Support Durham City Residents against the Northern Relief Road

This is our Third page of petition comments

Comment: There are other ways of meeting the Council\'s goals without the destruction inherent in their present proposals. When will the ever learn?

Comment: Original Plan

We must not forget the original plan, that would have seen the conversion of the Belmont Viaduct and the bypass built between Pity Me and Carville. This scheme has already gone through various planning stages, follows existing corridors that the old railway once took, brings back in to use the Belmont Viaduct, it is more northern then the proposed relief road and would complete what is already the Durham City Northern Bypass next to the Arnison Centre.

Comment: The old Durham City needs no further roads, no further traffic and no further development of any kind. It\'s a very small town housing a good university that\'s actually far too big for it. Designated routes for commercial traffic avoiding the city centre should be created on existing roads and weight limits should apply on all entrances to Durham such as A177 at Shincliffe and the Cock\' the North,

the roads from Sherburn Road End, tNeville\'s Cross, Framwellgate Moor etc.

Govt buildings to let ot for sale in Framwellgate should be turned over to the Dept of Education for intensive university student accommodation.

Comment: I believe that the proposed route for the bypass is inappropriate as it will spoil the beautiful River Wear valley. Durham is a World Heritage Site and this beauty must be retained at all costs - another route for the bypass must be found.

Comment: ALTHOUGH I DO NOT NOW LIVE IN DURHAM HAVING MOVED AWAY IN THE 1960\'S I STILL CLASS DURHAM AS MY HOME, IF THE COUNCIL COULD NOT GET THINGS CORRECT FIRST TIME ROUND WITH THEIR ROAD PLANS GOD HELP US WITH THE FUTURE ROAD PLANS, WHO WAS THE IDIOT WHO THOUGHT UP THE MILLBURNGATE ROUNDABOUT IMPROVEMENTS.WHY NOT HAVE MORE PARK AND RIDE

Comment: Dear sir,

I think it would be a great shame and a travesty to destroy such a beautiful and historical area as the Kepier and Frankland Woods area, as is proposed by the Durham Northern Relief Road. As a motorist, and an ex-byways warden, I appreciate the need for roads, but I even more appreciate the need to protect beautiful, historical and important woodland and buildings as is proposed here.

Comment: NO BYPASS STOP SPOILING DURHAM

Comment: History is our most important heritage. The ancient properties built centuries ago by our ancestors bring modern man closer to his past. Both they and their environment should be preserved wherever possible for the benfit of all our descendants. Once destroyed, they can never return. What we build close to ancient properties more often than not detracts considerably from them. Durham is an ancient city and important for many reasons. Beauty takes many forms and modern construction should not be allowed to impinge unduly on that beauty. Although I myself live in Newcastle upon Tyne, I well appreciate the history of surrounding areas. We are mere temporary tenants and should never forget our obligations to the future. Regards, Jeff Bartram.

Comment: We are totaly against the idea of the route fo the propsed BYPASS.

Comment: It is of paramount importance that this area is saved. Once its beauty is destroyed it cannot be regained. We have a duty to future generations of preserve our heritage.

Comment: Good luck with the campaign.

Comment: A stupid short sighted plan which will not solve a problem but simply move it slightly aside.

Are they saying that the Durham City northern boundary is the A690?

This sight should be embraced and nurtured bringing it into the City as much as the Prebends bridge woodland area is.

Think again people a bypass has got to link to the already prepared Arnison Centre back road.All agree that a by-pass is essential and no one is saying the solution is easy...but this is definately wrong.

Comment: The council should have kept to the original plan and built the bypass within the original corridor it was supposed to go. The Arnison Development including the first stage of the Durham City Northern Bypass between Pity Me Roundabout and Red House Roundabout was part of a more elaborate scheme to divert the A691.

The second stage of the bypass would complete the road between Red House Roundabout and Carville Interchange, crossing the existing Belmont Viaduct, which was to be converted to a road deck, much to like what was done to Newton Cap Viaduct in Bishop Auckland. Later proposals, where for the bypass to run further south east before crossing on a new bridge which was to connect with a new junction on the A690.

