More than 100 boats expected to sail through Warrington at rush hour in 2014 - causing traffic nightmares

Warrington Guardian: The Manchester Ship Canal The Manchester Ship Canal

MOTORISTS are facing a year of traffic hell with plans to open the town’s swing bridges more than 100 times at rush hour in 2014, the Warrington Guardian can reveal.

And this week we are launching a campaign to find out more about the problem - and what can be done to help ease it.

The council has been warned that Peel Ports, who privately own the Manchester Ship Canal, is expecting 720 vessels to sail through Warrington this year, with around 124 of these sailing between peak periods.

The opening of the swing bridges in Walton, Stockton Heath and Latchford has been highlightes as one of the reasons for gridlock in the town.

Peel Ports currently has the power to open the bridges at their discretion due to an 1885 Act of Parliament.

The council has no power over how frequently the bridges are opened or at what time.

Councillor Paul Kennedy (Hatton, Stretton and Walton - Con) said the bridges can cause a ‘nightmare’ for motorists when opened during rush hour.

In March 2012, Clr Kennedy put it to the council that they should try to repeal the act but was told that the costs would be ‘phenomenally high’.

He added: “An alternative option would be for the Government to repeal the act as they have a lot more money than a local authority like Warrington.”

Clr Kennedy believes more must be done to alleviate the problem and confirmed that Warrington Borough Council and Peel Ports are currently in discussion with regards to the issue.

The council is currently working on an early warning system which should provide up to half an hour alerts of the swing bridges opening.

It is expected that this project will be completed later this year.

Andrew Moore, who moved to Warrington five years ago, said: “I was amazed at how accepting people are and that people just let it happen. I think people have just got used to it.

“But if they stopped to think about it they would realise that it’s not fair.”

Andrew, from Birchwood, has launched a campaign to put pressure on Peel Ports to reduce the swing bridge opening hours after traffic problems caused by the bridge started to affect his business.

Andrew works as a self-employed trainer and has missed countless appointments after being stuck in traffic due to the gridlock caused by the swing bridges.

The 50-year-old, who has recently decided to bill Peel Ports for a loss of income, is urging residents to back him in his to bid, which proposes that the swing bridges no longer open during peak times.

From 7.30am to 9am and 4.30pm and 6.30pm, the swing bridge would remain closed, which would still give Peel Ports a 20 and a half hour window to open the bridges and would be more than reasonable, argues Andrew.

A spokesman at Peel Ports said: “We are fully aware of the concerns of residents and businesses regarding traffic issues associated with the opening of the swing bridges at Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton.

“We are working closely with Warrington Borough Council to minimise the number of vessel movements within the morning and evening peak periods, increased use of the canal during the night, and to develop advanced notification and messaging to forewarn motorists of potential disruption.”

To sign on our online petition click here

Comments (160)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:15am Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

I see we get the usual response from Peel Ports; 'working with the council to minimise disruption'. THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!!

Tima and time again they give the same, condescending, response to a serious issue.

There should be ZERO disruption during rush hour.

They would have over 20 hours a day during the week and 48 hours over the weekend, even if they agreed to stop peak time openings.

They could do it if they wanted to, but that's the issue; they DON'T want to.
I see we get the usual response from Peel Ports; 'working with the council to minimise disruption'. THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!! Tima and time again they give the same, condescending, response to a serious issue. There should be ZERO disruption during rush hour. They would have over 20 hours a day during the week and 48 hours over the weekend, even if they agreed to stop peak time openings. They could do it if they wanted to, but that's the issue; they DON'T want to. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -1

8:43am Thu 23 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

Maybe we're accepting of it because it has formed part of life for countless generations since the Ship Canal was built?

It is ONE of the reason for disruption in the town. However the impact of the ridiculous traffic light sequences at Cockhedge roundabout, Winwick road, the lane changes that the council never corrected at bridge foot are much more affecting than a closure every 2/3 days for 10 minutes maximum.
Maybe we're accepting of it because it has formed part of life for countless generations since the Ship Canal was built? It is ONE of the reason for disruption in the town. However the impact of the ridiculous traffic light sequences at Cockhedge roundabout, Winwick road, the lane changes that the council never corrected at bridge foot are much more affecting than a closure every 2/3 days for 10 minutes maximum. flashcoffy
  • Score: 23

8:49am Thu 23 Jan 14

defor_dog says...

They usually blame it on the tide. What's to stop the boat going thru the bridges at night and then mooring until the tide is correct.

Yesterday 5pm the Stockton heath bridge opened to let a vessel thru.

Make use of the big signs that WBC don't seem to put anything important on.. "vessel ETA for Stockton Heath bridge 16.50"motorist can then avoid the bread
They usually blame it on the tide. What's to stop the boat going thru the bridges at night and then mooring until the tide is correct. Yesterday 5pm the Stockton heath bridge opened to let a vessel thru. Make use of the big signs that WBC don't seem to put anything important on.. "vessel ETA for Stockton Heath bridge 16.50"motorist can then avoid the bread defor_dog
  • Score: 18

8:52am Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

defor_dog wrote:
They usually blame it on the tide. What's to stop the boat going thru the bridges at night and then mooring until the tide is correct.

Yesterday 5pm the Stockton heath bridge opened to let a vessel thru.

Make use of the big signs that WBC don't seem to put anything important on.. "vessel ETA for Stockton Heath bridge 16.50"motorist can then avoid the bread
Even if the signs were used, there is only one alternative route to serve all three bridges; the cantilever bridge at latchford.

Have you ever tried to get to it at rush-hour?

It is woefully inadequate.
[quote][p][bold]defor_dog[/bold] wrote: They usually blame it on the tide. What's to stop the boat going thru the bridges at night and then mooring until the tide is correct. Yesterday 5pm the Stockton heath bridge opened to let a vessel thru. Make use of the big signs that WBC don't seem to put anything important on.. "vessel ETA for Stockton Heath bridge 16.50"motorist can then avoid the bread[/p][/quote]Even if the signs were used, there is only one alternative route to serve all three bridges; the cantilever bridge at latchford. Have you ever tried to get to it at rush-hour? It is woefully inadequate. A.P.Moore
  • Score: 10

8:58am Thu 23 Jan 14

Freeborn John says...

The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back.
In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps? Freeborn John
  • Score: 4

9:13am Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

Freeborn John wrote:
The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back.
In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
I really think that they are.
Peel Ports own a huge amount of property in the area. As we all know; money talks!!
I'd love to know what input the council have when they 'work with' Peel Ports with regard to bridge opening times.
[quote][p][bold]Freeborn John[/bold] wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?[/p][/quote]I really think that they are. Peel Ports own a huge amount of property in the area. As we all know; money talks!! I'd love to know what input the council have when they 'work with' Peel Ports with regard to bridge opening times. A.P.Moore
  • Score: 6

9:32am Thu 23 Jan 14

irishwire says...

Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad!
Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad! irishwire
  • Score: 2

9:39am Thu 23 Jan 14

The Maestro says...

Could the old railway bridge over the canal not be converted to a road to ease some pressure? The council are scared of Peel because they have an interest in Port Warringtona take Peel onand lose that to anothetown such as Runcorn
Could the old railway bridge over the canal not be converted to a road to ease some pressure? The council are scared of Peel because they have an interest in Port Warringtona take Peel onand lose that to anothetown such as Runcorn The Maestro
  • Score: 13

9:43am Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

irishwire wrote:
Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad!
Obviously, you aren't affected by the bridges opening at peak times. If not, then good for you.

However, it is costing me and other businesses in Warrington REAL MONEY!! That's why it's an issue!

Btw, I don't know where the 'Birchwood' thing came from. I live in Latchford. I can't even get out of my own street sometimes when the bridges open.
[quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad![/p][/quote]Obviously, you aren't affected by the bridges opening at peak times. If not, then good for you. However, it is costing me and other businesses in Warrington REAL MONEY!! That's why it's an issue! Btw, I don't know where the 'Birchwood' thing came from. I live in Latchford. I can't even get out of my own street sometimes when the bridges open. A.P.Moore
  • Score: 5

9:44am Thu 23 Jan 14

irishwire says...

They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this? irishwire
  • Score: 5

10:32am Thu 23 Jan 14

ninearches says...

It might make a difference if people allowed for disruption & left for their appointments a bit earlier.I am sure the boom years of the last century saw much more canal traffic & much more road traffic coming through town in the years before the motorways were built.
It might make a difference if people allowed for disruption & left for their appointments a bit earlier.I am sure the boom years of the last century saw much more canal traffic & much more road traffic coming through town in the years before the motorways were built. ninearches
  • Score: 9

11:02am Thu 23 Jan 14

grappenhall boy says...

A bit of better timing on behalf of the bridge operator and some maintainance and updating on the bridge my help.
Stolt Egret has just passed Latchford swing bridge,the bridge was opened and the ship was still under the old railway bridge and it took the ship 4 mins to reach the swing bridge,I appreciate there has to be a safety factor but there is safe and super safe.
After the ship had passed the swing bridge and the bridge had returned it took a further 2mins 30 secs for the jacks to retun to position.
So in conclusion on this 14 min swing,with a bit of better timing and updating the stoppage could have been reduced to 10 mins, only 4 mins but over the year it stacks up.
A bit of better timing on behalf of the bridge operator and some maintainance and updating on the bridge my help. Stolt Egret has just passed Latchford swing bridge,the bridge was opened and the ship was still under the old railway bridge and it took the ship 4 mins to reach the swing bridge,I appreciate there has to be a safety factor but there is safe and super safe. After the ship had passed the swing bridge and the bridge had returned it took a further 2mins 30 secs for the jacks to retun to position. So in conclusion on this 14 min swing,with a bit of better timing and updating the stoppage could have been reduced to 10 mins, only 4 mins but over the year it stacks up. grappenhall boy
  • Score: 11

11:53am Thu 23 Jan 14

wolfitdown says...

irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
I can see your point but if the swing bridge was your only route to lets say the Halliwell Jones stadium and each and every time it was off, as happens along the canal every day and increasing you may see others point of view.
The canal can only be crossed via two very cumbersome, slow, outdated swing bridges plus a weight restricted cantilever bridge, we all know nothing will be done so motorists and residents again will suffer, personally it's something a good welding kit could fix.
[quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]I can see your point but if the swing bridge was your only route to lets say the Halliwell Jones stadium and each and every time it was off, as happens along the canal every day and increasing you may see others point of view. The canal can only be crossed via two very cumbersome, slow, outdated swing bridges plus a weight restricted cantilever bridge, we all know nothing will be done so motorists and residents again will suffer, personally it's something a good welding kit could fix. wolfitdown
  • Score: -1

11:53am Thu 23 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

Just out of interest are the Warrington Guardian able to provide the 2013 figures for Canal journeys?
Just out of interest are the Warrington Guardian able to provide the 2013 figures for Canal journeys? flashcoffy
  • Score: 10

11:55am Thu 23 Jan 14

AppleJunkie says...

wolfitdown wrote:
irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
I can see your point but if the swing bridge was your only route to lets say the Halliwell Jones stadium and each and every time it was off, as happens along the canal every day and increasing you may see others point of view.
The canal can only be crossed via two very cumbersome, slow, outdated swing bridges plus a weight restricted cantilever bridge, we all know nothing will be done so motorists and residents again will suffer, personally it's something a good welding kit could fix.
When I last counted there were 3 swing bridges........
[quote][p][bold]wolfitdown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]I can see your point but if the swing bridge was your only route to lets say the Halliwell Jones stadium and each and every time it was off, as happens along the canal every day and increasing you may see others point of view. The canal can only be crossed via two very cumbersome, slow, outdated swing bridges plus a weight restricted cantilever bridge, we all know nothing will be done so motorists and residents again will suffer, personally it's something a good welding kit could fix.[/p][/quote]When I last counted there were 3 swing bridges........ AppleJunkie
  • Score: 8

12:15pm Thu 23 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 7

12:25pm Thu 23 Jan 14

grey_man says...

