
of
greenbelt
land
outside
Mickle
Trafford?
The
application
is
by Fordent
Properties,
the
code
number
is
99/181/COU
and
the
location
is
land
adjacent
to
Rose
Manor
Farm
on
Warrington
Road.
Residents
are,
not
surprisingly,
up
in
arms
about
the
proposal.
The
Parish
Council
has
resolved
to
object
strongly
and
the
Action
Group
that
is
still
forming
are
calling
for
a
public
meeting.
They
already
have
town
planners,
landscape
architects,
solicitors
and
environmental
consultants
on
board,
so
a
decent
scrap
is
assured.
Just
possibly
the
'developer's
friends'
in
the
Town
Hall
may
have
bitten
off
more
than
they
can
chew
this
time.
This
is
a
blatant
attempt
to
try
to
develop
Green
Belt
land
by
trying
to
link
to
the
proposals
for
the
disused
railway
and
also
to
attempt
to
'set
a
precedent'
in
order
to
eventually
commercially
'develop'
the
land- a
crucial
element
of
the
economics
of
the
CDTS.
Interestingly,
the
applicant
proposes
a
'bike
and
ride'
facility
to
take
advantage
of
the
Sustrans
cycleway.
In early June 1999 this interesting letter about the busway from Councillor Ebo appeared in the local press. In contrast, we note that most of those councillors who were busily stuffing our letterboxes with paper a while back have barely raised their heads above the parapet on this matter since the election.
Unlike (unfortunately) the bowtied bigot in the pages of the Chester Chronicle. Here's his latest words of wisdom regarding the CDTS.
Published
in
two
volumes
in
June
1999,
the
council's
vast,
expensive-
and
patently
biased-
'CDTS
Environmental
Statement' nontheless
contains
a
wealth
of
statistics
and
data,
maps,
plans
and
'artist's
impressions'-
in
addition
to
which,
if
you
look
hard
enough,
some
very
revealing
figures.
For
example,
paragraph
2.10
tells
how
the
granting
of
a Transport
and
Works
Act by
the
Secretary
of
State-
for
which
the
council
have
indeed
applied-
"means
that
works
would
then
enjoy
the
status
of
a
statutory
undertaking,
conferring
on
it
certain
privileges, such
as
immunity
from
claims
of
nuisance
which
may
arise
from
its
construction
and
operation."
Which
would
seem
to
make
a
nonsense
of
Cllr
Peter
Byrne's
reassurances
of
the
likelihood
of
compensation
at
the
recent
public
meeting
in
Hoole.
The
absolute
core
reason
for
the
construction
of
Phase
I
of
the
CDTS
is,
we're
told,
to
take
traffic
off
Hoole
Road. How
interesting
then,
to
read
in
this
same
Environmental
Statement
that
that
the
reductions
in
traffic
flow
that
are
being
claimed
for
CDTS
are
pitifully
negligible-
for
example,
in
the
order
of
2-3%
only
on
Hoole
Road! Also,
by
the
study's
own
admission,
there
could
only
be
a
maximum
reduction
in
vehicle
emissions
of
3%
due
to
CDTS
Phase
I,
against
which
should
be
set
the
additional
emissions
of
the
buses.
If
these
are
added
together, there
is
no
effective
net
reduction.
The
Statement
was
produced
by
Chester-based Chris
Blandford
Associates,
who
have
been
contracted
by
the
Council
over
a
number
of
years
to
produce
material
in
support
of
the
CDTS
project
and
who
presumably
expect
to
get
additional
work
from
it
in
the
future.
Could
it
be
that
a truly
independent assessing
organisation
would
have
reached
very
different
conclusions
from
those
reached
by
CBA?
The
front
pages
of
the
two
Chester
free
newspapers
of 7th
and
8th
July
1999 were
an
interesting
study
in
contrasts
on
the
subject
of
CDTS.
While
that
of
the
Standard
carried
a
photograph
of
the
previous
Wednesday's
anti-busway
demonstration
at
Chester
Cross
above
an
article
entitled
'Busway
protest
gathers
strength',
the
recently
re-titled
Chronicle
offshoot,
the
Chester
Mail
(formerly
the
'Herald
and
Post'-
nice
new
name,
same
sorry
content)
carried
the
banner
headline,
'Ask
Your
Mum'
which
told
us
that
Deputy
Prime
Minister John
Prescott "has
an
easy
answer"
in
deciding
whether
to
allow
the
go
ahead
of
CDTS-
all
he
has
to
do
is
ask
his
mother!
The
Evening
Leader
of July
13th,
in
the
course
of
a
story
about
Mr
Prescott's
recent
visit
to
the
city,
revealed
the
remarkable
coincidence
that
his
father,
Bert-
who
lives
in
Newtown-
also
thought
the
busway
will
be
the
answer
to
Chester's
traffic
problems
and
was
in
fact
one
of
the
SIX
supporters
who
have
so
far
signed
the
Leader's
CDTS
reader's
poll.