I live close to what was supposed to be the second stage and a few years back trees where planted on the edged of the proposed bypass corridor to provide screening to the light and noise pollution. Utilities already exist on part of the second stage close to Rosemont and can be seen in the field near to the bus stop. I agree that Durham needs a bypass, but why should you have to still drive more or less in to the city centre to use it. I say no to the Durham Northern Relief Road and yes to the Durham City Northern Bypass. Council should give us a choice and not construct what will be a white collar access road to County Hall.

In addition the construction of the Witton Gilbert Bypass was to be complimented with a link road between Earls House Hospital and Pity Me Roundabout. The whole road was to be numbered A691 and would provide an alternative to the A692/A693 route from Consett.

Comment: I think it is one of the worst ideas that this council has come up with, and they have come up with a few corkers. They are hell bent on destroying beautiful Durham.

Comment: Durham is a beautiful city where my great-grandfather lived as a young schoolboy.

Plans to build a Northern Relief Road would destroy the greenbelt. Ancient woodlands, destroyed for so called \"relief\" purposes could never be reclaimed.

Creative alternatives need to be explored as opposed to a \"quick fix\".

Comment: I cant see any excuse for destroying these beautiful natural areas for yet another bypass. Here\'s hoping they dont.

Comment: While recognising that a way of by-passing Durham is much over due I would urge the Authority to site the road well away from the City\'s river banks. I agree with the ideas expressed by those who would open up the area to walkers.

Comment: This appears to be an extremely ham-fisted solution to a problem that not everybody even thinks exists. Why not use your intelligence,imagination and a good dose of commonsense to relieve traffic congestion and poor signage. Go gently on the land you have the privilege to care for. Don\'t be fooled by the idea that visible changes , such as construction of new roads, bridges and buildings,are a measure of a council\'s success. To preserve, maintain and protect should be your challenge now, so that, in the future, this council will be honoured for their wisdom and foresight.

Comment: There are few areas of beauty left in Durham, which have not been used to redevelop and this is one of them. The building of a road would descimate the whole area and wipe out hundreds of years of our heritage.

Comment: If this road goes ahead it will close up the city once and for all. Will it really make that much difference to the traffic?

Comment: Yet another brilliant idea from the council who wants to make Durham a better place to live, work and bring up a family. It can\'t even l;ook after it\'s own residents. (I live in Diamond Terrace!!!!!)Have all the logistics been looked at? Do we REALLY need another road to be filled with traffic to pollute our fragile environment?

Comment: As a resident of Diamond Terrace and the valley, I wholeheartedly object to the proposal of building a new road, which will be a disfigurement to the whole of the surrounding area. There are few enough open areas left in Durham. Do you really have to close this one as well????

Comment: This road will spoil a beautiful city. The Council\'s scheme is crude and, frankly, stupid. There must be another way of dealing with traffic in Durham.

Comment: Future Durham 2015, two years after the Northern Relief Road opened, the County Council Local Transport Plan covering period 2015/2016 to 2020/2021 has a number of new Major Schemes including the A691 Durham City Northern Bypass, to improve access to the motorway, which was upgraded to three lanes between Barton and Chester-le-street as part of the M1 extension scheme in 2012. Seven new housing developments to the north of the recently extended Arnison Centre and the total closure of the road running through Cocken, increased traffic has been generated on the roads through Framwellgate. The new bypass will be dual carriageway and the existing section between Pity Me and Red House will be also upgraded to the same standard.

Comment: Totally inappropriate proposal. No way!

Don\'t destroy more of Durham\'s precious few remaining assets.

Comment: It is a typical engineering solution, forging across an \'undeveloped\' green area and another example of Durham failing to perform to the World Heritage status of the area. I don\'t think it would actually work and congestion would remain, just coming in by another route. A further danger is that it would create carte blanche to develop and build up to the new boundary created by the road.

Comment: The bypass should follow the original plan going from Brasside to Pity Me.

However, I don,t hold out much hope, as our council leaders only appear to good at telling lies and not at taking notice. I,m affraid that the bypass is only one example of many issues that are going to destroy our city.

Comment: Totally unnecessary - the new Park & ride and improvements to public transport and road traffic restrictions should ease congestion.

Comment: I feel a by-pass on this site would be detrimental to the city scene, without making a great difference to the flow of traffic.

Comment: More roads always seem to lead to more traffic - we must protect the rural feeling of Durham and find creative ways to reduce the traffic congestion.

Go To Next Page Of Responses