Always worth bearing in mind that Steven Broomhead was Chief Executive of the NWDA when it appointed a director of Peel Holdings as its Chairman. There may be no conflict of interests involved but certainly the council should have a direct line to Peel.
Always worth bearing in mind that Steven Broomhead was Chief Executive of the NWDA when it appointed a director of Peel Holdings as its Chairman. There may be no conflict of interests involved but certainly the council should have a direct line to Peel. grey_man
  • Score: 1

12:47pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Newarrival says...

irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
How can you say it affects only 1% of the population? The congestion caused by the swing bridges extends all the way to Warrington city centre, causing gridlock. Anyone travelling in or out of the city, or across the city in any direction, is trapped. This means almost every working person in and around the city centre. A lot more than 1% !
[quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]How can you say it affects only 1% of the population? The congestion caused by the swing bridges extends all the way to Warrington city centre, causing gridlock. Anyone travelling in or out of the city, or across the city in any direction, is trapped. This means almost every working person in and around the city centre. A lot more than 1% ! Newarrival
  • Score: -1

1:14pm Thu 23 Jan 14

irishwire says...

Newarrival wrote:
irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
How can you say it affects only 1% of the population? The congestion caused by the swing bridges extends all the way to Warrington city centre, causing gridlock. Anyone travelling in or out of the city, or across the city in any direction, is trapped. This means almost every working person in and around the city centre. A lot more than 1% !
First we do not live in a city.
Second the amount of people this affects will be less that 1% of the whole Warrington population.
[quote][p][bold]Newarrival[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]How can you say it affects only 1% of the population? The congestion caused by the swing bridges extends all the way to Warrington city centre, causing gridlock. Anyone travelling in or out of the city, or across the city in any direction, is trapped. This means almost every working person in and around the city centre. A lot more than 1% ![/p][/quote]First we do not live in a city. Second the amount of people this affects will be less that 1% of the whole Warrington population. irishwire
  • Score: 5

1:44pm Thu 23 Jan 14

efc808 says...

irishwire wrote:
Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad!
Idiot comes to mind.... Move? very sound advice. If like I do you live in an area which you like and have invested time, money and got good neighbours and family near by, but happen to live near a swing bridge why would you want to move. Yes the bridge is annoying and has got considerably busier of over the last couple of years and sometimes they don't just send one boat through but 2 or 3. The council do need to look at this, like other people have said there plenty of hours in the day with out using up rush hour. You move!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad![/p][/quote]Idiot comes to mind.... Move? very sound advice. If like I do you live in an area which you like and have invested time, money and got good neighbours and family near by, but happen to live near a swing bridge why would you want to move. Yes the bridge is annoying and has got considerably busier of over the last couple of years and sometimes they don't just send one boat through but 2 or 3. The council do need to look at this, like other people have said there plenty of hours in the day with out using up rush hour. You move!!!!! efc808
  • Score: -8

1:54pm Thu 23 Jan 14

irishwire says...

efc808 wrote:
irishwire wrote:
Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad!
Idiot comes to mind.... Move? very sound advice. If like I do you live in an area which you like and have invested time, money and got good neighbours and family near by, but happen to live near a swing bridge why would you want to move. Yes the bridge is annoying and has got considerably busier of over the last couple of years and sometimes they don't just send one boat through but 2 or 3. The council do need to look at this, like other people have said there plenty of hours in the day with out using up rush hour. You move!!!!!
Why would I move? I am not moaning about something that has been here a lot longer than me. I have bigger and better things to worry about rather than a bridge that inconveniences people for a small amount of time each year.

They sometimes send 2 or 3 boats at a time??? Well I take everything back this is indeed a very serious subject and everything else in Warrington should be dropped immediately and the council should throw money they dont have at this!

Is it not possible to get expected boat times up to a week before and then work around that?
[quote][p][bold]efc808[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad![/p][/quote]Idiot comes to mind.... Move? very sound advice. If like I do you live in an area which you like and have invested time, money and got good neighbours and family near by, but happen to live near a swing bridge why would you want to move. Yes the bridge is annoying and has got considerably busier of over the last couple of years and sometimes they don't just send one boat through but 2 or 3. The council do need to look at this, like other people have said there plenty of hours in the day with out using up rush hour. You move!!!!![/p][/quote]Why would I move? I am not moaning about something that has been here a lot longer than me. I have bigger and better things to worry about rather than a bridge that inconveniences people for a small amount of time each year. They sometimes send 2 or 3 boats at a time??? Well I take everything back this is indeed a very serious subject and everything else in Warrington should be dropped immediately and the council should throw money they dont have at this! Is it not possible to get expected boat times up to a week before and then work around that? irishwire
  • Score: 13

2:00pm Thu 23 Jan 14

ninearches says...

When the canal was dug the planners forgot to factor in that the towns families would 2 or 3 cars per family in just over a hundred years.
When the canal was dug the planners forgot to factor in that the towns families would 2 or 3 cars per family in just over a hundred years. ninearches
  • Score: 12

2:11pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -6

2:15pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
There would be no cost involved if Peel Ports did the decent thing and stopped using the bridges at peak times.

There should be no need for legal action.

It's not rocket science.

You think that this only affects 1% of the population?

Are the other 99% all hermits who never leave the house?
[quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]There would be no cost involved if Peel Ports did the decent thing and stopped using the bridges at peak times. There should be no need for legal action. It's not rocket science. You think that this only affects 1% of the population? Are the other 99% all hermits who never leave the house? A.P.Moore
  • Score: 2

2:21pm Thu 23 Jan 14

irishwire says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
There would be no cost involved if Peel Ports did the decent thing and stopped using the bridges at peak times.

There should be no need for legal action.

It's not rocket science.

You think that this only affects 1% of the population?

Are the other 99% all hermits who never leave the house?
Nope they just dont live near there or do not work so are not affected. Its quite simple when you think about it really, Warrington is a big town!
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]There would be no cost involved if Peel Ports did the decent thing and stopped using the bridges at peak times. There should be no need for legal action. It's not rocket science. You think that this only affects 1% of the population? Are the other 99% all hermits who never leave the house?[/p][/quote]Nope they just dont live near there or do not work so are not affected. Its quite simple when you think about it really, Warrington is a big town! irishwire
  • Score: 6

2:44pm Thu 23 Jan 14

wolfitdown says...

AppleJunkie wrote:
wolfitdown wrote:
irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
I can see your point but if the swing bridge was your only route to lets say the Halliwell Jones stadium and each and every time it was off, as happens along the canal every day and increasing you may see others point of view.
The canal can only be crossed via two very cumbersome, slow, outdated swing bridges plus a weight restricted cantilever bridge, we all know nothing will be done so motorists and residents again will suffer, personally it's something a good welding kit could fix.
When I last counted there were 3 swing bridges........
Apple-junkie, I stand Corrected there is three also moore swing bridge I was thinking of the two I use most, that awful pollution caused by standing traffic with their engines left running, creates terrible problems with the old grey matter.
[quote][p][bold]AppleJunkie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wolfitdown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]I can see your point but if the swing bridge was your only route to lets say the Halliwell Jones stadium and each and every time it was off, as happens along the canal every day and increasing you may see others point of view. The canal can only be crossed via two very cumbersome, slow, outdated swing bridges plus a weight restricted cantilever bridge, we all know nothing will be done so motorists and residents again will suffer, personally it's something a good welding kit could fix.[/p][/quote]When I last counted there were 3 swing bridges........[/p][/quote]Apple-junkie, I stand Corrected there is three also moore swing bridge I was thinking of the two I use most, that awful pollution caused by standing traffic with their engines left running, creates terrible problems with the old grey matter. wolfitdown
  • Score: -1

3:13pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

irishwire wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
There would be no cost involved if Peel Ports did the decent thing and stopped using the bridges at peak times.

There should be no need for legal action.

It's not rocket science.

You think that this only affects 1% of the population?

Are the other 99% all hermits who never leave the house?
Nope they just dont live near there or do not work so are not affected. Its quite simple when you think about it really, Warrington is a big town!
If they're not affected, then they don't have to get involved! it's not compulsory.

As with operating the swing bridges; it's not rocket science!
[quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]There would be no cost involved if Peel Ports did the decent thing and stopped using the bridges at peak times. There should be no need for legal action. It's not rocket science. You think that this only affects 1% of the population? Are the other 99% all hermits who never leave the house?[/p][/quote]Nope they just dont live near there or do not work so are not affected. Its quite simple when you think about it really, Warrington is a big town![/p][/quote]If they're not affected, then they don't have to get involved! it's not compulsory. As with operating the swing bridges; it's not rocket science! A.P.Moore
  • Score: -3

4:04pm Thu 23 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest, SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 6

4:11pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs?

Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!!

As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics!

You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you!

Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,[/p][/quote]Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs? Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!! As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics! You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you! Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that. A.P.Moore
  • Score: 4

4:13pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

ninearches wrote:
When the canal was dug the planners forgot to factor in that the towns families would 2 or 3 cars per family in just over a hundred years.
It has nothing to do with that.

It has everything to do with how the bridges are managed in 2014.
[quote][p][bold]ninearches[/bold] wrote: When the canal was dug the planners forgot to factor in that the towns families would 2 or 3 cars per family in just over a hundred years.[/p][/quote]It has nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with how the bridges are managed in 2014. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -6

4:35pm Thu 23 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs?

Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!!

As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics!

You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you!

Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.
Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it?

There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,[/p][/quote]Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs? Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!! As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics! You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you! Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.[/p][/quote]Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it? There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 1

4:45pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs?

Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!!

As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics!

You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you!

Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.
Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it?

There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.
OMG.........

THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!!

WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,[/p][/quote]Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs? Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!! As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics! You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you! Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.[/p][/quote]Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it? There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.[/p][/quote]OMG......... THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!! WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -2

5:02pm Thu 23 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs?

Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!!

As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics!

You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you!

Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.
Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it?

There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.
OMG.........

THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!!

WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.
I understand with clarity that you personally do not have sufficient local knowledge to have any available alternatives for crossing the Manchester Ship canal. However that doesn't mean that other people do not have alternative available routes. It of course depends on where in Warrington they live. It doesn't take much intelligence to realise that, now does it? Find a map and see for your self. If I were you I would expect traffic queues at rush hour, and take necessary journey planning to get to where you are going and arrive on time or a little early so as not to be rushed.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,[/p][/quote]Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs? Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!! As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics! You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you! Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.[/p][/quote]Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it? There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.[/p][/quote]OMG......... THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!! WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.[/p][/quote]I understand with clarity that you personally do not have sufficient local knowledge to have any available alternatives for crossing the Manchester Ship canal. However that doesn't mean that other people do not have alternative available routes. It of course depends on where in Warrington they live. It doesn't take much intelligence to realise that, now does it? Find a map and see for your self. If I were you I would expect traffic queues at rush hour, and take necessary journey planning to get to where you are going and arrive on time or a little early so as not to be rushed. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 3

5:30pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs?

Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!!

As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics!

You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you!

Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.
Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it?

There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.
OMG.........

THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!!

WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.
I understand with clarity that you personally do not have sufficient local knowledge to have any available alternatives for crossing the Manchester Ship canal. However that doesn't mean that other people do not have alternative available routes. It of course depends on where in Warrington they live. It doesn't take much intelligence to realise that, now does it? Find a map and see for your self. If I were you I would expect traffic queues at rush hour, and take necessary journey planning to get to where you are going and arrive on time or a little early so as not to be rushed.
Eveidently, your local knowledge is sorely lacking.

The ship canal cuts the south of Warrington off from the rest of the town.

There are 4 crossings; the swing bridges as Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton and the cantilever bridge, also at Latchford.

When a ship goeas along the canal, all three swing bridges open in sequence, causing gridlock around them if it happens to be peak time. The three swingbridges are very close together, so the three 'pools' of gridlock tend to overlap each other.

The cantilever is a good alternative route, if you can get to it and you're not in a lorry or HGV.

Unfortunately, such is the severity of the gridlock, more often than not you can't get to it because of the gridlock......oh the irony!!

No satnav in the world can sort out that pesky little problem.

Do you or any of your friends/family work for Peel Ports, by any chance?
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,[/p][/quote]Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs? Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!! As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics! You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you! Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.[/p][/quote]Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it? There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.[/p][/quote]OMG......... THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!! WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.[/p][/quote]I understand with clarity that you personally do not have sufficient local knowledge to have any available alternatives for crossing the Manchester Ship canal. However that doesn't mean that other people do not have alternative available routes. It of course depends on where in Warrington they live. It doesn't take much intelligence to realise that, now does it? Find a map and see for your self. If I were you I would expect traffic queues at rush hour, and take necessary journey planning to get to where you are going and arrive on time or a little early so as not to be rushed.[/p][/quote]Eveidently, your local knowledge is sorely lacking. The ship canal cuts the south of Warrington off from the rest of the town. There are 4 crossings; the swing bridges as Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton and the cantilever bridge, also at Latchford. When a ship goeas along the canal, all three swing bridges open in sequence, causing gridlock around them if it happens to be peak time. The three swingbridges are very close together, so the three 'pools' of gridlock tend to overlap each other. The cantilever is a good alternative route, if you can get to it and you're not in a lorry or HGV. Unfortunately, such is the severity of the gridlock, more often than not you can't get to it because of the gridlock......oh the irony!! No satnav in the world can sort out that pesky little problem. Do you or any of your friends/family work for Peel Ports, by any chance? A.P.Moore
  • Score: 3

5:38pm Thu 23 Jan 14

hippety says...

I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks.

I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience.

I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that.

There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.
I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks. I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience. I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that. There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over. hippety
  • Score: 14

6:01pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

hippety wrote:
I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks.

I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience.

I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that.

There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.
It has nothing to do with 'self-importance'. More like 'common sense'.......a term that's become something of an oxymoron these days.

If you've never been significantly held up, then you're one of the lucky one's. There are times when I can't even get out of my own street when the Latchford bridge opens during peak times. Especially now the new housing estate has been built alongside Latchford locks.

Could you tell me these alternative routes?
[quote][p][bold]hippety[/bold] wrote: I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks. I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience. I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that. There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.[/p][/quote]It has nothing to do with 'self-importance'. More like 'common sense'.......a term that's become something of an oxymoron these days. If you've never been significantly held up, then you're one of the lucky one's. There are times when I can't even get out of my own street when the Latchford bridge opens during peak times. Especially now the new housing estate has been built alongside Latchford locks. Could you tell me these alternative routes? A.P.Moore
  • Score: -3

6:09pm Thu 23 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think?

When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads.

I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.
People don't 'choose to sit in queues'.

There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries.

That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it.

Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day.

They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs.

The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.
Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,
Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs?

Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!!

As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics!

You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you!

Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.
Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it?

There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.
OMG.........

THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!!

WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.
I understand with clarity that you personally do not have sufficient local knowledge to have any available alternatives for crossing the Manchester Ship canal. However that doesn't mean that other people do not have alternative available routes. It of course depends on where in Warrington they live. It doesn't take much intelligence to realise that, now does it? Find a map and see for your self. If I were you I would expect traffic queues at rush hour, and take necessary journey planning to get to where you are going and arrive on time or a little early so as not to be rushed.
Eveidently, your local knowledge is sorely lacking.

The ship canal cuts the south of Warrington off from the rest of the town.

There are 4 crossings; the swing bridges as Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton and the cantilever bridge, also at Latchford.

When a ship goeas along the canal, all three swing bridges open in sequence, causing gridlock around them if it happens to be peak time. The three swingbridges are very close together, so the three 'pools' of gridlock tend to overlap each other.

The cantilever is a good alternative route, if you can get to it and you're not in a lorry or HGV.

Unfortunately, such is the severity of the gridlock, more often than not you can't get to it because of the gridlock......oh the irony!!

No satnav in the world can sort out that pesky little problem.

Do you or any of your friends/family work for Peel Ports, by any chance?
No matter how you dress it up what you are really complaining about is normal rush hour traffic conditions and your own inadequate or lack of any journey planning. The shipping traffic on the canal is minimal and would remain minimal even when the bridges are required to be opened for 100 times in the year and equates to about twice a week. You will just have to factor in the 20 minutes you might have to wait.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: What does the spokespersons for the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club think? When travelling it is necessary to prepare before one takes to the road, take note of any possible issues and find alternative routes if required. That task is now made much easier with modern maps for those who can use them or the modern gadgets that have GPS incorporated such as Tom Tom Live. They have come down in price since they were first introduced to the common driver. The antique Manchester Ship canal is here to stay and is much more environmentally friendly than road transport when shifting bulk loads. I do not understand why people choose to sit in queues waiting for an event that they know it will happen and roughly how long it will take to clear and then whine on about it. So get used to it and prepare before you start your journey.[/p][/quote]People don't 'choose to sit in queues'. There is only one, that's ONE, alternative route, that's the cantilever bridge at latchford. Even that can't be used by lorries. That is no use whatsoever when you're stuck at the end of a mile of gridlocked traffic and you can't even get to it! You can do all of the 'preparation' that you like, but short of buying a flying car, there's nothing you can do about it. Do you suggest that everyone stays off the road, just so that Peel Ports can operate at their own cenvenience? That's all this comes down to at the end of the day. They could easily agree not to use the canal for 3 1/2 hours every weekday. That still leaves them 20 1/2 hours a day, plus 48 hours over the weekend to move shipping along the canal. If they can't organise that, then it's a pretty sad state of affairs. The environmental issue doesn't hold water. What do you think the environmental damage of a town full of gridlocked cars is? The tree-huggers who support the canal seem to conveniently forget that not insignificant fact.[/p][/quote]Of course they do choose to sit in the queues and not and not plan their journey properly. Their are alternative routes and with a sat nav there should be no mapping problems for the intelligent to moderately intelligent motorist. They just need to remember that the Manchester Ship Canal is there and that it has been there since Queen Victoria was on the throne. Additionally The Canal is as much a right of way as the main road are. Your arguments are certainty not absolute as you suggest,[/p][/quote]Why do you kep bleating on about sat-navs? Local people don't NEED a sat-nav!! As I said, if you bothered to read, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN THE CANTILEVER BRIDGE!! Intelligence has nothing to do with it, it's pure physics! You can have the best sat-nav in the world, but it won't build an alternative route for you! Any intelligent to moderately intelligent person knows that.[/p][/quote]Sat nav is the modern map and they have the added benefit of gps and also know when main roads are congested, and therefore offer an alternative route. Now that wasn't hard to understand was it? There most certainly are alternative route and they may be adequate for some. However people may choose to wait in the queue than a detour. i still say that if you factor in when journeying over the canal some time( 20-minutes at most.), for a possible delay than there shouldn't be a problem. You deliberately dismiss the other alternative crossing because you might have to travel up to double the distance and also not save any time.[/p][/quote]OMG......... THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES!! WHAT PART OF THOSE FIVE WORDS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? This is why the bridges opening at peak times is such an issue, because there are NO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.[/p][/quote]I understand with clarity that you personally do not have sufficient local knowledge to have any available alternatives for crossing the Manchester Ship canal. However that doesn't mean that other people do not have alternative available routes. It of course depends on where in Warrington they live. It doesn't take much intelligence to realise that, now does it? Find a map and see for your self. If I were you I would expect traffic queues at rush hour, and take necessary journey planning to get to where you are going and arrive on time or a little early so as not to be rushed.[/p][/quote]Eveidently, your local knowledge is sorely lacking. The ship canal cuts the south of Warrington off from the rest of the town. There are 4 crossings; the swing bridges as Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton and the cantilever bridge, also at Latchford. When a ship goeas along the canal, all three swing bridges open in sequence, causing gridlock around them if it happens to be peak time. The three swingbridges are very close together, so the three 'pools' of gridlock tend to overlap each other. The cantilever is a good alternative route, if you can get to it and you're not in a lorry or HGV. Unfortunately, such is the severity of the gridlock, more often than not you can't get to it because of the gridlock......oh the irony!! No satnav in the world can sort out that pesky little problem. Do you or any of your friends/family work for Peel Ports, by any chance?[/p][/quote]No matter how you dress it up what you are really complaining about is normal rush hour traffic conditions and your own inadequate or lack of any journey planning. The shipping traffic on the canal is minimal and would remain minimal even when the bridges are required to be opened for 100 times in the year and equates to about twice a week. You will just have to factor in the 20 minutes you might have to wait. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 3

7:31pm Thu 23 Jan 14

old-codger says...

There is an unused railway bridge in the background just before latchford locks, Could it be converted into a roadbridge to halve the cantilever bridge traffic, Maybe Peel holdings could make a generous donation towards the cost, Its just an idea so don't throw any wobblers.
There is an unused railway bridge in the background just before latchford locks, Could it be converted into a roadbridge to halve the cantilever bridge traffic, Maybe Peel holdings could make a generous donation towards the cost, Its just an idea so don't throw any wobblers. old-codger
  • Score: 11

7:47pm Thu 23 Jan 14

ninearches says...

Is it the bridges that are a problem or the number of vehicles on the roads into Warrington ? Maybe better public transport from the south would be an idea with a park & ride scheme ....a bus could potentially carry the sole occupants of 50 cars thus taking up less road space , shorten a traffic queue & be less vulnerable to being held up by traffic lights etc which are also an influence in the free flow of traffic into town.
Is it the bridges that are a problem or the number of vehicles on the roads into Warrington ? Maybe better public transport from the south would be an idea with a park & ride scheme ....a bus could potentially carry the sole occupants of 50 cars thus taking up less road space , shorten a traffic queue & be less vulnerable to being held up by traffic lights etc which are also an influence in the free flow of traffic into town. ninearches
  • Score: 8

8:54pm Thu 23 Jan 14

stewlycoscom says...