(By
which
time
1,378
OBJECTORS
had
also
signed
the
same
poll-
soon
to
reach
over
1,600-
see
below)
The
same
evening,
Chester's
city
councillors
assembled
together-
having
run
the
gauntlet
of
a
large
group
of
demonstrators
outside
the
Town
Hall-
and,
like
the
County
councillors
before
them,
dutifully
voted
in
favour
(45
for,
5
against,
1
abstained)
of
proceeding
with
the
construction
of
CDTS.
So
now
it
seems
it's
all
down
to
Phyllis,
Bert
and
little
John....
An important article by Andrew Baxter was recently published in the Daily Telegraph entitled End of the Road for Park and Ride? It described the findings of the University College of London's influential Transport Studies Unit which tells us that, far from easing congestion and pollution in our cities, evidence suggests that ferrying drivers into town by bus from giant car parks in the greenbelt is only making matters worse. (There will be around 200 extra buses per day clogging up Chester city centre if CDTS goes ahead.) It should be obligatory reading for all Chester's councillors and planners.
A
report
from
Cheshire
County
Council's
environmental
forum, Agenda
21 a
while
back
told
us
that
"building
new
roads
in
Cheshire
is
no
longer
a
viable
option".
Not
that
we
doubted
it
for
a
moment.
The
message
doesn't
yet
seem
to
have
got
across
to
Chester's
Tories,
however.
At
a
full
council
meeting
in
mid-July,
the
controlling
Labour
and
LibDems
introduced
a
resolution
to
investigate
inplementing
the
government's
proposals
for
a workplace
parking
levy-
designed
to
be
draconian
enough
to
provide
a
real
disincentive
to
bringing
a
car
into
the
city
centre,
but
also
to
raise
new
locally-spendable
funding
for
alternative
transport
schemes.
(Whether
these
'draconian'
parking
charges
will
also
be
made
to
apply
to
the
city
and
county
council's
own
thousands
of
workers-
whose
cars
currently
clog
up
the
city
centre
at
no
cost
to
their
owners
whatever-
is
currently
unclear).
Leading
the
Conservative
protests,
Cllr John
Boughton,
whose
strongly
pro-busway
views
are
well
known
(and
some
of
which
may
be
read here)
said
the
proposed
charges
were
"another
unnecessary
burden
upon
businesses
and
motorists"
and
that
the
Tories
would
"oppose
the
plans
every
step
of
the
way".
Should
be
an
interesting
scrap.
He
also
called
on
the
government
to
start
providing
a
realistic
programme
of
new
roads,
railways
and busways from
the
£31
billion
raised
every
year
from
the
road
tax.
Fat
chance
of
that,
Cllr
Boughton.
The
obvious
(to
the
rest
of
us)
fact
that
enbarking
upon
multi-million
pound
megalomaniac
schemes
like
CDTS
means
they
have
to
be
paid
for-
by
local
council
and
business
taxpayers
and certainly by
motorists-
may
be
even
starting
to
sink
into
our
councillor's
thick
heads.
Should
be
a
great
vote
winner-
we
don't
think.
Watch
this
space
for
news
of
more
desperate
plans
to
raise
the
busway
millions...
In
early
August
1999
a
poster
outlining
people's
concerns
about
the
CDTS
busway
was
put
up,
with
permission,
in
Hoole
library
by
a
resident.
She
noticed
upon
her
next
visit,
however,
that
it
had
been
removed.
Upon
enquiring,
she
was
told
(subsequently
confirmed
by
us)
that
it
was
City
and
County
Council
policy
NOT
to
allow
the
display
of
any
material
pertaining
to
CDTS-
upon
the
grounds
that
"the
project
had
already
received
full
council
backing"-
in
any
council
owned
premises,
for
example
libraries
and
schools.
Had
the
Secretary
of
State
given
the
go-ahead
for
the
busway
then?
Was
the
battle
lost?
We
think
not.
This
attempt
to
strangle
the
debate
and
obstruct
the
dissemination
of
lawful
information
on
a
matter
of
great
public
concern in
the
very
places
the
public
are
best
able
to
find
it strikes
us
as
both
undemocratic
and
exceedingly
mean
spirited.
The
councils
held
their
glossy
and
expensive
'consultation'
exhibitions
in
these
publicly-owned
locations
remember,
so
what's
the
problem
with
a
bit
of
A4
on
a
library
noticeboard?
What
are
they
so
afraid
of?
In
a letter of
12th
August,
County
Councillor Peter
Byrne denied
censorship,
stating
simply
that
"The
posters
referred
to
were
removed
from
County
Council
premises
because
they
were
inaccurate".
