Paul Kennedy Posted January 1, 2008 Report Share Posted January 1, 2008 Who is responsible for its maintenance, and is it being maintained at all. Are there plans to replace it, and has its loss to the road system connecting the south to the north of the town been considered. I notice it is subject to both weight and speed restrictions which doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 1, 2008 Report Share Posted January 1, 2008 About 25 years ago,(I think) there were plans to build another one which would have taken the road through Boteler playing fields to Kingsway Bridge. It fell through for some reason. At the time someone was trying to sell his house on the Grappenhall side and couldn't because no decision had been taken. As for the maintenance of the road on the bridge, it takes place every Preston Guild. As for the speed limit, most seem to ignore it. I would imagine it is there to limit the wear and tear. Given the unevenness of the surface 20mph seems to make sense. Less wear and tear on your car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 1, 2008 Report Share Posted January 1, 2008 Originally posted by Paul Kennedy: Who is responsible for its maintenance, and is it being maintained at all. Are there plans to replace it, and has its loss to the road system connecting the south to the north of the town been considered. I notice it is subject to both weight and speed restrictions which doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Do you know of something that the rest of us are yet to hear about Sir Paul Find it worrying that you are suddenly posing questions about the Cantilever Bridge and the impact of it's possible loss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted January 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2008 Finger on the pulse Dismayed, finger on the pulse. But seriously one hopes that Members and Officers of WBC who regularly read posters' comments, might give mine and others concerns some thoughts, and that plans for dealing with its loss, temporary.......or otherwise are in hand. The latter part of your first sentence..... [ 01.01.2008, 22:35: Message edited by: Paul Kennedy ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBain Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Is that the bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal? If it is, then Manchester Ship Canal Company own it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Remove this, and our ground loses its name, will have to go back to plain old Common Lane then, boo hoo, lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilly Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Is falling down, falling down, falling down.............. anyone walked UNDER it, tis fairly scarey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 The ?Cantilever? Bridge?s real name is the ?Latchford High Level Bridge?? it?s is known locally as the Cantilever because of it?s cantilever design. It weighs approx 783 tons and the 206 foot span carries the roadway 75 feet above the water level... Eek imagine if it fell down. Most of the existing bridges over the Ship Canal remain the responsibility of the Manchester Ship Canal Company?.and as this one is an original they will still be responsible for it. So guess it depends on wether they want to fork out the money to keep maintain their bridges which given the state of some of them it would seem not In January 1997 (11 years ago) the local papers reported that some of the ancient bridges were straining to keep up with modern times. Vital links such as the then 100-year-old Latchford High Level bridge (now 111 years old) were buckling under the weight of the thousands of cars and lorries which travelled across the town. So?. the Manchester Ship Canal Company carried out an assessment and they decided they would get a lot more life out of the bridges if weight restriction were introduced. This was approved and Council Chiefs imposed weight restrictions in a bid to stretch the bridge's life span. The long term solution was to build a new bridge - funded by the Department of Transport ? but to retain the high level bridge as a green route for cyclists and pedestrians ) I?m sure a new bridge will be on the way soon.... new is always preferable than refurbishing/repairing old ?..and maybe those who are responsible for the maintenance of the Cantilever Bridge will still fork out the cost towards a new one but under a different ?guise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_b Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 I always thought the cantilever bridge was built at the say so of Mr Parr,so he could drive his horse & carriage straight through from Parrs bank in the town centre to his home in Grappenhall Hayes.He was a major shareholder of the ship canal company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Some pics of it being constructed... ... or NOT it would seem... why do any pictures I link to just come up with a little square with a cross in it ?? [ 03.01.2008, 19:52: Message edited by: Dismayed ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Dismayed are you putting the pictures into an online server? Like Photobucket? You have to do that first before you add them as a link? Or take them from a web page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 They are links direct to pictures on a web site so would have thought they should work. Never heard of the likes of photobucket and wouldn't know where to start. Here's the links(rather than trying to dsplay the pics here...) cos as soon as I put the UBB code round the links it goes to pot... http://www.canalarchive.org.uk/map/getobjectmap.php?rnum=T1086&mapid=&mlsref=&cmn=&pn=&mp=&all=yes