Jump to content

Latchford Transport Issues


Recommended Posts

Hello we are group of third year students from Manchester Met Uni. We are investigating the Latchford area in an assignment. We are working with Councillor Steven Wright and Scott Jones, Chrissie Gibson Uni lecturers. We have been asked to make an action plan to deal with the current issue in the Latchford area we are looking at the issues around transport

 

We are interested in any ideas or thoughts of way to improve or manage the transport issue in the Latchford area.

 

Looking forward to hearing your ideas and thoughts. Thank you for your help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stand back - look at the maps and imagine a series of concentric circles around the Town, the outer one being the M/Way system; thus allowing traffic to avoid the bottle neck at Bridge Foot. So at least one new bridge over the Mersey, opening up the S/W quadrant. Possible use of the old rail line from T/C to Lymm, to link up with the Manchester Light Rail System? Then, having applied some vision - try finding the money to deliver it! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly when you look at the old development plans for the Grappenhall / Appleton area, there was the provision of a North/South feeder road and a new high level bridge over the canal near to the Cantilever Bridge. I understand money was put aside for it, but I assume it has long since been used elsewhere.

It is a pity that that bridge did not go ahead. Maybe if further development does take place on the allocated land, then a new bridge will be part of that development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Structural repairs to the existing high level railway bridge over the ship canal near Latchford locks to permit a road link from somewhere near the Springbrook traffic lights where all the traffic from the M6 comes in to, then over the Mersey on a couple of relatively cheap low level bridges rejoining at either the Farrell St/Kingsway roundabout or up onto the A57 Manchester Rd. (possibly even both!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think the new high level bridge and road system that Paul was referring to was the one that was earmerked for going over Cartwright's Field many many years ago. It would have run parallel to the Cantilever Bridge.

 

However, that wont happen now as the council have sold of the publicly used land for affordable housing... for ?1 if I remember rightly :roll:

 

But then again if, as Paul says, they possibly used the money for the new bridge 'elsewhere' then they had no reason to retain the land any longer and handing it over for affordable housing could get them out of a tricky situation :wink::roll:

 

There definately needs to be a new north/south crossing though as Bridge Foot is a nightmare especially if the MSC Bridges are off at rush hour or if there is an accident on any of the local motorwas.

 

In addition as Peel Holdings have got the first part of their 'Port' Plan passed there will undoubtable be even more hold-ups in the future with more ships using the Manchester Ship Canal and it's swing bridges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason the "high level" bridge, designed as part of the "T" linear system designed by the New Town, to link all their developments; was abandoned - was through LibDem opposition at the time - they are now moaning about congestion in Stockton Heath. Just shows, to be a politician - dementia helps! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M6 at thelwall has cut off the old railway line so would be too expensive to re-open to lymm

 

I'm not sure that's right - my map has the line in a cutting going under the road that goes under the viaduct.

 

No chance of funding anyway - plus remodelling Bridge Foot would be a lot easier if the Latchford sidings were no more and the bridge over the old line (which replaced the old level crossing) could be removed; this needs the Arpley Chord building (for Fiddlers Ferry coal traffic to access Arpley sidings and the main line without reversing). A guided busway would be the only realistic option for public transport to use the line again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we understand it, the main issues here are the bridge and railway line. We too saw raised these as issues when we visited latchford to carry out our own research. However, we also considered that the traffic lights and one way system coming from the lights under the railway bridge to netto and also down latchford's main shopping street could be possibly re-worked. What would be your views on this?

 

Thank you for replying, you have already been a great help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don?t suggest any more traffic lights please. :cry:

 

The major issue as I see it is the lack of any firm plans for the long-term future of the canal. If some decision could be made that resulted in barge only traffic rather than general shipping, then several problems would be immediately solved.

 

 

Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we understand it, the main issues here are the bridge and railway line. We too saw raised these as issues when we visited latchford to carry out our own research. However, we also considered that the traffic lights and one way system coming from the lights under the railway bridge to netto and also down latchford's main shopping street could be possibly re-worked. What would be your views on this?

 

Thank you for replying, you have already been a great help.

 

Where's netto? Do you mean Lidl's?