People don't use public transport if they have an alternative private car. Can't say I blame them after seeing some of the other bus users I am inclined to agree. If everyone got on buses the industry would be thriving and the roads congestion free. The more passengers on buses the more frequent they would become. But as I said people don't like sharing space with strangers if an alternative is available.
People don't use public transport if they have an alternative private car. Can't say I blame them after seeing some of the other bus users I am inclined to agree. If everyone got on buses the industry would be thriving and the roads congestion free. The more passengers on buses the more frequent they would become. But as I said people don't like sharing space with strangers if an alternative is available. stewlycoscom
  • Score: 3

9:12pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

"No matter how you dress it up what you are really complaining about is normal rush hour traffic conditions and your own inadequate or lack of any journey planning. The shipping traffic on the canal is minimal and would remain minimal even when the bridges are required to be opened for 100 times in the year and equates to about twice a week. You will just have to factor in the 20 minutes you might have to wait."

No, it isn't normal rush-hour conditions. They are bad enough, but when the 3 trunk-roads across the canal are closed for up to 20 minutes, it is ridiculous.

How often have you been caught in traffic die to the swing bridges? It can't be very often if you think that 20 minutes is all it adds! I have sat on Thelwall New Road for 40 minutes sometimes while the bridge opens, lets the ship pass, closes again, then waited to get to the traffic lights to turn right into Latchford.
"No matter how you dress it up what you are really complaining about is normal rush hour traffic conditions and your own inadequate or lack of any journey planning. The shipping traffic on the canal is minimal and would remain minimal even when the bridges are required to be opened for 100 times in the year and equates to about twice a week. You will just have to factor in the 20 minutes you might have to wait." No, it isn't normal rush-hour conditions. They are bad enough, but when the 3 trunk-roads across the canal are closed for up to 20 minutes, it is ridiculous. How often have you been caught in traffic die to the swing bridges? It can't be very often if you think that 20 minutes is all it adds! I have sat on Thelwall New Road for 40 minutes sometimes while the bridge opens, lets the ship pass, closes again, then waited to get to the traffic lights to turn right into Latchford. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -4

9:33pm Thu 23 Jan 14

John__ says...

hippety wrote:
I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks.

I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience.

I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that.

There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.
Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous.
Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's.
The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year.
I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?
[quote][p][bold]hippety[/bold] wrote: I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks. I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience. I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that. There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.[/p][/quote]Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous. Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's. The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year. I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead? John__
  • Score: 6

9:49pm Thu 23 Jan 14

grey-area says...

Bridge opening at peak times will cause greater chaos. Allowing extra journey time is subjective at best. And are the alternative routes Thelwall Viaduct (M6), Widnes/Runcorn Bridge? These are clogged up daily anyway.

Cars,lorries etc are used for convenience rather than public transport. If there's no bus to places of work (and a job is a job) what's the alternative. So long as no one wants deliveries in the day, then yes, lets get lorries off the road.
Bridge opening at peak times will cause greater chaos. Allowing extra journey time is subjective at best. And are the alternative routes Thelwall Viaduct (M6), Widnes/Runcorn Bridge? These are clogged up daily anyway. Cars,lorries etc are used for convenience rather than public transport. If there's no bus to places of work (and a job is a job) what's the alternative. So long as no one wants deliveries in the day, then yes, lets get lorries off the road. grey-area
  • Score: 4

10:01pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

John__ wrote:
hippety wrote:
I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks.

I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience.

I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that.

There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.
Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous.
Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's.
The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year.
I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?
It may come as surprise to you, but EVERY town has increased traffic at rush hour. Trust me, I've lived and worked in several.

In Warrington, it is compounded by the bridge openings on all 3 of the routes through the south of the town. Do you think that has no adverse affect on the flow of traffic? That all of the 3 routes between south Warrington and the rest of the town being blocked for up to 20 minutes when the roads are already rammed with traffic doesn't cause any additional problems?

One week in december last year, the bridges opened at 08:30 and again at 17:30 for three days running for work at Latchford locks. The 'two openings a week' doesn't include any additional openings for their own service vessels,which add to the number of openenings considerably.

The traffic volume in the 50's anf 60's was a fraction of what it is today. So that's hardly relevant.

I don't think that Peel Ports agreeing not to open the bridges at weekday peak times (just 3 1/2 hours a day) is a huge sacrifice. That still leaves them 150 1/2 hours every week to move ships along the canal.

Just as you can't believe the Guardian 'report this nonsense', i can't believe that there are people like you who think that the present situation is acceptable.

I take it that you're not among the unfortunate people who have no choice but to be on the roads in south Warrington during peak times.
[quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hippety[/bold] wrote: I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks. I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience. I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that. There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.[/p][/quote]Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous. Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's. The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year. I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?[/p][/quote]It may come as surprise to you, but EVERY town has increased traffic at rush hour. Trust me, I've lived and worked in several. In Warrington, it is compounded by the bridge openings on all 3 of the routes through the south of the town. Do you think that has no adverse affect on the flow of traffic? That all of the 3 routes between south Warrington and the rest of the town being blocked for up to 20 minutes when the roads are already rammed with traffic doesn't cause any additional problems? One week in december last year, the bridges opened at 08:30 and again at 17:30 for three days running for work at Latchford locks. The 'two openings a week' doesn't include any additional openings for their own service vessels,which add to the number of openenings considerably. The traffic volume in the 50's anf 60's was a fraction of what it is today. So that's hardly relevant. I don't think that Peel Ports agreeing not to open the bridges at weekday peak times (just 3 1/2 hours a day) is a huge sacrifice. That still leaves them 150 1/2 hours every week to move ships along the canal. Just as you can't believe the Guardian 'report this nonsense', i can't believe that there are people like you who think that the present situation is acceptable. I take it that you're not among the unfortunate people who have no choice but to be on the roads in south Warrington during peak times. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -3

10:03pm Thu 23 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

grey-area wrote:
Bridge opening at peak times will cause greater chaos. Allowing extra journey time is subjective at best. And are the alternative routes Thelwall Viaduct (M6), Widnes/Runcorn Bridge? These are clogged up daily anyway.

Cars,lorries etc are used for convenience rather than public transport. If there's no bus to places of work (and a job is a job) what's the alternative. So long as no one wants deliveries in the day, then yes, lets get lorries off the road.
A little common sense, at last!!
[quote][p][bold]grey-area[/bold] wrote: Bridge opening at peak times will cause greater chaos. Allowing extra journey time is subjective at best. And are the alternative routes Thelwall Viaduct (M6), Widnes/Runcorn Bridge? These are clogged up daily anyway. Cars,lorries etc are used for convenience rather than public transport. If there's no bus to places of work (and a job is a job) what's the alternative. So long as no one wants deliveries in the day, then yes, lets get lorries off the road.[/p][/quote]A little common sense, at last!! A.P.Moore
  • Score: 4

10:32pm Thu 23 Jan 14

John__ says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
John__ wrote:
hippety wrote:
I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks.

I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience.

I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that.

There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.
Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous.
Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's.
The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year.
I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?
It may come as surprise to you, but EVERY town has increased traffic at rush hour. Trust me, I've lived and worked in several.

In Warrington, it is compounded by the bridge openings on all 3 of the routes through the south of the town. Do you think that has no adverse affect on the flow of traffic? That all of the 3 routes between south Warrington and the rest of the town being blocked for up to 20 minutes when the roads are already rammed with traffic doesn't cause any additional problems?

One week in december last year, the bridges opened at 08:30 and again at 17:30 for three days running for work at Latchford locks. The 'two openings a week' doesn't include any additional openings for their own service vessels,which add to the number of openenings considerably.

The traffic volume in the 50's anf 60's was a fraction of what it is today. So that's hardly relevant.

I don't think that Peel Ports agreeing not to open the bridges at weekday peak times (just 3 1/2 hours a day) is a huge sacrifice. That still leaves them 150 1/2 hours every week to move ships along the canal.

Just as you can't believe the Guardian 'report this nonsense', i can't believe that there are people like you who think that the present situation is acceptable.

I take it that you're not among the unfortunate people who have no choice but to be on the roads in south Warrington during peak times.
But you are asking the movement of freight to stop for the convenience of YOU. Like I said should we make lorries pull up alongside the roads at peak times so let everybody past? Time is money whether it's on the roads, water or in the air. I don't think Tesco, who are having containers of wine shipped across the world to Irlam are going to be bothered about you being held up for 20 minutes max. There is not a chance they will agree to mooring their cargo up for 2/3 hours while the traffic dies down. They have fast turn around times just like road hauliers.
I'm not sure how you can say the road traffic in the 50's and 60's isn't relevant as you still had to wait 20 mins for a ship to pass and you were likely be stopped by a bridge swing about 20 times more than you are today.. so it isn't much a problem today as it was back then even with so many million extra cars on the road today.
Regarding the 'extra movements' you refer to. Your probably not familiar with the canal today. The MSC only own one work boat now having sold them off in the last 10 years. The remaining few will pass under the swing bridges and the one that remains which is a crane boat only comes up to Warrington once a week at best and it traditionally avoids peak times with it being a work boat.
I find the present situation with the shipping traffic is acceptable actually. What I don't find acceptable is the traffic in general i.e. poor road layouts and too many traffic lights.
And yes, I do cross the canal at peak times. If i want to I can bypass it by going over the cantilever. However inconvenienced i may be by being delayed 15/20 minutes i still find the sight of a ship passing through our town amazing. A surreal sight that can't be found in many places in the world.
This is the town we live in. Get on with it.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hippety[/bold] wrote: I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks. I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience. I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that. There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.[/p][/quote]Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous. Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's. The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year. I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?[/p][/quote]It may come as surprise to you, but EVERY town has increased traffic at rush hour. Trust me, I've lived and worked in several. In Warrington, it is compounded by the bridge openings on all 3 of the routes through the south of the town. Do you think that has no adverse affect on the flow of traffic? That all of the 3 routes between south Warrington and the rest of the town being blocked for up to 20 minutes when the roads are already rammed with traffic doesn't cause any additional problems? One week in december last year, the bridges opened at 08:30 and again at 17:30 for three days running for work at Latchford locks. The 'two openings a week' doesn't include any additional openings for their own service vessels,which add to the number of openenings considerably. The traffic volume in the 50's anf 60's was a fraction of what it is today. So that's hardly relevant. I don't think that Peel Ports agreeing not to open the bridges at weekday peak times (just 3 1/2 hours a day) is a huge sacrifice. That still leaves them 150 1/2 hours every week to move ships along the canal. Just as you can't believe the Guardian 'report this nonsense', i can't believe that there are people like you who think that the present situation is acceptable. I take it that you're not among the unfortunate people who have no choice but to be on the roads in south Warrington during peak times.[/p][/quote]But you are asking the movement of freight to stop for the convenience of YOU. Like I said should we make lorries pull up alongside the roads at peak times so let everybody past? Time is money whether it's on the roads, water or in the air. I don't think Tesco, who are having containers of wine shipped across the world to Irlam are going to be bothered about you being held up for 20 minutes max. There is not a chance they will agree to mooring their cargo up for 2/3 hours while the traffic dies down. They have fast turn around times just like road hauliers. I'm not sure how you can say the road traffic in the 50's and 60's isn't relevant as you still had to wait 20 mins for a ship to pass and you were likely be stopped by a bridge swing about 20 times more than you are today.. so it isn't much a problem today as it was back then even with so many million extra cars on the road today. Regarding the 'extra movements' you refer to. Your probably not familiar with the canal today. The MSC only own one work boat now having sold them off in the last 10 years. The remaining few will pass under the swing bridges and the one that remains which is a crane boat only comes up to Warrington once a week at best and it traditionally avoids peak times with it being a work boat. I find the present situation with the shipping traffic is acceptable actually. What I don't find acceptable is the traffic in general i.e. poor road layouts and too many traffic lights. And yes, I do cross the canal at peak times. If i want to I can bypass it by going over the cantilever. However inconvenienced i may be by being delayed 15/20 minutes i still find the sight of a ship passing through our town amazing. A surreal sight that can't be found in many places in the world. This is the town we live in. Get on with it. John__
  • Score: 12

10:34pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Reader says...

