In September 2005, this old road scheme suddenly re-appeared on the Council's website, now as a third possible "outer" route for the relief road.

http://www.durham.gov.uk/durhamcc/usp.nsf/Lookup/DNRRouter-watermarkNew/$file/DNRRouter-watermarkNew.pdf

Why is this scheme being resurrected now when it so clearly contravenes Government policy on roadbuilding and when it is not recommended in the Consultant's study that led to the proposal for a relief road?

Is it because there are some people in Durham for whom the old proposal for a "Northern Bypass" sounds superficially atttractive? However, this "outer" route:

• would slash up Durham City's green belt, exposing it to further unsuitable development.
• would take away only 1 vehicle in 10 from the centre of Durham.
• would generate a huge amount of new traffic, damaging the quality of life across the city.
• has already been assessed and rejected, dropped from the transport plan for 2001-6 for environmental reasons.
• would cut through a large area of ancient woodland on both banks of the Wear, passing on a new bridge at some distance south of the Belmont viaduct.
• would damage a site of special scientific interest and part of the low Newton Junction nature reserve.
• would, like any route of the NRR, kill or seriously injure more people than the current route through Durham
• The "Durham City Travel Study" found that through traffic accounted for only 15% of all journeys in Durham. So, even if a toll on the old route were used to divert all the through traffic onto this new route, still less than 1 in 6 vehicles would be removed from Milburngate.