Network rail been given ok to chop part of Liverpool rd line Manchester

Here we go again:

http://www.manchesterconfidential.c...by-seeks-legal-halt-to-ordsall-chord-starting

As the article says, this has become the Ordsall Discord

David R

 

I read elsewhere that the court has ruled against the attempt to get the scheme stopped.

 

Confirmed in the Manchester Evening News:
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...r-news/one-man-battle-derail-ordsall-11088626

My hunch is that the Supreme court will refuse to take this case if he tries to take it further.

 

I rather do hope that this is the end of legal challenges. One depressing thing during my years in planning was the gradual escalation of using the courts to challenge decisions that were properly political decisions on the grounds that there had been some flaw in procedure. During those years planning and related law had become ever more complex so the chance of procedural error inevitably increased. The High Court and the Court of Appeal have I think become more adept at distinguishing errors that were highly unlikely to affect the outcome from those which caused material disadvantage to someone.

I give one simple example of how absolute adherence to procedure is impossible. I once dealt with a planning application of a type which required notice of it to be placed on site. Yes, on site, not nearby, but the site was in the middle of railway sidings, not up to any boundary. The only place to pin a notice would have been to a sleeper and no-one could have come to read it with committing a trespass offence. I instructed that the notice be placed on the boundary, quite secure in knowing that no court would rule that out of order should some smart chappie argue otherwise.

I did, once, have sympathy for Mr Whitby as I considered that his scheme was better than that chosen. Unfortunately it came along so late in the process (it was option No. 15) that changing to it would not only have delayed the Ordsall Chord by two or three years but would also have wrecked Salford's comprehensive redevelopment ideas for the site north of the existing railway. I am sorry that Mr Whitby didn't know when to stop trying to fight a battle that was unwinnable. I have no doubt that the DfT (and I include both the civil servants and the Ministers) did agonise over the impact on the bridges, the overall historic environment and the truncation of rail access to MOSI. The Secretary of State's decision made it clear that these matters had been taken into account but that other factors, namely the general public benefits of the scheme, had to be given greater weight. This was a legitimate political decision; it is for politicians to decide on the balance of public good, not for judges to do so.

 

Indeed, Mr whitbys proposal would also have encroached on middle wood locks which is earmarked for massive development, less development land is less profit, and that just won't do now will it seriously though, if anyone is hungry for more discussion, the ordsall chord project has been talked about at length over on the skyscrapercity Manchester forums for a few years now

 

An interesting update on the Ordsall Chord project.

Noel

 

Thanks, very interesting, even if they did spell Stephenson wrongly once

Dave

 

I think these photos are by the official photographer.

http://www.matthewnichol.com/ordsallchord/

 

Confusingly, there was of course a Robert Stevenson, a very celebrated civil engines of lighthouses in particular. He was the grandfather of Robert Louis Stevenson.