100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths. Reader
  • Score: 9

10:41pm Thu 23 Jan 14

John__ says...

Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I agree it isn't much.
The article is a bit misleading. It says "over a hundred sailing in rush hour during 2014"
But there were over a hundred sailing during rush hour in 2013... and that figure has declined since the canal had a busy period in 2005/6.
[quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I agree it isn't much. The article is a bit misleading. It says "over a hundred sailing in rush hour during 2014" But there were over a hundred sailing during rush hour in 2013... and that figure has declined since the canal had a busy period in 2005/6. John__
  • Score: 7

11:05pm Thu 23 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
grey-area wrote:
Bridge opening at peak times will cause greater chaos. Allowing extra journey time is subjective at best. And are the alternative routes Thelwall Viaduct (M6), Widnes/Runcorn Bridge? These are clogged up daily anyway.

Cars,lorries etc are used for convenience rather than public transport. If there's no bus to places of work (and a job is a job) what's the alternative. So long as no one wants deliveries in the day, then yes, lets get lorries off the road.
A little common sense, at last!!
This is not common sense as you suggest, it is just one comment that you agree with. It is also not feasible, so will not be happening.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grey-area[/bold] wrote: Bridge opening at peak times will cause greater chaos. Allowing extra journey time is subjective at best. And are the alternative routes Thelwall Viaduct (M6), Widnes/Runcorn Bridge? These are clogged up daily anyway. Cars,lorries etc are used for convenience rather than public transport. If there's no bus to places of work (and a job is a job) what's the alternative. So long as no one wants deliveries in the day, then yes, lets get lorries off the road.[/p][/quote]A little common sense, at last!![/p][/quote]This is not common sense as you suggest, it is just one comment that you agree with. It is also not feasible, so will not be happening. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 2

11:56pm Thu 23 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

NO WONDER WE DONT SEE HAND HELD SPEED CAMERAS OR "SPEED CAMERA VANS" IN THE SOUTH OF WARRINGTON ! ITS SNAIL PACE WHEN THESE SWING BRIDGES OPEN ! (I SIGNED PETITION) OPENING THEM IN RUSH-HOUR WOULD BE TAKING THE "MICHAEL" !!!
NO WONDER WE DONT SEE HAND HELD SPEED CAMERAS OR "SPEED CAMERA VANS" IN THE SOUTH OF WARRINGTON ! ITS SNAIL PACE WHEN THESE SWING BRIDGES OPEN ! (I SIGNED PETITION) OPENING THEM IN RUSH-HOUR WOULD BE TAKING THE "MICHAEL" !!! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -7

7:10am Fri 24 Jan 14

grey_man says...

John__ wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
John__ wrote:
hippety wrote:
I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks.

I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience.

I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that.

There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.
Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous.
Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's.
The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year.
I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?
It may come as surprise to you, but EVERY town has increased traffic at rush hour. Trust me, I've lived and worked in several.

In Warrington, it is compounded by the bridge openings on all 3 of the routes through the south of the town. Do you think that has no adverse affect on the flow of traffic? That all of the 3 routes between south Warrington and the rest of the town being blocked for up to 20 minutes when the roads are already rammed with traffic doesn't cause any additional problems?

One week in december last year, the bridges opened at 08:30 and again at 17:30 for three days running for work at Latchford locks. The 'two openings a week' doesn't include any additional openings for their own service vessels,which add to the number of openenings considerably.

The traffic volume in the 50's anf 60's was a fraction of what it is today. So that's hardly relevant.

I don't think that Peel Ports agreeing not to open the bridges at weekday peak times (just 3 1/2 hours a day) is a huge sacrifice. That still leaves them 150 1/2 hours every week to move ships along the canal.

Just as you can't believe the Guardian 'report this nonsense', i can't believe that there are people like you who think that the present situation is acceptable.

I take it that you're not among the unfortunate people who have no choice but to be on the roads in south Warrington during peak times.
But you are asking the movement of freight to stop for the convenience of YOU. Like I said should we make lorries pull up alongside the roads at peak times so let everybody past? Time is money whether it's on the roads, water or in the air. I don't think Tesco, who are having containers of wine shipped across the world to Irlam are going to be bothered about you being held up for 20 minutes max. There is not a chance they will agree to mooring their cargo up for 2/3 hours while the traffic dies down. They have fast turn around times just like road hauliers.
I'm not sure how you can say the road traffic in the 50's and 60's isn't relevant as you still had to wait 20 mins for a ship to pass and you were likely be stopped by a bridge swing about 20 times more than you are today.. so it isn't much a problem today as it was back then even with so many million extra cars on the road today.
Regarding the 'extra movements' you refer to. Your probably not familiar with the canal today. The MSC only own one work boat now having sold them off in the last 10 years. The remaining few will pass under the swing bridges and the one that remains which is a crane boat only comes up to Warrington once a week at best and it traditionally avoids peak times with it being a work boat.
I find the present situation with the shipping traffic is acceptable actually. What I don't find acceptable is the traffic in general i.e. poor road layouts and too many traffic lights.
And yes, I do cross the canal at peak times. If i want to I can bypass it by going over the cantilever. However inconvenienced i may be by being delayed 15/20 minutes i still find the sight of a ship passing through our town amazing. A surreal sight that can't be found in many places in the world.
This is the town we live in. Get on with it.
In addition to the hold ups caused by the swing bridges and the amazingly dysfunctional and ever changing road layouts, we also face the double whammy of a council hell bent on slowing traffic down across the borough with lower speed limits and an increase in traffic avoiding the new Mersey toll. We already know what happens when there are accidents on any of the motorways that encircle Warrington.

We need a major and intelligent rethink of the town's infrastructure that goes way beyond David Mowat having a quiet word with the Chancellor and we certainly need something better than a council hell-bent on making things worse rather than better.

Regardless of whether you have a problem with freight on the ship canal, the town faces a huge problem with its road networks and nobody seems to be doing anything about it.
[quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hippety[/bold] wrote: I live South of the canal and have done for most of my life. Traffic is heavy and congested during most rush hour periods on the approaches to Knutsford Road Bridge irrespective of whether the bridge has been opened or not. There are significant ship movements on the canal and I very much doubt that the numbers quoted for 2014 are much higher than for 2013, but they make a good headline don't they. The bridge doesn't cause gridlock, it creates minor tailbacks. I get held up by the bridge occasionally but I accept that I choose to live in area where that might happen. But then I am not so full of my own self importance as to think that everything should change for my convenience. I have never missed a meeting or an appointment because, once the bridge opens, the traffic starts moving quite quickly. In all honesty, I face greater delays in the town centre around Cockedge every morning than the canal causes but I see no campaigns around that. There are always alternative routes available that would avoid the canal. Including the Cantilever, I can think of three routes that I could take if I chose to. It really isn't worth getting stressed over.[/p][/quote]Someone has talked some sense at last. The traffic problems around the town are more of a problem generally these days than the occasional bridge swing. Around Latchford, Stockton Heath & even Chester road the traffic is always a problem a peak hour without a bridge swing. Blaming passing ships is quite ridiculous. Also, I'm not sure whether the figures come from but 720 movements a year equates to about 2 movements a day. YES 2 PER DAY. Bearing in mind the bridges would be swinging every half an hour in the 50's and 60's. The bridge movements in 2014 will be of a similar number to last year. There won't be any increase. What does increase is the number of cars using our roads each year. I can't believe the guardian report this nonsense. Should we be starting a petition to get lorries off the roads a peak times instead?[/p][/quote]It may come as surprise to you, but EVERY town has increased traffic at rush hour. Trust me, I've lived and worked in several. In Warrington, it is compounded by the bridge openings on all 3 of the routes through the south of the town. Do you think that has no adverse affect on the flow of traffic? That all of the 3 routes between south Warrington and the rest of the town being blocked for up to 20 minutes when the roads are already rammed with traffic doesn't cause any additional problems? One week in december last year, the bridges opened at 08:30 and again at 17:30 for three days running for work at Latchford locks. The 'two openings a week' doesn't include any additional openings for their own service vessels,which add to the number of openenings considerably. The traffic volume in the 50's anf 60's was a fraction of what it is today. So that's hardly relevant. I don't think that Peel Ports agreeing not to open the bridges at weekday peak times (just 3 1/2 hours a day) is a huge sacrifice. That still leaves them 150 1/2 hours every week to move ships along the canal. Just as you can't believe the Guardian 'report this nonsense', i can't believe that there are people like you who think that the present situation is acceptable. I take it that you're not among the unfortunate people who have no choice but to be on the roads in south Warrington during peak times.[/p][/quote]But you are asking the movement of freight to stop for the convenience of YOU. Like I said should we make lorries pull up alongside the roads at peak times so let everybody past? Time is money whether it's on the roads, water or in the air. I don't think Tesco, who are having containers of wine shipped across the world to Irlam are going to be bothered about you being held up for 20 minutes max. There is not a chance they will agree to mooring their cargo up for 2/3 hours while the traffic dies down. They have fast turn around times just like road hauliers. I'm not sure how you can say the road traffic in the 50's and 60's isn't relevant as you still had to wait 20 mins for a ship to pass and you were likely be stopped by a bridge swing about 20 times more than you are today.. so it isn't much a problem today as it was back then even with so many million extra cars on the road today. Regarding the 'extra movements' you refer to. Your probably not familiar with the canal today. The MSC only own one work boat now having sold them off in the last 10 years. The remaining few will pass under the swing bridges and the one that remains which is a crane boat only comes up to Warrington once a week at best and it traditionally avoids peak times with it being a work boat. I find the present situation with the shipping traffic is acceptable actually. What I don't find acceptable is the traffic in general i.e. poor road layouts and too many traffic lights. And yes, I do cross the canal at peak times. If i want to I can bypass it by going over the cantilever. However inconvenienced i may be by being delayed 15/20 minutes i still find the sight of a ship passing through our town amazing. A surreal sight that can't be found in many places in the world. This is the town we live in. Get on with it.[/p][/quote]In addition to the hold ups caused by the swing bridges and the amazingly dysfunctional and ever changing road layouts, we also face the double whammy of a council hell bent on slowing traffic down across the borough with lower speed limits and an increase in traffic avoiding the new Mersey toll. We already know what happens when there are accidents on any of the motorways that encircle Warrington. We need a major and intelligent rethink of the town's infrastructure that goes way beyond David Mowat having a quiet word with the Chancellor and we certainly need something better than a council hell-bent on making things worse rather than better. Regardless of whether you have a problem with freight on the ship canal, the town faces a huge problem with its road networks and nobody seems to be doing anything about it. grey_man
  • Score: 8

7:52am Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u
k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!
! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah
ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
[quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc! PageA
  • Score: -1

8:41am Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

Freeborn John wrote:
The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back.
In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
Port Warrington might also be an issue
[quote][p][bold]Freeborn John[/bold] wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?[/p][/quote]Port Warrington might also be an issue PageA
  • Score: -1

9:18am Fri 24 Jan 14

Billy Porter says...