http://www.canalarchive.org.uk/map/getobjectmap.php?rnum=T1085&mapid=&mlsref=&cmn=&pn=&mp=&all=yes http://www.canalarchive.org.uk/map/getobjectmap.php?rnum=T1084&mapid=&mlsref=&cmn=&pn=&mp=&all=yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilly Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Cant see pics Still fink its falling down [ 04.01.2008, 12:08: Message edited by: Tilly ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Thank you for that Dismayed. The Ship Canal and it's bridges were a fantastic achievement. Can you imagine how long and how costly that would be today? IF they would take it on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilly Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Ditto Dismayed, thanks. Just looked at those links, amazing piece of engineering as was the canal its self. I love anything like that, really fascinates me, probably having a Dad who explained all that sort of thing to me as a child as he worked in the Contruction Industry himself on the design, promotion, organising side of things,engineering, roof design, cladding, all sorts really, never laid a brick in his life. He must have thought he'd got a little boy I can remember going on site visits with him as a tiny one and loving it and stayed really interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warringtoncouncil.is good Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 the whole of the canal archive site is very good, Is the tesco Wine ship still going on the canal 3 times a week? And is the anywhere you can see what will be on the canal at any time ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyMac Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Originally posted by Dismayed: LUT19 of the 2005 UDP specified that the Council would NOT permit any development of, and would also safeguard, land required for transport schemes which also included ?A new or replacement high-level crossing of the Manchester Ship Canal between Ackers Road, Stockton Heath and Station Road, Latchford.? I think a fixed high-level bridge across the Ship Canal should be the main priority of the council when it comes to the subject of new roads. Probably more so than a second Mersey crossing. It should be an urban expressway, possibly dual carriageway, and it should become the main A49. It could utilise the old railway formation between Bridge Foot and Latchford, with a link road in towards Loushers Lane for Morrisons traffic. It should then cross the Ship Canal next to the Cantilever and head out towards Grappenhall Heys and onto the road network as envisaged by the New Town Development Plan, rejoining the old A49 somewhere near the M56 with feeder routes into the housing estates there, e.g. Witherwin Avenue. The traffic through Stockton Heath is intolerable, and there needs to be a by-pass - once this is in place, you could even consider limited pedestrianisation or a one-way system in the village centre there. Public transport would be much more punctual. There would be less Chelsea Tractors clogging up the whole shiddig. Less disruption from boats on the Big Ditch as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyMac Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Originally posted by warringtoncouncil.is good: And is the anywhere you can see what will be on the canal at any time ? Try this: http://www.aisliverpool.co.uk/currentmap.php?map=MSC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBain Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Jimmy Mac, can you really see the Council having: a) the brains and foresight; the political will, and; c) the ability to exercise its CPO powers to actually deliver a new Canal crossing? Somehow I don't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted January 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Brilliant link JM, thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyMac Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Originally posted by McBain: Jimmy Mac, can you really see the Council having: a) the brains and foresight; the political will, and; c) the ability to exercise its CPO powers to actually deliver a new Canal crossing? Nope. I've lost what little nugget of hope I had that both the officers and councillors could actually do the right thing ever. I'm sure that MSCC would love another bridge over the canal, but the moans from residents about noise, construction traffic, delays, unsightly structures etc. during its construction would be deafening...The plans for a similar bridge have been mooted for how long? Long enough, even despite the on-off nature of the scheme. Frankly I don't have any real sympathy - I live next door to a railway, and one can hear the whining of cars going over Thelwall Viaduct from my parents' house, even though they live in Paddington! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Happy New Year James. Wasn't the original plan to build a new road off the Whitchurch road on the Cheshire side of the M56? which would have by-passed St. Heath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warringtoncouncil.is good Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Originally posted by JimmyMac: ]Try this: http://www.aisliverpool.co.uk/currentmap.php?map=MSC WOW Thats brill No work for me this next week i will b epoping out to see the ships Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 So from those pictures, would I be right in thinking that the centre section has no visible support of its own, just where it's welded to the end sections over the piers? I think I'll stick to 20... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Don't worry it's bolted together as well as being welded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.