By Garry Clarke
RESIDENTS packed into a public meeting to raise concerns over the proposed “Orange Route” Western Link road, which could lead to the demolition of local homes and businesses in the Great Sankey area.
The Orange route is one of six being consulted on by Warrington borough council in a bid to ease traffic congestion in the town.
Richard Flood, the council’s project manager of the Warrington Western Link Scheme, attended an emotionally charged meeting of Great Sankey residents who are opposed to the “Orange Route.”
The well attended meeting organised by the “Sankey – Squash the Orange” protest group was held at Kings Community Centre on Marina Avenue, one of the roads which will be most affected if the proposed Orange Route development goes ahead.
Group chairman Anthony Woods opened the meeting before passing control to Great Sankey South councillor Amanda King who introduced Mr Flood. Also in attendance were Great Sankey South councillors Jean Carter and Hitesh Patel.
Mr Flood explained the idea behind the proposals for the Link Road from the A56 Chester Road to the A574 Sankey Way, emphasising the hoped reduction in traffic congestion at Bridge Foot and the opening up of land at Arpley Meadows and other areas, for housing development.
Mr Flood advised that the “Orange Route” was one of six routes under consideration and that the council were aware of concerns from the public regarding all the routes.
Numerous residents, affected in varying degrees by the Orange Route, spoke passionately about the area and raised various concerns with Mr Flood, who did he best to answer as many questions as he could.
However, as the proposal is still at the consultation and planning stages no definitive answers could be given.
Amongst the many topics raised by concerned residents included the demolition of at least 29 residential properties (the most residential properties required for any of the six routes), many of which have been occupied by the same residents for 50 years.
Other concerns included the demolition of a number of business units on Penketh Business Park (businesses will be affected on all routes), leading to job losses in the area.
The route would also go through Marina Park, one of the few green areas in the vicinity, which includes a children’s play area, on which the council had spent £72,000 to refurbish in recent years.
There would also be increased traffic and congestion in all already busy residential area.
There were also safety concerns regarding pedestrians, especially the elderly and school children, crossing another potentially busy road which could cause access problems to schools and medical facilities.
There were also concerns that the construction of the road would cause a physical divide within the community.
Meanwhile a further meeting has been arranged by the “Sankey Squash the Orange” committee this Thursday (July 13) at Kings Community Centre Marina Avenue Great Sankey and all residents are welcome to attend.
A face book page – “Sankey Squash the Orange”- has been created which will carry updates from the committee as well as being a forum for local residents to discuss any topics and an e mail address – [email protected] – has been set up if anyone wants to contact the committee or join the campaign to “Squash The Orange”.
Pictures Colin Drinkwater
8 Comments
I remember opening the play area 2 years ago. I also used to pick up members of the Blind Society in adjoining roads in this compact area that was built many years ago. I think that the yellow and orange routes have been put forward to make up the options to a round half dozen. I’m sure we will we more such meetings for other options.
This was standard procedure for the MoT for years whenever road schemes were considered through residential or problem areas. Red, Blue Green, Brown Yellow etc routes were put before the public not to round up the options Geoff but to divide and conquer. At each ‘consultation’ they “hear what you all say and will bear it in mind but no firm decision has been made yet….” Inevitably there will be those who will take the view so long as it doesn’t affect me I don’t mind, point of view. And in so doing play into the road planners’ hands. The only way the residents, all residents, can deal with this is by banding together across the routes, as SHA has indicated below.
Quote from the above news article;
“However, as the proposal is still at the consultation and planning stages no definitive answers could be given.”
What’s the point of a ‘consultation’ if ‘no definitive answers could be given’?
How will this proposal ease up congestion in the town? If it opens up land for development the increased housing will mean increased traffic and thus the congestion problem will be back to square one!
WBC’s proposed housing targets and grand aspirations to expand the town are not going down well in any areas of Warrington. The mass opposition by Warrington residents should indicate it’s time for a rethink!
I agree that the town needs more town centre bypasses. However what we DO NEED are more crossings of the Ship Canal and the mersey. I am not sure how many people realise that there are only 9 exits from Warrington because of the Motorways and the river/ship canal….The routes that have been suggested that would involve the bridge proposed opposite Gainsborough road should be burnt as soon as possible. The bridge is a good idea, but having the traffic from Penketh and Sankey hitting the traffic from the town at a junction 200 metres from a swing brige is utter folly. It is a massive traffic jam in the planning.There is already a bridge over the mersey that will feed some traffic to the hospital and Liverpool road area, this does not need to destroy any homes for it to work. The MAIN connection to Penketh and Sankey (and beyond) could be further down “near” where the roundabout is at the Fiddlers ferry and Cronton roads meet . It could cross the mersey and canal “near” the ferry in and join the main roads near Foundry lane. The other end would join Walton drag as the plan suggests. I do not see any houses being destroyed this way, and it would take a lot of traffic from the town centre/bridge foot area. Any businesses affected could be compensated by the money saved.
This is a fait comp!is and of these routes will be the planners preferred option probably one that opens up the ability to build houses on the flood plain.
This of course opens up the question about how those residents will be protected if and when the river Mersey level rises and will residents get insurance?
Indicating some concern about consent to housing in such close proximity to the river Mersey, when you voted to pass and approve such cases in your role on the development management committee!
There is a lot of concern and conflicting ‘street talk’ in the Lower Walton area of where exactly the routes are and which houses/businesses/land will be affected. Only tonight someone told me that the houses on the bend of Chester Road (opposite the Stag Pub near the swing bridge) have had letters saying they will/may be affected but nobody knows how.
It’s not helped by the fact that the councils online documentation is not very clear to understand and that all their maps with associated coloured line routes are NOT zoomable. OK so you can see a rough idea of where the routes are but NOT exactly which houses or roads they go over. I did save copies to try to zoom in on but they just pixelate so no help at all.
What is clear close to there will be affected one way or another.
Surely for there to be a proper dialogue with the public in these “consultations” the council should put all its cards on the table by showing and listing all the properties that will have to be demolished, altered or in some way affected, for each route option. Anything less, given the record of successive council’s form (as it has been described elsewhere) is wholly unacceptable.