My place of work is on Loushers Lane. If I'm contracted to work until say, 5.00pm, and a ship has just caused all three bridges to be closed to traffic at around the same time, how should I "plan" my journey home? What are my "alternative routes" - as far as I'm aware I can only either turn left or right on to Loushers Lane, both of which directions are likely to be congested.
My place of work is on Loushers Lane. If I'm contracted to work until say, 5.00pm, and a ship has just caused all three bridges to be closed to traffic at around the same time, how should I "plan" my journey home? What are my "alternative routes" - as far as I'm aware I can only either turn left or right on to Loushers Lane, both of which directions are likely to be congested. Billy Porter
  • Score: -3

9:37am Fri 24 Jan 14

John__ says...

PageA wrote:
Freeborn John wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
Port Warrington might also be an issue
I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore.
Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year.
Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky..
the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freeborn John[/bold] wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?[/p][/quote]Port Warrington might also be an issue[/p][/quote]I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore. Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year. Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky.. the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is. John__
  • Score: 6

10:23am Fri 24 Jan 14

vjones says...

The biggest cause of traffic problems is the school run maybe children should start school an hour earlier or maybe walk to school dare l say traveling round warrington is much easier in school holidays .the new port will bring more jobs to the town this has to be a good thing for our children .maybe they could use an app for our phones to warn you when bridge will go off so you can alter your journey before you leave we all have phones .remember peel holdings the app was my idea
The biggest cause of traffic problems is the school run maybe children should start school an hour earlier or maybe walk to school dare l say traveling round warrington is much easier in school holidays .the new port will bring more jobs to the town this has to be a good thing for our children .maybe they could use an app for our phones to warn you when bridge will go off so you can alter your journey before you leave we all have phones .remember peel holdings the app was my idea vjones
  • Score: 9

10:25am Fri 24 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u

k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!

! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah

ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -4

10:31am Fri 24 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

I'm not one for wading into this kind of nonsensical argument but I am astounded by the extraordinarily conceited and mis-informed views on this thread.
I have lived in South Warrington for 12 years and I am fortunate enough to work in South Manchester so my daily commute isn't greatly affected by the MSC bridge movements or the awful pinch points that are the Walton/Stockton Heath or Latchford Swing Bridges. However my property backs onto the canal, so I have a pretty good idea of ship traffic, which doesn't only include one service boat that passes under the swing bridge as suggested by one reader, far from it.
At the last census the population of Warrington was just over 202,000 and the population of the South Warrington borough's (including Lymm) is almost 40,000, so although maths is not my strong point, I'm pretty sure that accounts for almost 20% of the town's population. Not 1%.....do the Maths. And those figures do not include people living further afield in villages south of Appleton or almost 8,000 residents of Latchford and Howley which are also affected.
As A.P.Moore says there is only ONE other viable crossing and that is the Cantilever. Other than that it is to drive out of Warrington to the Viaduct and take a 10 mile detour (twice as week for a year at 35p a mile (inland revenue figures) equates to £364 per annum, which seems like a pretty steep stealth tax to me.....anyone with an ounce of common sense can understand why Mr Moore, who is merely trying to earn a living, is disgruntled).
It has been widely publicised that following each bridge movement it takes approximately one hour for traffic to return to normal not 20 minutes as people keep stating (and this figure does not account for problems on the nearby M6/M62/M56) and as the bridge opening times are not published, please confirm exactly how residents are supposed to 'plan' their journeys around this.
It takes 6 hours to navigate from Salford Quays to the River Mersey. There is no reason why Peel cannot utilise the canal at night, causing little or no disruption. Noise is not an issue, even in summer with windows open. It is merely arrogance on Peel's part not to consult with residents.
We consider ourselves extremely fortunate to live where we do, and value the canal greatly, but are also fortunate to only be adversely affected by this traffic on an occasional basis.
And yet, I am not so conceited that I cant empathise with the many thousands of people around South Warrington and Latchford who ARE affected; and I fully support any attempts to force Peel and WBC to properly address this issue (and it IS an issue whether or not it affects you personally).
I'm not one for wading into this kind of nonsensical argument but I am astounded by the extraordinarily conceited and mis-informed views on this thread. I have lived in South Warrington for 12 years and I am fortunate enough to work in South Manchester so my daily commute isn't greatly affected by the MSC bridge movements or the awful pinch points that are the Walton/Stockton Heath or Latchford Swing Bridges. However my property backs onto the canal, so I have a pretty good idea of ship traffic, which doesn't only include one service boat that passes under the swing bridge as suggested by one reader, far from it. At the last census the population of Warrington was just over 202,000 and the population of the South Warrington borough's (including Lymm) is almost 40,000, so although maths is not my strong point, I'm pretty sure that accounts for almost 20% of the town's population. Not 1%.....do the Maths. And those figures do not include people living further afield in villages south of Appleton or almost 8,000 residents of Latchford and Howley which are also affected. As A.P.Moore says there is only ONE other viable crossing and that is the Cantilever. Other than that it is to drive out of Warrington to the Viaduct and take a 10 mile detour (twice as week for a year at 35p a mile (inland revenue figures) equates to £364 per annum, which seems like a pretty steep stealth tax to me.....anyone with an ounce of common sense can understand why Mr Moore, who is merely trying to earn a living, is disgruntled). It has been widely publicised that following each bridge movement it takes approximately one hour for traffic to return to normal not 20 minutes as people keep stating (and this figure does not account for problems on the nearby M6/M62/M56) and as the bridge opening times are not published, please confirm exactly how residents are supposed to 'plan' their journeys around this. It takes 6 hours to navigate from Salford Quays to the River Mersey. There is no reason why Peel cannot utilise the canal at night, causing little or no disruption. Noise is not an issue, even in summer with windows open. It is merely arrogance on Peel's part not to consult with residents. We consider ourselves extremely fortunate to live where we do, and value the canal greatly, but are also fortunate to only be adversely affected by this traffic on an occasional basis. And yet, I am not so conceited that I cant empathise with the many thousands of people around South Warrington and Latchford who ARE affected; and I fully support any attempts to force Peel and WBC to properly address this issue (and it IS an issue whether or not it affects you personally). OofT72
  • Score: 9

10:33am Fri 24 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

Billy Porter wrote:
My place of work is on Loushers Lane. If I'm contracted to work until say, 5.00pm, and a ship has just caused all three bridges to be closed to traffic at around the same time, how should I "plan" my journey home? What are my "alternative routes" - as far as I'm aware I can only either turn left or right on to Loushers Lane, both of which directions are likely to be congested.
You don't plan, you just have to suck it up that you might be home 15 minutes later. If you know the bridge is closed you know it will be open once the vessel has passed.

Again, this is troublesome but does this really deserve a petition based on the WG's attempts to uncover a none-existing crisis? Which it now transpires is fanciful at best given a peak in flow in 2006 for Canal traffic.

There are more deserving hotspots of the town for a traffic petition rather than something that causes a maximum 10-15 minute delay.
[quote][p][bold]Billy Porter[/bold] wrote: My place of work is on Loushers Lane. If I'm contracted to work until say, 5.00pm, and a ship has just caused all three bridges to be closed to traffic at around the same time, how should I "plan" my journey home? What are my "alternative routes" - as far as I'm aware I can only either turn left or right on to Loushers Lane, both of which directions are likely to be congested.[/p][/quote]You don't plan, you just have to suck it up that you might be home 15 minutes later. If you know the bridge is closed you know it will be open once the vessel has passed. Again, this is troublesome but does this really deserve a petition based on the WG's attempts to uncover a none-existing crisis? Which it now transpires is fanciful at best given a peak in flow in 2006 for Canal traffic. There are more deserving hotspots of the town for a traffic petition rather than something that causes a maximum 10-15 minute delay. flashcoffy
  • Score: 0

10:58am Fri 24 Jan 14

Billy Porter says...

"You don't plan, you just have to suck it up..."

Thanks for that - those who've suggested "planning your journey properly", please take note. Btw, as suggested above, it often takes more than 15 minutes for traffic to return to normal levels after these bridges have been closed. It's lucky people like me have nothing better to be doing with their time so as not to inconvenience megacorps like Peel Holdings eh?

No "alternative route" suggestions then? Righto.
"You don't plan, you just have to suck it up..." Thanks for that - those who've suggested "planning your journey properly", please take note. Btw, as suggested above, it often takes more than 15 minutes for traffic to return to normal levels after these bridges have been closed. It's lucky people like me have nothing better to be doing with their time so as not to inconvenience megacorps like Peel Holdings eh? No "alternative route" suggestions then? Righto. Billy Porter
  • Score: 1

11:07am Fri 24 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

flashcoffy wrote:
Billy Porter wrote:
My place of work is on Loushers Lane. If I'm contracted to work until say, 5.00pm, and a ship has just caused all three bridges to be closed to traffic at around the same time, how should I "plan" my journey home? What are my "alternative routes" - as far as I'm aware I can only either turn left or right on to Loushers Lane, both of which directions are likely to be congested.
You don't plan, you just have to suck it up that you might be home 15 minutes later. If you know the bridge is closed you know it will be open once the vessel has passed.

Again, this is troublesome but does this really deserve a petition based on the WG's attempts to uncover a none-existing crisis? Which it now transpires is fanciful at best given a peak in flow in 2006 for Canal traffic.

There are more deserving hotspots of the town for a traffic petition rather than something that causes a maximum 10-15 minute delay.
Why should Billy Porter have to 'suck it up' as you say and be further delayed after a hard day's work just because multi-million pound corporation Peel Holdings will not resource the planning of ship movements so they do not adversely affect the people of this town.

A town which you correctly state has many traffic issues. And yet who are you to decide who is and isn't deserving of exercising their democratic right to petition? And who does and doesn't deserve to waste their valuable time sitting in unnecessary traffic jams? A bridge movement disrupts traffic for an hour, this has been studied and widely publicised for a number of years. Not 10 or 15 minutes.