A
perusal
of
the
many
other
letters
by
this
gentleman
(who
seems
to
have
been
lumbered
with
the
task
of
publicly
defending
the
undefendable
by
the
rest
of
the
close-lipped
pack
of
councillors
who
voted
for
CDTS)
make
it
clear
that
he
has
long
since
'shot
his
bolt'
as
far
as
rational
debate
goes
while
continuing
to
refuse
to
answer
repeated
requests
from
residents
for
further
information
upon
such
matters
as
the
deeply-worrying
'complementary
measures'
planned
for
Hoole
Road-
see
below-
while
at
the
same
time
issuing
courtious
invitations
to
residents
to
meet
with
him
to
discuss
"minimising
any
unwanted
effects"
the
busway
will
have
upon
their
communities-
and
his
most
recent
attempts
to
persuade
an
increasingly-sceptical
electorate
comprise
little
more
than
a
string
of
wild
accusations
about
"inaccurate
and
misleading"
claims
by
the
increasingly-organised
objectors.
Here is a website containing a body of research by Graham Parkhurst under the collective title Does Bus-Based Park and Ride Assist the Integration of Local Transport?- more material for councillors and planners to study before continuing to commit Chester to something that is firstly not going to solve our traffic problems and secondly does not have the support of the local people.
In
early
September
1999,
having
received
over
1,100
letters
of
objection
to
the
CDTS
busway,
Transport
Minister
Keith
Hill
has
unsurprisingly
decided
that
the
matter
should
now
become
the
subject
of
a
Public
Inquiry.
Remarkably,
the
poll
of
readers
carried
out
by
the
Chester
Evening
Leader
earlier
this
year
and
forwarded
to
John
Prescott,
which
included
over 1,600 signed
objections
to
the
scheme,
will
count
as
only
ONE
of
those
eleven
hundred
registered
objections
(as
would
any
other
letter
containing
more
than
one
name)-
giving
a
fair
idea
of
the
level
of
public
concern.
The
most
common
grounds
of
objection
concerned
green
belt,
ecology
and
wildlife
issues.
In
addition
to
which,
lack
of
public
support,
the
unlikelihood
of
any
meaningful
traffic
reduction
and
the
scheme's
perceived
failure
to
benefit
local
people
were
mentioned.
And
not
all
the
letters
of
objection
received
by
the
DTI
were
from
mere
members
of
the
public.
Oh
no.
Organisations
such
as
British
Gas/Transco,
British
Telecom,
the
Environment
Agency,
English,
Welsh
and
Scottish
Railways,
the
Highways
Agency,
Manweb,
Railtrack,
Welsh
Water
and,
interestingly,
Tescos
were
among
the
27
statutory
bodies,
elected
representatives
(Councillors
Ebo,
Bain,
Biddle
and
D
and
J
Evans),
companies
and
campaign
groups
(Chester
Green
Party,
the
Council
for
the
Preservation
of
Rural
England
and
Upton
Green
Belt
Preservation
Group)
who
have
registered
concern
about,
and
objection
to,
the
scheme
as
it
stands.
According
to
the
council,
the
results
have
been
analysed
on
a
purpose-built
computer
database
(more
expense)
and
the
1,102
objection
letters
contained
about
4,300
overlapping
points
of
concern,
an
average
of
four
points
per
letter.
Objections
received
from
different
areas
of
Chester
broke
down
thus:
- Backing onto the route: 197
- Postcode CH2 1- Upton area: 83
- Postcode CH2 2- Newton area: 353
- Postcode CH2 3- Hoole area; 424
- Postcode CH2 4- Mickle Trafford: 10
- Others: 35
A date and place for the inquiry has yet to be made public (much like most of the council's plans), but it will be held locally, probably sometime early in the New Year, before an independent inspector who will listen to the evidence from both sides and then decide whether or not to grant planning permission for the scheme to proceed. He will also report to Secretary of State John Prescott, who will have the final say.
Remember- everybody has the right to speak at a Public Inquiry. Now is the time to start preparing your statements- and to start giving some serious thought to fund raising ideas- bearing in mind that the council have 'set aside' (you may be able to supply another phrase) the almost-unbelievable sum of £900,000 of OUR money to pay for the battery of lawyers they're hoping will crush all opposition to their unpopular, undemocratic and ill-considered plans...
Much, very much, has happened since the last entries in these brief notes. However, lack of time and the need to make a living has, for the moment, sadly prevented us from keeping things even remotely up-to-date and for this we apologise. This situation will hopefully be rectified in the near future. Much more, however, may be learned by perusing our growing collection of letters to these pages and the Chester press in favour of the busway and- far, far more numerous!- letters against it. A true and accurate indication of public opinion!
But then, in February 2003, the long. long battle seemed to be at last at an end, as this remarkable statement by Chester City Council indicated...
Back to parts I and II of our brief history of the Mickle Trafford-Shotton Railway- or take A Virtual Stroll Along the Mickle Trafford Railway for yourself!
If you still have your doubts after wandering through all that lush greenery, prepare for a nasty shock as you view some so-called artist's impressions of the completed busway...