AN £8 million project to renovate the Stockton Heath swing bridge has been put on hold after borough council highway chiefs refused a nine-month temporary road closure traffic order.
The Manchester Ship Canal Company (MSCC) owned by Peels Ports says remains committed to the Stockton Heath Bridge renovations despite the refusal of Temporary Traffic Regulation Order by Warrington Borough Council.
In March 2022, MSCC applied for the road closure for nine months to ensure contractors could safely carry out the works. However, the borough council has recently refused to permit the closure, which was scheduled to begin in April 2023, meaning works will have to be put on hold.
MSCC was due to fund the £8 million project but the responsibility for elements of the mitigation costs, which firmly lie with the borough council, remain without funding.
A spokesperson for Peel Ports said: “We are regretful that the planned works have been delayed and remain committed to engaging with the council to find a viable solution.
“We aim to deliver the works required while minimising disruption as much as possible for the local area. From the offset, it was made clear that contractors could only complete the work if the nine-month road closure was agreed upon, for safety reasons. No contractor has been willing to take on this work without the closure.
“Whilst disappointed, we remain hopeful of finding a solution that will work for all involved.”
The bridge remains fully safe and operational for users, and routine maintenance will continue as normal.
A Warrington Borough Council spokesperson said: “We have always been clear that any disruption as a result of the decision by Peel to close the bridge for road or pedestrian traffic would require mitigation measures paid for by Peel. Stockton Heath swing bridge and canal is owned by Peel. The bridge has not had any investment for many years and it is the decision of Peel to carry out the work in this manner which benefits their commercial position and allows ships to continue to travel.
“It is not fair that the public and businesses should be inconvenienced in this way. Nor is it fair that the local taxpayer should be expected to foot the bill. Nevertheless, we hope that a solution can be reached.”