If Tesco started parking wagons outside your place of work and made you an hour late home a couple of times a week would you complain? Yes I think you would, and anyone with an ounce of common decency would support you.
[quote][p][bold]flashcoffy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Billy Porter[/bold] wrote: My place of work is on Loushers Lane. If I'm contracted to work until say, 5.00pm, and a ship has just caused all three bridges to be closed to traffic at around the same time, how should I "plan" my journey home? What are my "alternative routes" - as far as I'm aware I can only either turn left or right on to Loushers Lane, both of which directions are likely to be congested.[/p][/quote]You don't plan, you just have to suck it up that you might be home 15 minutes later. If you know the bridge is closed you know it will be open once the vessel has passed. Again, this is troublesome but does this really deserve a petition based on the WG's attempts to uncover a none-existing crisis? Which it now transpires is fanciful at best given a peak in flow in 2006 for Canal traffic. There are more deserving hotspots of the town for a traffic petition rather than something that causes a maximum 10-15 minute delay.[/p][/quote]Why should Billy Porter have to 'suck it up' as you say and be further delayed after a hard day's work just because multi-million pound corporation Peel Holdings will not resource the planning of ship movements so they do not adversely affect the people of this town. A town which you correctly state has many traffic issues. And yet who are you to decide who is and isn't deserving of exercising their democratic right to petition? And who does and doesn't deserve to waste their valuable time sitting in unnecessary traffic jams? A bridge movement disrupts traffic for an hour, this has been studied and widely publicised for a number of years. Not 10 or 15 minutes. If Tesco started parking wagons outside your place of work and made you an hour late home a couple of times a week would you complain? Yes I think you would, and anyone with an ounce of common decency would support you. OofT72
  • Score: 3

11:26am Fri 24 Jan 14

marksiddall says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
irishwire wrote:
Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad!
Obviously, you aren't affected by the bridges opening at peak times. If not, then good for you.

However, it is costing me and other businesses in Warrington REAL MONEY!! That's why it's an issue!

Btw, I don't know where the 'Birchwood' thing came from. I live in Latchford. I can't even get out of my own street sometimes when the bridges open.
its not peel ports fault, born in warrington lived in appleton 25 years lived in latchford since 2000. In my eyes the council have granted planning permission for new homes in latchford, ( old renault garage latchford village raddon court, T I new world , eagle ottawa, new apartments at cantilever, and on the banks of the ship canal next to the swing bridge) these must add up to a lot of more cars on the road at peak times, have they spent all the extra council tax on improving the roads no. The roads have not changed at all for as long as i can remember. When one swing bridge off everyone heads for a bridge which is not designed for the amount of traffic, loushers lane becomes blocked with people cutting out stockton heath (mulberry tree traffic lights which is now a traffic black on news everyday) not matter where you go in warrington at anywhere close to rush hour warrington is grid locked even if the bridge haven't been off , peel ports dredge the ship canal if the stopped next thing someone would be moaning about is flooding as some said if people don't like it move ...
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad![/p][/quote]Obviously, you aren't affected by the bridges opening at peak times. If not, then good for you. However, it is costing me and other businesses in Warrington REAL MONEY!! That's why it's an issue! Btw, I don't know where the 'Birchwood' thing came from. I live in Latchford. I can't even get out of my own street sometimes when the bridges open.[/p][/quote]its not peel ports fault, born in warrington lived in appleton 25 years lived in latchford since 2000. In my eyes the council have granted planning permission for new homes in latchford, ( old renault garage latchford village raddon court, T I new world , eagle ottawa, new apartments at cantilever, and on the banks of the ship canal next to the swing bridge) these must add up to a lot of more cars on the road at peak times, have they spent all the extra council tax on improving the roads no. The roads have not changed at all for as long as i can remember. When one swing bridge off everyone heads for a bridge which is not designed for the amount of traffic, loushers lane becomes blocked with people cutting out stockton heath (mulberry tree traffic lights which is now a traffic black on news everyday) not matter where you go in warrington at anywhere close to rush hour warrington is grid locked even if the bridge haven't been off , peel ports dredge the ship canal if the stopped next thing someone would be moaning about is flooding as some said if people don't like it move ... marksiddall
  • Score: 0

11:36am Fri 24 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

Billy, my apologies my statement wasnt meant as a direct insult, it was merely a light-hearted (misguided maybe) attempt to suggest that its tough and you just have to get on with it. In all seriousness what would you expect to be done if you left work at 5pm and the traffic was busy on loushers lane?

OofT72, Im not disputing anyones democratic right to petition, also it is the WG that has brought this petition, not Mr Moore in the article. I have no jurisdiction to demand other areas are more deserving, I am merely saying the facts that the WG have provided are flawed and unbalanced. As are your claims of an hours delay following the bridge closure, this figure is cumulative and does not mean those stuck in a queue will be stuck there for an hour. Youve basically taken a figure and done what the Guardian have in the article and made it fit.

I travel to Manchester daily from Warrington. I travel down Manchester Rd and then past Warburton Bridge, Traffic here is without fail always delayed, But as I suggested in my previous post, I just "suck it up", wait it out and travel home knowing that my life will go on regardless.
Billy, my apologies my statement wasnt meant as a direct insult, it was merely a light-hearted (misguided maybe) attempt to suggest that its tough and you just have to get on with it. In all seriousness what would you expect to be done if you left work at 5pm and the traffic was busy on loushers lane? OofT72, Im not disputing anyones democratic right to petition, also it is the WG that has brought this petition, not Mr Moore in the article. I have no jurisdiction to demand other areas are more deserving, I am merely saying the facts that the WG have provided are flawed and unbalanced. As are your claims of an hours delay following the bridge closure, this figure is cumulative and does not mean those stuck in a queue will be stuck there for an hour. Youve basically taken a figure and done what the Guardian have in the article and made it fit. I travel to Manchester daily from Warrington. I travel down Manchester Rd and then past Warburton Bridge, Traffic here is without fail always delayed, But as I suggested in my previous post, I just "suck it up", wait it out and travel home knowing that my life will go on regardless. flashcoffy
  • Score: 3

11:53am Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u


k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!


! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah


ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
[quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'? PageA
  • Score: -3

11:56am Fri 24 Jan 14

Billy Porter says...

Heh, no offence taken, flash. At least it's an honest answer, think you can guess I'm having a pop at those suggesting "planning" and "alternatives" when sometimes it's just not an option. Btw, was the development at the old distillery mentioned above?

..."what would you expect to be done if you left work at 5pm and the traffic was busy on loushers lane?"

It happens frequently and will get more frequent with more canal traffic at rush hour, I have no "expectations" though. I worked in Manchester for over 20 years myself, then I took a job with lower pay and fewer prospects, but nearer to home, so that I could spend more time with my family rather than spending it on the road. Poor me.
Heh, no offence taken, flash. At least it's an honest answer, think you can guess I'm having a pop at those suggesting "planning" and "alternatives" when sometimes it's just not an option. Btw, was the development at the old distillery mentioned above? ..."what would you expect to be done if you left work at 5pm and the traffic was busy on loushers lane?" It happens frequently and will get more frequent with more canal traffic at rush hour, I have no "expectations" though. I worked in Manchester for over 20 years myself, then I took a job with lower pay and fewer prospects, but nearer to home, so that I could spend more time with my family rather than spending it on the road. Poor me. Billy Porter
  • Score: -3

12:00pm Fri 24 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

Flashcoffy. If you travel out of Warrington via Manchester Rd and the Warburton bridge then how do you know how long traffic takes to get back to normal following a bridge movement, when you don't go anywhere near the area at peak times? As I have said it takes an hour for traffic to return to normal at any time following a bridge movement, not just at peak times. This figure is taken from traffic surveys, not from WG cooking the books to 'rabble rouse''

The aim of the petition, whether brought by Mr Moore or the WG, is not to shut the canal or cause further inconvenience to anyone, it is to request that Peel addresses the issue to the satisfaction of 40,000 plus residents., who cannot all simply up sticks and move if they don't like it! If you could take action which may help decrease your travel time then wouldn't you? This is a real issue for a lot of local people and as such is deserving of debate in the local press.
Flashcoffy. If you travel out of Warrington via Manchester Rd and the Warburton bridge then how do you know how long traffic takes to get back to normal following a bridge movement, when you don't go anywhere near the area at peak times? As I have said it takes an hour for traffic to return to normal at any time following a bridge movement, not just at peak times. This figure is taken from traffic surveys, not from WG cooking the books to 'rabble rouse'' The aim of the petition, whether brought by Mr Moore or the WG, is not to shut the canal or cause further inconvenience to anyone, it is to request that Peel addresses the issue to the satisfaction of 40,000 plus residents., who cannot all simply up sticks and move if they don't like it! If you could take action which may help decrease your travel time then wouldn't you? This is a real issue for a lot of local people and as such is deserving of debate in the local press. OofT72
  • Score: 0

12:02pm Fri 24 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

Work/Life Balance my friend. You work to live and all that, I used to work in Preston so the M6 every day was soul destroying!

That's my point though about the article, it is in no way an increase on current and historical numbers from the last 8 years.

Few people also mentioned the bridge over Latchford Locks for redevelopment, a few Urbex forums have recent shots from the bridge and it's littered with holes and degradation across its length but i'm no structural engineer so cant say whether that is repairable.
Work/Life Balance my friend. You work to live and all that, I used to work in Preston so the M6 every day was soul destroying! That's my point though about the article, it is in no way an increase on current and historical numbers from the last 8 years. Few people also mentioned the bridge over Latchford Locks for redevelopment, a few Urbex forums have recent shots from the bridge and it's littered with holes and degradation across its length but i'm no structural engineer so cant say whether that is repairable. flashcoffy
  • Score: 1

12:14pm Fri 24 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

OofT72, again, beg to differ but I do, regularly do the school run (AM or PM) which crosses this area. My point was to highlight a traffic hotspot and how I personally deal with it, this point only. We all cope differently.

Again, I am not disputing the figure of 1 hour to return to normal, I am disputing the individual impact this has to a commuters travel time. This is why I have touted 10/15 minutes delay in previous posts.

Even taking your/their figure of 1 hour. We are talking about up to 3 passes per week. I would suggest (no basis for this its a thought) the traffic chaos further towards the town centre, at Bridge Foot, for people heading to South Warrington would balance any delays caused at the bridge.
OofT72, again, beg to differ but I do, regularly do the school run (AM or PM) which crosses this area. My point was to highlight a traffic hotspot and how I personally deal with it, this point only. We all cope differently. Again, I am not disputing the figure of 1 hour to return to normal, I am disputing the individual impact this has to a commuters travel time. This is why I have touted 10/15 minutes delay in previous posts. Even taking your/their figure of 1 hour. We are talking about up to 3 passes per week. I would suggest (no basis for this its a thought) the traffic chaos further towards the town centre, at Bridge Foot, for people heading to South Warrington would balance any delays caused at the bridge. flashcoffy
  • Score: -2

12:39pm Fri 24 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u



k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!



! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah



ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak) GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -5

12:52pm Fri 24 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

Prior to my job in Manchester and moving into my current home in South Warrington I worked in Sankey and lived just south of Preston. I could travel 30 miles home via severely congested Winwick Road and the M6 in less time than it took me to get to my partners house (where I now live). This makes a fallacy of a mere 10 minute delay.