ALL the lights in Warrington need looking at. I believe that the previous encumbent in the traffic light office, created more problems than he solved.

The new guy has, I believe, after prompting from a NON Lib-Dem, changed things so that the traffic flows better. Maybe they need to look at the ones in Latchford.

Perhaps in a lot of places they should get the old Traffic controller bobby directing traffic. It would flow a lot better.

 

Another one, could be NO right turn coming out of Loushers Lane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The elephant in the room of course is congestion and travel dependency - so no matter how much you reconfigure the highway network, it will be blocked by sheer numbers and usage: so perhaps, a little thinking outside the box is required - such as, reducing travel to work/school distances, by promoting localisation. :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don?t suggest any more traffic lights please. :cry:

 

The major issue as I see it is the lack of any firm plans for the long-term future of the canal. If some decision could be made that resulted in barge only traffic rather than general shipping, then several problems would be immediately solved.

 

 

Bill :)

 

As far as I know, Peel Holdings have long-term firm plans to continue shipping on the upper reaches of the MSC (and increase it with development of "Port Salford"), so I don't think any decision is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vic

 

I was thinking more of real plans rather than pipe dreams. For sure the ship canal brought prosperity to the region but times have changed and these days it?s probably seen more as a liability than an asset. It?s bad enough having a river divide the town but add to that a largely unused canal with limited crossing points and you get the transport infrastructure nightmare that?s Warrington.

 

They can?t get rid of the canal for obvious reasons and the cost of keeping it navigable for just the occasional larger ship is probably unjustifiable. Peel Holding?s must be incurring some huge costs in just keeping the thing running and can?t be making a bean with low levels of usage. Call me cynical but I think their current plans have more to do with mitigating these costs while any resulting environmental improvements are merely an incidental side effect.

 

If these plans were to go ahead then I think we?d need a bit more than a student project to resolve the gridlock nightmare that almost certainly would result.

 

Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean the plans for the ?400 million container terminal at Port Salford, which got consent last year? Last time I heard (November), Peel Holdings were "mindful of the swing bridge issue and we are in discussions with transport (WBC) to try to develop a practical way to minimise traffic disruptions".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Port Moore is going to be an interesting one. The road from the village to the Industrial estate is not exactly designed for HGV's and there will be a lot more of them.

I heard a rumour on the grapevine, that Solvay are looking into opening up the old rail link to transport their stuff.

One way that would help to ease the traffic problems, would be to build a road from Walton to Liverpool Rd.That would get rid of a lot of traffic that was going through the town.

Another would be to employ local people. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Planning permission is what the name implies and doesn?t necessarily mean that their plans will actually materialise. I would imagine that planning consent to develop on a former rubbish dump wouldn?t really have been a hard fought battle but irrespective of whether or not they go ahead, the value of that land would increase considerably.

 

Liverpool has a perfectly good port with existing to the road and rail networks so why attempt to bring ships up to Salford to unload if the goods aren?t actually destined for that area. There?s no sound logic behind this idea but as I say, without it, Peel Holdings have a big drain (if you pardon the pun) on their resources.

 

Cut through the hyperbola about environmental and job creation issues and your left with a crazy plan employing methods dating back to early 1900s while at the same time completely cocking up our town. If high volume shipping was to return to Warrington, then I think it would take a bit more than the offer of a can of WD40 to sort out the problems that it?d create.

 

Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The logic (a bit like old railway marshalling yards for wagons) is a centralised hub for transhipping containers - supposedly 5% of the country's container traffic would pass through Port Salford. Salford City Council's planning website is awful for finding the actual plans, design and access statements etc, but the proposals are for handling two container ships at a time - which (in the absence of a better guess than 12 hours turnaround time) could mean 4 ships a day each way. 4 meeting the night high tide, so 4 movements during the day. Even if avoiding rush hours, that's a lot of delay at three swing bridges....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5% of the countrys containerised shipping is one HELL of a lot more than 4 ships a day!!!!

 

Especially if the ships in question have to be small enough to get through the locks on the ship canal.

 

The port of Felixstowe alone handles the equivalent of almost 3 1/2 MILLION twenty foot containers per year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...