Proposal for Colne bypass sparks fears for villages

FURTHER concern has been expressed that a proposed bypass in Colne would bring more traffic through West Craven villages.

Lancashire County Council is currently consulting on plans for a bypass for Colne, with its preferred route from the M65 emerging on the northern side of Foulridge on the A56.

Pendle Council is supporting the route, which it says will relieve traffic, particularly along Vivary Way, Colne, and protect the potential reinstatement of the railway from Skipton to Colne.

But North Yorkshire county councillor Patrick Mulligan, who represents West Craven, claims there has been no consultation between the two authorities, and is urging residents to comment now before it is too late.

He said: “The bypass would come out on the northern side of Foulridge, which would mean all the traffic coming through Thornton-in-Craven, and possibly also through the Martons.”

Coun Joe Cooney, Pendle Council leader, said: “The plans will help to connect employment sites in this part of the borough, and help ease traffic congestion along Vivary Way, in Colne, which is a huge problem for many people.”

Coun Cooney said Pendle had supported the ‘brown option’, the county council’s preferred route.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:27pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Philip A Berry says...

"But North Yorkshire county councillor Patrick Mulligan, who represents West Craven"

Err excuse me but West Craven is represented by county councillor David Whip on LANCASHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL.

West craven is beggar all to do with North Yorkshire county council.
"But North Yorkshire county councillor Patrick Mulligan, who represents West Craven" Err excuse me but West Craven is represented by county councillor David Whip on LANCASHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL. West craven is beggar all to do with North Yorkshire county council. Philip A Berry

3:23pm Tue 10 Dec 13

It's a spade! says...

They might have got the district wrong but it highlights that all this talk of "improving links" to Yorkshire is rubbish.

Yorkshire are having nothing to do with it! It's a road to nowhere!............
Unless of course you own a small engineering company in Sough.

There is no justification for the amount of money that will be spent and the environmental damage done for this road. Widen Vivary Way, improve the traffic flow wih the right kind of lights and re-assess the local routes.

All this money just so Mendoros can get to Bannister's chippy a couple of minutes quicker.
They might have got the district wrong but it highlights that all this talk of "improving links" to Yorkshire is rubbish. Yorkshire are having nothing to do with it! It's a road to nowhere!............ Unless of course you own a small engineering company in Sough. There is no justification for the amount of money that will be spent and the environmental damage done for this road. Widen Vivary Way, improve the traffic flow wih the right kind of lights and re-assess the local routes. All this money just so Mendoros can get to Bannister's chippy a couple of minutes quicker. It's a spade!

4:59pm Tue 10 Dec 13

David Richardson says...

Reducing congestion through Colne is important!

It must happen.... However, I'm not the proposed bypass routes are the answer.

One thing is sure though, Labour have completed cocked up this consultation! It's been a disaster!
Reducing congestion through Colne is important! It must happen.... However, I'm not the proposed bypass routes are the answer. One thing is sure though, Labour have completed cocked up this consultation! It's been a disaster! David Richardson

6:44pm Tue 10 Dec 13

willie eckerslike says...

"RE OPEN THE COLNE TO SKIPTON RAIL LINE"
"RE OPEN THE COLNE TO SKIPTON RAIL LINE" willie eckerslike

8:03pm Tue 10 Dec 13

iasiah fartwell says...

yes open the railway line that no one will use, about 97% of the traffic is not going to stop at Skipton, so yes the reopening of the line is going to make lots of money NOT!!
yes open the railway line that no one will use, about 97% of the traffic is not going to stop at Skipton, so yes the reopening of the line is going to make lots of money NOT!! iasiah fartwell

9:30pm Tue 10 Dec 13

willie eckerslike says...

iasiah fartwell wrote:
yes open the railway line that no one will use, about 97% of the traffic is not going to stop at Skipton, so yes the reopening of the line is going to make lots of money NOT!!
Hang on my old pal, FOLK SAID THAT ABOUT THE CLITHEROE TO MANCHESTER LINE, and look at it now FULL TO CAPACITY, ???
[quote][p][bold]iasiah fartwell[/bold] wrote: yes open the railway line that no one will use, about 97% of the traffic is not going to stop at Skipton, so yes the reopening of the line is going to make lots of money NOT!![/p][/quote]Hang on my old pal, FOLK SAID THAT ABOUT THE CLITHEROE TO MANCHESTER LINE, and look at it now FULL TO CAPACITY, ??? willie eckerslike

5:03pm Wed 11 Dec 13

retsofad says...

This proposed road does not need to run from Colne. the route should connect at junction 8 M65 run down to Simonstone industrial estate by-pass Read on the south side then connect to Clitheroe by-pass A59 By-pass Gisburn West Marton East Marton pick up the A56 into Skipton
This would then link Barnoldswick and Earby to the motorway system from the A59 most of the route would be through open land. but the powers that be can't see wood for trees
This proposed road does not need to run from Colne. the route should connect at junction 8 M65 run down to Simonstone industrial estate by-pass Read on the south side then connect to Clitheroe by-pass A59 By-pass Gisburn West Marton East Marton pick up the A56 into Skipton This would then link Barnoldswick and Earby to the motorway system from the A59 most of the route would be through open land. but the powers that be can't see wood for trees retsofad

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree