New Mersey Crossing

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

New Mersey Crossing

Post by PeterA5145 »

This project to relieve the Runcorn-Widnes bridge certainly seems to be going ahead:

https://www.merseycrossing.co.uk
According to the website it may be open by 2007. I'll believe that when I see it, but it will happen eventually.

They're just about to start carriageway replacement on the current bridge which is likely to cause delay and disruption for three months. There will be a temporary 20 mph limit on the bridge (normally 40) enforced by cameras - should be fun Image

Regards,

Peter
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
Phil
Member
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Post by Phil »

Having looked at the location of the new bridge, I would have thought it would be better being built downstream from the current bridge as an extension of the A5300 runing down to the missing junction 13 on the M56. This would prevent through trafficfrom having to travel round Runcorn's ring road to get to the M56.I know there could be probems with its proximity to Liverpool airport, but I am sure these could be solved.
regards
Phil
Mediaman_12
Member
Posts: 566
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 23:29

Post by Mediaman_12 »

Phil.
The reason for a it being up stream of the existing crossing is because it is more for regional/local traffic than National routes. A bridge between Warrington and Widnes will provide some relief for Bridge Foot & the narrow Chester road swing bridge in Warrington as well as the current Widnes/Runcorn bridge. Also a downstream location is easier to connect to the local Roan networks on ether side of the river, a downstream ridge would also be lot's more expensive, The River Mersey gets lot's wider just west of Runcorn and remains so almost up to Liverpool waterfront.
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

There's a big article about this in today's "Sunday Times"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 08,00.html

====================================

Double bridge to put Mersey ferries in shade
Jonathan Leake and Andrew White

LIVERPOOL?S historic Mersey ferries face a new rival in the form of a giant double-decker bridge, the first in Britain.

The ?350m project, expected to be announced by ministers within the next few weeks, would also create one of the longest bridges in the country. It would stretch 1.7 miles across the Mersey, carrying motor traffic on its top deck with trams, walkers and cyclists on the lower tier.

The aim is to improve links between Liverpool, the Wirral peninsula and Runcorn, close to John Lennon airport, which has become one of the fastest- growing in the country.

But critics fear the bridge could cause environmental damage and adversely affect the ferries, which carry more than 600,000 passengers a year. The boats were immortalised in the 1964 hit Ferry ?cross the Mersey, by Gerry and the Pacemakers. The band, who shared manager Brian Epstein and producer George Martin with the Beatles, were at the forefront of the ?Merseybeat? revolution.

Tony McDermott, chairman of the New Mersey Crossing Group, said the bridge would become an icon for the regeneration of northwest England. ?This bridge will knock the socks off the Angel of the North. We hope it will be built by 2008, when Liverpool becomes the European capital of culture.?

Several designs have been submitted but the one understood to be favoured by ministers would see three spans supported by cables running from two 360ft towers. The top deck would have a four-lane highway ? with room to add two more lanes later. The lower deck would have a tram lane in the middle, with cycle lanes and walkways along the outside.
The new bridge would be among the largest of its kind in the world, with its double-decker design making it one of Britain?s most ambitious engineering projects of recent years.

The Britannia bridge crossing the Menai Straits between Anglesey and the Welsh mainland also has two decks, but it is much shorter and was built as a rail link, with the upper deck, for cars, being added later. The country?s last major bridge to be completed was the second Severn crossing in 1996.

The Mersey project is being overseen by Gifford & Partners, the same consultant engineers behind construction of the Millennium bridge across the Tyne in Gateshead. Ian Hunt, a director of Gifford, said: ?This area of Merseyside is a community divided by the river and the new bridge will relieve that situation as well as reducing journey times.?

Environmentalists are less enthusiastic. They say such projects generate more car use at a time when government policy is to try to reduce traffic. The nearby Silver Jubilee bridge was built in 1961 to carry a predicted 9,000 vehicles a day but is now pounded by more than 90,000, necessitating frequent repairs.

Friends of the Earth warned that the new bridge would generate a similar surge in congestion and pollution for neighbouring communities. ?They should be looking at ways to draw traffic away from the area, not increase it. In a few years? time they will just need another one,? it said.

The bridge is certain to raise questions over the future of the Mersey ferries. Some fear the new scheme will result in a drop in numbers taking the ferries, but others hope it will bring in extra tourists to make up for any loss in commuter traffic.

A spokesman for Mersey Ferries said the bridge would be several miles from the ferry crossing, and predicted: ?The ferries will remain one of the most popular tourist attractions in the north of England.?

A spokeswoman for Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, confirmed that a decision on the new Mersey crossing was imminent. But Alan Bleasdale, the Liverpool playwright, who penned Boys from the Blackstuff and Blood Brothers, warned ministers to consider the impact on the ferries.

?It would be astonishingly bad for Liverpool if the ferries were lost,? he said. ?I did most of my courting sitting on the back of the Mersey ferries. It was incredibly romantic ? something you could not replicate on a bus going over a metal bridge.?

====================================

They seem to have got the wrong end of the stick here, because the bridge will be 15 miles from Liverpool and I can't see it having any impact on the Mersey ferries whatsoever.

Also a tram system in Runcorn and Widnes looks unlikely to say the least.

Regards,

Peter
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
Thryduulf
Member
Posts: 1050
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 10:17
Location: Walking distance to the A2204
Contact:

Post by Thryduulf »

In terms of double-decker bridges tehy appear to have forgotten the High Level Bridge in Newcastle. It is much shorter than this proposed bridge, but it was designed as a double decker bridge from the start.

Chris
The user formerly known as Chris 'Awkward' McKenna
David D Miller
Member
Posts: 636
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 11:04
Location: St Andrews
Contact:

Post by David D Miller »

The other thing they've forgotten is that one of theexisting Mersey crossingsalready has a second deck built for tram tracks: Central Avenue, the lower deck of the 1934 Queensway tunnel, was intended for trams but never used. It's now unlikely ever to be used, as reinforcements to the main road deck have reduced the clearances underneath.

Liverpool's roads are famous for having space reserved for tram tracks:
Between the wars, Liverpool Corporation continued to expand its tramway system and designed a network of new suburban roads which incorporated tramway reservations. J. A. Brodie, city engineer from 1896 to 1926, held progressive views about urban transport and planning. In 1910, he formulated the 'linear park' concept, whereby new outer suburbs were to be built to house the displaced occupants of cleared inner-city slums. The new developments would be at lower densities and served by wide parkway-type roads. Crucially, however, he recognised that fast and cheap public transport was needed to compensate for the longer journeys to work and he therefore favoured dual-carriageways with rapid tramways on the central reservation. Liverpool was already commutted to a 'wide roads' policy contained in its Corporation Act of 1902 and the 1908 Streets and Building Act, so the new policy accorded well with the old. Brodie's concept involved tramways which, unlike railways laid on ballast sleeper tracks, were bedded on clinkers which were then grassed over - this resulted in the characteristic Liverpool 'grass track' tramways. <P align=right>from Leading the Way, a history of Lancashire's Roads,
edited by Dr Alan Crosby, Lancashire County Books, 1998.
<P align=left>It should be remembered that mostof the wide "Brodie system" roads in Liverpool did actually carry trams. Expansion of Liverpool's trams continued until 1942. It's only since the sudden abandonment of theentire network in the mid-1950s that the reserved space seems like a waste.
Tastyfish
Member
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 13:42
Location: Gloucestershire

Post by Tastyfish »

I'm also miffed why the bridge isn't built downstream. The A5300 could be extended south to Hale Gate Farm, swing eastwards and across the Mersey which is only slightly wider here than at the location of the official proposal. The road would then join the A557 ring-road by the rec near Weston Point. I would then say any relief for the Warrington Bridge would be provided by the existing Silver Jubilee bridge. 90,000 vehicles a day sounds like a lot more than local traffic. The new proposed bridge would create a more complex interchange on its northern end as it links with the A553 and A557. Most local traffic would continue to use the existing bridge.If the bridge were to be built downstream at Hale Gate Farma new link road to John Lennon airport could then be built more easily.
Also, does anyone know why there is a footpath marked 'Trans-Pennine Trail' that runs under the bridge being nowhere near the Pennines!
BobA6271
Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 19:38

Post by BobA6271 »

The Trans-Pennine trail runs from Liverpool to Hull.Perhaps they have widened the Pennines without telling anyone.
User avatar
stu531
Member
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 23:10
Location: Harrogate

Post by stu531 »

(It's a jolly good cycle path, actually - with spurs going up to Southport, over the pennines to Leeds, Hull and Derby, and the east-most point being Hornsea.)
When I first look at this I thought 'this isn't going to help anything except local traffic'. But given the angle it's at, it will help people looking for an alternative route from South Liverpool to the M6 south, and vice versa. So there will be some benefits. As a result, the existing Runcorn bridge would tend to take more traffic going towards Chester.So I think it's a good idea.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

And of course, FoE omitted the detail that if both bridges get congested, with some cleverly planned links they could be both made one-way. However, since progress seems to be evil in the UK, and instead going back to the 12th century seems to be favoured, I don't know...
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3853
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Post by Brenley Corner »

Peter A5145 <<will be a temporary 20 mph limit on the bridge (normally 40) enforced by cameras - should be fun>>
I crossed this bridge on Monday with another Sabristo, I struggled to keep the car at 20mph only to find there was a bag/sack over the head of the GATSO!!!Image
Tony
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

PeterA5145 wrote:This project to relieve the Runcorn-Widnes bridge certainly seems to be going ahead:
http://www.merseycrossing.co.uk
According to the website it may be open by 2007. I'll believe that when I see it, but it will happen eventually.
The local paper reports this week that the decision has been postponed for a year :(

AKA kicked into touch.

Why do the government not realise that major infrastructure projects such as this are a key engine of economic growth?
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
stu531
Member
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 23:10
Location: Harrogate

Post by stu531 »

Isn't 2007 a little early, given where we are?

I used to use the Runcorn-Widnes bridge on a daily commute, and it wasn't fun - it's a real bottleneck, although the bridge is increasingly famous following 2 pints etc!

Another Mersey crossing does make sense though, especially where it is, though it'll give trouble to people trying to make sense of the comedy Runcorn expressway system...

Stu
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

Perhaps surprisingly, this has been given provisional approval today.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/mers ... 854658.stm
New Mersey toll bridge approved

Plans for a new toll bridge crossing the River Mersey have moved a step nearer with the promise of £209m of government funds.

Transport Secretary Alistair Darling has approved the Mersey Gateway scheme for entry into the national programme of major schemes and agreed funds.

It will provide a crossing of the Mersey between Runcorn and Widnes.

It will ease pressure on the existing Silver Jubilee bridge, which suffers congestion and is costly to maintain.

The government decision now allows Halton Borough Council to draw up detailed designs.

Mr Darling said: "The proposed new bridge would bring significant benefits to the local communities of Runcorn and Widnes, improve access to key developments such as Liverpool John Lennon Airport and help to support the continuing economic growth on Merseyside."

Roy Morris, chairman of the Merseyside Partnership, said the announcement was "fantastic news".

He said the bridge was of "massive strategic importance" to the North West.
However, as stated, it will be a toll bridge, and the existing bridge will also be tolled. Also I understand that the existing bridge will be reduced from S4 to S2, which seems something of a retrograde step.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

Why toll the original bridge? I can't see that going down too well with the residents of Runcorn who will have to travel to Warrington to find a free crossing over the Ship Canal...
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
ndp
Member
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 13:35

Post by ndp »

Bryn666 wrote:Why toll the original bridge?
Presumably to pay for the new one.
DavidBrown
Member
Posts: 8398
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 00:35

Post by DavidBrown »

ndp wrote:
Bryn666 wrote:Why toll the original bridge?
Presumably to pay for the new one.
Plus it said that the original bridge is 'costly to maintain' - I wonder what sort of toll will be charged for bridges like them? I presume that the toll will be the same on both bridges - it would be rather silly not to make them the same!

The biggest :shock: factor is the fact that the original bridge is going to be reduced to S2! What standard will the new bridge be? Does seem odd to reduce the capacity of a congested road. :?
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

DavidBrown wrote:The biggest :shock: factor is the fact that the original bridge is going to be reduced to S2! What standard will the new bridge be? Does seem odd to reduce the capacity of a congested road. :?
AIUI the new bridge will be D2.

Unless the toll is a fairly nominal amount I expect there will be a lot of diversion of "strategic" traffic over Thelwall and also - at quieter times - of more local traffic through the centre of Warrington.

People in Runcorn and Widnes will also be aggrieved that, having had an untolled bridge for 50+ years, they will now have to start paying a toll on it :evil:

Especially since Scotland seems to be going the other way.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9861
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

The news story implies it will be included in the TPI ("entry into the national programme of major schemes"). In which case it must be an HA scheme. In which case it will presumably form part of the HA strategic network. Which, important though the route is, doesn't really make much sense to me, as I can't see much "strategic" (I presume this means long distance through traffic) traffic using it. Where's the flaw in the logic?

Or is the press release misleading and it will be a major LTP scheme?
Owen
User avatar
haymansafc
Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 16:52
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire

Post by haymansafc »

PeterA5145 wrote:This project to relieve the Runcorn-Widnes bridge certainly seems to be going ahead:"http://www.merseycrossing.co.uk">http://www.merseycrossing.co.uk[/url] According to the website it may be open by 2007. I'll believe that when I see it, but it will happen eventually.
Aye, I believe it's true. Open by 2007? Not a chance. :rofl: Something like 2010 is probably a little closer the mark. I've heard rumours the opening time is 2014! A second bridge has been needed for a good couple of years now. Yesterday, with the closure of the Mersey Tunnels showed how crowded the original bridge is, which local radio reported standing traffic on it for half an hour. A second bridge will be built, there is no doubt about that, not now.

Woops - just seen the original date of this post regarding the 2007 opening! Sorry! :oops:
Why toll the original bridge? I can't see that going down too well with the residents of Runcorn who will have to travel to Warrington to find a free crossing over the Ship Canal...
I see absolutely no sense at all in tolling the old bridge. Why does it only now suddenly require to be tolled? I heard these rumours a couple of years ago and they died down for a time - only to come back now. I really can't see where Toll booths can be placed by the bridge - there is no room for them! Can you imagine the traffic backing up to use it if it was to be tolled? It would just make rush-hour matters even worse!

I use the bridge on a fairly regular basis to get into Warrington and the Gemini Retail Park. I have done for about ten years or so. I gave up on using the A49 to get there long ago - it's become a joke.
Also I understand that the existing bridge will be reduced from S4 to S2, which seems something of a retrograde step.
:msnshock: It's the first I've heard of this. First, news of it possibly becoming a toll bridge was bad enough and now this...! Sure, the new crossing will take away a lot of traffic from the old bridge, but there are still a lot of business's around it so demand for the old bridge will still be quite high. Besides, the road on either side of the bridge is dual carriageway, I can't see any sense either in making it an S2.
The biggest factor is the fact that the original bridge is going to be reduced to S2! What standard will the new bridge be? Does seem odd to reduce the capacity of a congested road.
It's a very strange one. I would have loved to have heard comments over this, presumably along the lines of "I know what we can fo to reduce conhestion on this over-conjected bridge...take out a lane in either direction to reduce capacity...that'll cure it" :bang: :rant:
Post Reply