Mottram Bypass Highways England p.Highways England

Balfour Beatty is lined up to build the project. Credit: National Highways

CPRE moves to block £200m Mottram Bypass 

Citing environmental concerns, the campaign group has lodged a legal challenge over the proposed relief road, which is aimed at providing a solution to congestion on the A57 between Manchester and Sheffield. 

The project, first mooted in the 1970s, would see a new dual carriageway link road built from Junction 4 of the M67, diverting traffic away from the centre of Mottram. 

In November, the government approved the £200m Mottram Bypass project after decades of clamour for the scheme and main contractor Balfour Beatty was due to begin work in spring. 

However, the legal challenge lodged by the Campaign to Protect Rural England’s Peak District and South Yorkshire branch to the High Court means the scheme faces an unspecified delay. 

CPRE has called into question the government’s “unlawful approach” to allowing the scheme, accusing it of not assessing “the cumulative impact of carbon emissions and failing to consider alternatives which would avoid harming the Green Belt, the National Park and the climate”. 

In its decision notice approving the project, the government accepted the scheme would “result in an increase in carbon emissions”.  

However, it was concluded that the “proposed development is consistent with existing and emerging policy requirements to achieve the UK’s trajectory towards net zero.” 

National Highways said it was aware of the legal challenge. 

“At this stage, it is too early to say how much of an impact the legal challenge will have on our programme, but we anticipate that it could be several months before there is more clarity.” 

“We’re disappointed about the legal challenge. We believe our proposals will provide much-needed relief for drivers and businesses that use this vitally important route every day, while also delivering an economic boost to the Greater Manchester and Sheffield city regions.” 

Your Comments

Read our comments policy

A much needed project, ask anyone who lives around here, my neighbours have been waiting 50 years for this by-pass. Hopefully the CPRE challenge will fail in short order and Balfour Beatty can get on and get it built.

By Marc Hourigan

Clearly the CPRE has not endured the delays, congestion and resultant damage to the environment and the regional economy therefrom. Why after 50 years have they waited until now , just as the scheme is about to start, before registering the challenge especially in the past 25 years they have had ample opportunity to make their concerns known. They need to get local , get real and consider what their selfish actions have on the wider community.

By Peak District Ram

Induced demand – build more road, then even more cars will fill them. Where will they stop?

By Car enthusiast

You know what’s really bad for the environment? Thousands of cars stuck in stationary traffic pumping out exhaust fumes into the atmosphere. Get it built.

By Nick

Good stuff. It’s 2023, not 1953. There is no need for new roads (which don’t solve congestion, read up on Induced Demand) in the middle of a climate crisis. That money could be much better spent on things which benefit society – like improved public transport. Cars are on the way out

By Anonymous

I’ve always thought there was a “dead hand” involved in the long delayed relief road & here I have it. The CPRE are causing a great disservice to everyone who reside & use these out of date road ways. I would never open a business in the Glossop area knowing that my goods & services are daily delayed by the long lines of traffic through this Mottram bottleneck. Get on with this much needed construction & stop wasting time & money on this appeal to overturn the governments funding of this project. Remember, should these road be prevented, then the funding will go elsewhere for road improvements.

By Barrie Eckford

Its typical CPRE behaviour, they sit in their ivory castle in London and send their agitators from outside the area to cause a stir. These and others taking everyone to court for any sort of infrasturcture development is the reason why everything takes forever to get done and goes over budget… look at HS2 it would probably have been built by now. Only the solicitors win when they do this.

By Aevis

Looking at the situation NOW this project is going to be a waste of money, it will increase traffic going through Glossop making it harder than ever to get to the shops! Just a great shame that it will carve up the countryside and be an excuse to build more house’s and Think what will that mean, yes you guessed right, More cars.

By Hermit Tinsel

It’s important that all sides of an issue are considered and we shouldn’t make a blanket assumption that all road building is bad… BUT:

Induced demand is a thing. Building roads rarely reduces congestion in the long run; it’s been proven time and time again. The only strategies that work are those that reduce demand, not increase supply.

Investment in rail, buses and active travel might do more for Mottram’s traffic problems than the bypass. Or introducing a 30mph limit and banning HGVs on Snake Road – they can use the M62 after all. Why should we treat roads in our national park as “vital arteries” instead of quiet tourist routes?

By W

Short sighted from the CPRE. This should have been a bigger scheme bypassing Tintwhistle though, as let’s be honest, the tunnel to Sheffield is never going to happen

By Levelling Up Manager

Why don’t we all just give up and go and live in caves again. It’s all ‘ do – gooding ‘ nonsense. Get building now !

By Ian Frost

It will do nothing to relieve the traffic in hollingworth. It will open up for house building on the land either side of the so called relief road on mottram moor. More traffic!! Waste of time as it won’t relieve any traffic delays. Put a weight limit on wood head pass, make it a B road.

By Hollingworth Resident

“Induced demand – build more road, then even more cars will fill them. Where will they stop?” Well at the moment, cars stop at the end of the M67.

