WARRINGTON could be subjected to almost permanent gridlock when the master plan to revive the Manchester Ship Canal comes into force, according to Liberal Democrats at Warrington.
Plans to minimise the impact of shipping on Warrington are “not nearly good enough,” they say.
The Lib Dems have been studying the proposed “Memorandum of Understanding” between the council and canal owners Peel Ports – and have roundly rejected it.
Lib Dem spokesman Cllr Brian Axcell (pictured) said: “The Memorandum of Understanding does not provide confidence that increased shipping on the Manchester Ship Canal will not cause very serious traffic congestion in Warrington.
“Our road network is already near to capacity and external events like motorway closures often create huge problems for traffic movement through our town. “Extra swing bridge movements, on the scale which can be deduced from Peel Ports’ own predictions, could easily create almost permanent gridlock, with highly damaging outcomes for Warrington’s economic and social life.”
Under the terms of the agreement, swing bridge openings would continue during the working day, including peak times.
Cllr Axcell said: “We know this can cause disruption to our road network for up to an hour. There is merely a promise to investigate the possibility of increasing the number of sailings during off-peak periods and at night. This is not nearly good enough.
“Peel Ports have not provided clear data for future shipping movements. We do know however that they intend to operate their 111-acre Port Salford site 24- hours a day, seven days a week. This implies a massive increase in container traffic through Warrington.
“At present Peel Ports send ships through Warrington predominantly during the working day for their own convenience, because there is no apparent correlation between swing bridge opening times and tidal movements on the Mersey.
“We say the ships could just as easily sail through Warrington for our convenience when our roads are quiet. Anything less than this is unacceptable.”
Town faces permanent gridlock
22 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
2 Comments
Blame the commision for new towns, hardly any of the provision for new roads were put in place including the high level road system. the road system to the rear of Smith dve was part of this. they were a law unto themselves. Alas history lingers for a long time
Quote Brian Axcell “We say the ships could just as easily sail through Warrington for our convenience when our roads are quiet. Anything less than this is unacceptable.”
About as WET as the petion Cllr Axcell made such a show of collecting signatures for, in which he didn’t oppose the scheme but merely asked for ‘mitigating measures’. He took the same stance re the new Runcorn bridge. I would have thought a TOTAL OPPOSITION to the Peel Port plans would be more appropriate because the only ‘mitagating measures’ which would prevent gridlock, should the Peel Port plans go ahead, would be an additional high level crossing of the ship canal – possibly another lane on the Cantilever ? and that would in effect supply the long awaited funding for the ‘southern expressway’ – conveniently removing the barrier to developing the last of Appleton’s green fields!