By Mr Hattersley

Just put a weight restriction on snake pass and woodhead. That would solve the problem. Make trucks use M62. This is just going to move the congestion not get rid of it

By Resident

Clearly anyone opposing this project does not live or travel through this area .

By Localman

What does most damage to the greenbelt carbon dioxide which is in the atmosphere anyway or concrete and tarmac?

By alparims

Adding a new route to relieve congestion here is very short sighted. Take the HGVs away from our Country side routes. If I really believed a bypass would be a long term solution I would support this as I live on the main road and find it a daily nightmare. The bypass is simply going to move the problem further along, spoiling the countryside for everyone.

By Anonymous

Roads induce demand? That means, if you build a road, folk use it. Amazing.

By James Yates

Thank goodness that someone has finally stood up to block this road, I agree with everybody who is saying we need a bypass but this one is not the solution, we need a new road that will bypass all 3 villages, mottram, hollingworth and tintwistle, the whole project needs stopping now, it doesn’t take a genius to work out where the new bypass needs to be built!

By Jason

Another project that should be left on the shelf. We don’t have cash to spare.

By Eric

This relief road has to be built , I’ve drove through this area and my heart goes out to the local residents who’s lives have been blighted long enough by toxic emissions and traffic noise , build the bloody road and let the residents breath again !!

By Mark Tate

This only moves the congestion “up the road” a few miles it seems completely pointless without a dual carriageway continuance.

By Archie

“Just put a weight restriction on Snake Pass and Woodhead. That would solve the problem. Make trucks use M62.” Good idea.

By Mr Hattersley

Why not start the work and deal with the talking later

By Fred Bagshaw

What a ridiculous scheme; it doesn’t tackle or solve any of the existing problems that area currently face. Where’s the VISION!!?? Nothing short of a full extension of a dual 3-Lane M67 over the Pennines to meet the M1 north of Sheffield with solve the chronic problems everyone in this area face on a daily basis.
Extend the M67 – M1 = Problem solved!

By Kayla Bibby

A terrible decision delaying a much needed by-pass, these people are selfish zealots who have no regard for the people of Mottram suffering terrible pollution. What is needed is a proper motorway between Manchester and Sheffield. ASAP.

By Mike

I’m so fed up of wasting so much of my life stuck in the eternal jams at the end of the m67. My job requires me to travel to the northwest so I have to take this journey. How can it be good for the environment cars idling stuck in jams 24\7? Shame on the people blocking this vital development

By Stuart

It’s pointless anyway, what they need here is a motorway to Sheffield as originally intended. This is just a waste of effort there will still be tons of trucks driving over the woodhead going off at the end of m67 and down mottram moor. Just another Tory attempt to look like they actually care and are doing something meaningful. Ha!

By Lopez the first

Why is it that other areas get their bypass. We have been waiting for decades with one of the worst traffic congestion in the area. An example 3/4 hour glossop to stalybridge and with all the houses being built it will get worse.

By Anonymous

So drivers including many HGVs belching out diesel fumes will be stuck in long traffic jams for years to come .

By Paul griffiths

How much longer do we have to wait before there is a start to the bypass ? .

By Anonymous

This is needed. Why don’t those CPRE do something useful. OMG

By Jacob

We’ve been waiting over 50 years for this, how can people sat behind a desk 100s of miles away get it stopped, sationary traffic pumping gas out 7days a week,it’s not about the environment it’s political.😬

By John Rawlinson

Green belt and wildlife preservation is wonderful but priority should be for the health and living of people. The pollution from vehicles in our villages is evident when you look at the filth on doors and windows. We are breathing this in! We have waited for this by pass for 50 years, it’s a scandal that it has been out on hold for the green agenda.

By Barbara Whittingham

CPRE is too arrogant. How do they think they can represent local residents who have suffered from congestion and pollution for too long and road users from long delay in journey?

By Anonymous

Anyone that is in favour of what this bunch of idiots (CPRE) are doing has obviously never sat in the heavy and very slow-moving traffic that starts at the end of the M67.
Fact: Modern vehicles are less polluting than those that were around at the time that the M67 was completed. And coupled with more hybrid and pure electric vehicles that are also around, there is not this great blanket of pollution over the area that CPRE would have everyone believe.
FACT: What vehicle emissions there are, are ALWAYS going to be worse when vehicles are sat hardly moving.
For me, it’s an inconvenience to be crawling from the M67 down to the B6174 (Stalybridge Road) and onwards. But for the residents around that area, it must be bloody awful.
CPRE – Keep your nose out of what everyone is trying to achieve.
To get from A to B in a safe, easy and quick manner, whilst having less impact on wildlife and residents with less pollution.
The current situation does nothing to achieve the above.


What has happened now with this has it been given the go ahead yet?

By Helen Harrison

Related Articles

Sign up to receive the Place Daily Briefing

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox


Join more than 13,000 property professionals and sign up to receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox.

By subscribing, you are agreeing to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

"*" indicates required fields

Your Job Field*
Other regional Publications - select below