I understand the point you are trying to make and the reasoning behind it but would also point out that schoolls are open until 3/4.30 at the latest (allowing for after school clubs), and that is not peak time. The aim of all this is to ask Peel for assistance in reducing traffic congestion in an area of a town inhabited by all of us. I cannot for the life of me fathom why so many people find this simple request so objectionable!

It seems to me to be a reflection of what an apathetic and self serving society we now live in!
Prior to my job in Manchester and moving into my current home in South Warrington I worked in Sankey and lived just south of Preston. I could travel 30 miles home via severely congested Winwick Road and the M6 in less time than it took me to get to my partners house (where I now live). This makes a fallacy of a mere 10 minute delay. I understand the point you are trying to make and the reasoning behind it but would also point out that schoolls are open until 3/4.30 at the latest (allowing for after school clubs), and that is not peak time. The aim of all this is to ask Peel for assistance in reducing traffic congestion in an area of a town inhabited by all of us. I cannot for the life of me fathom why so many people find this simple request so objectionable! It seems to me to be a reflection of what an apathetic and self serving society we now live in! OofT72
  • Score: 4

1:18pm Fri 24 Jan 14

flashcoffy says...

OofT72, point taken. I may have misunderstood you but my mention of travelling to Preston was in response to feeling Billys pain regards to travelling every day affecting the work/life balance.

I would suggest though your travel to South Warrington from Sankey was affected more by the hotspots of Bridgefoot and Cockhedge rather than a bridge closure. Which is what I would personally see as more deserving of enquiry than the Bridge closures but I dont have the inclination or time to raise this for petition.

Which probably proves your point of apathy correct. :-)
OofT72, point taken. I may have misunderstood you but my mention of travelling to Preston was in response to feeling Billys pain regards to travelling every day affecting the work/life balance. I would suggest though your travel to South Warrington from Sankey was affected more by the hotspots of Bridgefoot and Cockhedge rather than a bridge closure. Which is what I would personally see as more deserving of enquiry than the Bridge closures but I dont have the inclination or time to raise this for petition. Which probably proves your point of apathy correct. :-) flashcoffy
  • Score: -1

1:28pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u




k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!




! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah




ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
[quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing PageA
  • Score: -2

1:40pm Fri 24 Jan 14

grey_man says...

OofT72 wrote:
Prior to my job in Manchester and moving into my current home in South Warrington I worked in Sankey and lived just south of Preston. I could travel 30 miles home via severely congested Winwick Road and the M6 in less time than it took me to get to my partners house (where I now live). This makes a fallacy of a mere 10 minute delay.

I understand the point you are trying to make and the reasoning behind it but would also point out that schoolls are open until 3/4.30 at the latest (allowing for after school clubs), and that is not peak time. The aim of all this is to ask Peel for assistance in reducing traffic congestion in an area of a town inhabited by all of us. I cannot for the life of me fathom why so many people find this simple request so objectionable!

It seems to me to be a reflection of what an apathetic and self serving society we now live in!
Quite right. I imagine all these people whose point seems to be 'it doesn't affect me therefore it's not a problem' respond to danger by putting a towel over their heads.
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: Prior to my job in Manchester and moving into my current home in South Warrington I worked in Sankey and lived just south of Preston. I could travel 30 miles home via severely congested Winwick Road and the M6 in less time than it took me to get to my partners house (where I now live). This makes a fallacy of a mere 10 minute delay. I understand the point you are trying to make and the reasoning behind it but would also point out that schoolls are open until 3/4.30 at the latest (allowing for after school clubs), and that is not peak time. The aim of all this is to ask Peel for assistance in reducing traffic congestion in an area of a town inhabited by all of us. I cannot for the life of me fathom why so many people find this simple request so objectionable! It seems to me to be a reflection of what an apathetic and self serving society we now live in![/p][/quote]Quite right. I imagine all these people whose point seems to be 'it doesn't affect me therefore it's not a problem' respond to danger by putting a towel over their heads. grey_man
  • Score: 4

1:44pm Fri 24 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

In a way you're right flashcoffy, however the hold ups at both locations are equally frustrating. That said bridge foot is also a major traffic issue, and if the WG petitioned the council to sort it out I would still support them, even though bridge foot and it's traffic problems have no bearing whatsoever on my quality of life.....thankfully! It isn't fair for people to simply dismiss the issues around Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton because it doesn't affect them as individuals (which is basically my point!).
In a way you're right flashcoffy, however the hold ups at both locations are equally frustrating. That said bridge foot is also a major traffic issue, and if the WG petitioned the council to sort it out I would still support them, even though bridge foot and it's traffic problems have no bearing whatsoever on my quality of life.....thankfully! It isn't fair for people to simply dismiss the issues around Latchford, Stockton Heath and Walton because it doesn't affect them as individuals (which is basically my point!). OofT72
  • Score: 5

2:05pm Fri 24 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u





k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!





! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah





ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe....
Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing[/p][/quote]Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe.... Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though) GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -2

2:06pm Fri 24 Jan 14

ninearches says...

A golden opportunity to help to solve the problem would be with the new bridge at Runcorn.....if proper expressways were built from South Warrington to link up with the new bridge & expressways to take the traffic back into town on the Widnes side. Sadly though there would still be bottle necks getting into town where new roads meet old.
A golden opportunity to help to solve the problem would be with the new bridge at Runcorn.....if proper expressways were built from South Warrington to link up with the new bridge & expressways to take the traffic back into town on the Widnes side. Sadly though there would still be bottle necks getting into town where new roads meet old. ninearches
  • Score: 2

2:13pm Fri 24 Jan 14

dannyb210 says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
I see we get the usual response from Peel Ports; 'working with the council to minimise disruption'. THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!!

Tima and time again they give the same, condescending, response to a serious issue.

There should be ZERO disruption during rush hour.

They would have over 20 hours a day during the week and 48 hours over the weekend, even if they agreed to stop peak time openings.

They could do it if they wanted to, but that's the issue; they DON'T want to.
maybe they should just put all the cargo onto wagons and drive it through Warrington instead eh?

The canal has been there and carrying cargo vessels far longer than any of us has been here.

If you dont like it.... move somewhere else.

I live on Thelwall Lane opposite Latchford Locks, and yes sometimes the bridge swinging can be annoying and cause a bit of traffic, however, i knew all this before i moved there.

To be fair looking at the figures, 1 in 6 depending on the tide being in rush hour isnt that bad.

Stockton Heath is a nightmare without the bridges swinging at rush hour, i find i normally get through quicker just after the bridge has swung!

The answer to this problem is simple..... there are too many cars on the road at rush hour, if people utilised public transport better then maybe this will have a better effect on traffic at rush hour than stopping a boat passing through.

Heaven forbid the Viaduct gets closed during high winds, id love to see Andrew Moores crusade against the weather.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: I see we get the usual response from Peel Ports; 'working with the council to minimise disruption'. THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!! Tima and time again they give the same, condescending, response to a serious issue. There should be ZERO disruption during rush hour. They would have over 20 hours a day during the week and 48 hours over the weekend, even if they agreed to stop peak time openings. They could do it if they wanted to, but that's the issue; they DON'T want to.[/p][/quote]maybe they should just put all the cargo onto wagons and drive it through Warrington instead eh? The canal has been there and carrying cargo vessels far longer than any of us has been here. If you dont like it.... move somewhere else. I live on Thelwall Lane opposite Latchford Locks, and yes sometimes the bridge swinging can be annoying and cause a bit of traffic, however, i knew all this before i moved there. To be fair looking at the figures, 1 in 6 depending on the tide being in rush hour isnt that bad. Stockton Heath is a nightmare without the bridges swinging at rush hour, i find i normally get through quicker just after the bridge has swung! The answer to this problem is simple..... there are too many cars on the road at rush hour, if people utilised public transport better then maybe this will have a better effect on traffic at rush hour than stopping a boat passing through. Heaven forbid the Viaduct gets closed during high winds, id love to see Andrew Moores crusade against the weather. dannyb210
  • Score: 5

2:32pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u






k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!






! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah






ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe....
Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)
A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson
"When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference".

I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples

No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land
[quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing[/p][/quote]Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe.... Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)[/p][/quote]A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson "When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference". I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land PageA
  • Score: 1

3:54pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Penketh Pony says...

Buy a bicycle, then cycle to the front of the queue therefore only waiting for the time it takes for the bridge to open and shut, and you won't be stuck in traffic. Simple!
Buy a bicycle, then cycle to the front of the queue therefore only waiting for the time it takes for the bridge to open and shut, and you won't be stuck in traffic. Simple! Penketh Pony
  • Score: 7

4:35pm Fri 24 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u







k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!







! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah







ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe....
Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)
A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson
"When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference".

I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples

No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land
PageA spelling of their or there is neither here or there the facts are simple you live there and I live here and that obviously annoys you as does spam your kids, while you and the misses stuff M&S food which is self evident that you can not really afford. Shop at M&S and live where you do Penketh/Sankey me guesses, what a **** hole! I will enjoy my night knowing that everything I pay for is done so using a debit card not a credit card. Please stop trying to teach me English PageA it's getting really drab. Oh by the way have android phones not reached your part of town yet? very sad if not. get with it PageA maybe if you had made it to PageB you would have earned a better future for your kids, wife.
Still Grumpy (but **** glad I ain't wearing PageA's shoes)
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing[/p][/quote]Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe.... Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)[/p][/quote]A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson "When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference". I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land[/p][/quote]PageA spelling of their or there is neither here or there the facts are simple you live there and I live here and that obviously annoys you as does spam your kids, while you and the misses stuff M&S food which is self evident that you can not really afford. Shop at M&S and live where you do Penketh/Sankey me guesses, what a **** hole! I will enjoy my night knowing that everything I pay for is done so using a debit card not a credit card. Please stop trying to teach me English PageA it's getting really drab. Oh by the way have android phones not reached your part of town yet? very sad if not. get with it PageA maybe if you had made it to PageB you would have earned a better future for your kids, wife. Still Grumpy (but **** glad I ain't wearing PageA's shoes) GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -8

4:41pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u







k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!







! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah







ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe....
Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)
A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson
"When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference".

I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples

No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land
Thank you both for your humorous comments. I think that it would be an excellent script for a sitcom. 10/10.
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing[/p][/quote]Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe.... Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)[/p][/quote]A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson "When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference". I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land[/p][/quote]Thank you both for your humorous comments. I think that it would be an excellent script for a sitcom. 10/10. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: -6

4:51pm Fri 24 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u








k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!








! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah








ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe....
Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)
A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson
"When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference".

I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples

No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land
Thank you both for your humorous comments. I think that it would be an excellent script for a sitcom. 10/10.
Me too I am thinking Only fools and horse...............
.... work
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing[/p][/quote]Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe.... Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)[/p][/quote]A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson "When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference". I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land[/p][/quote]Thank you both for your humorous comments. I think that it would be an excellent script for a sitcom. 10/10.[/p][/quote]Me too I am thinking Only fools and horse............... .... work GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -5

5:12pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

Billy Porter wrote:
"You don't plan, you just have to suck it up..."

Thanks for that - those who've suggested "planning your journey properly", please take note. Btw, as suggested above, it often takes more than 15 minutes for traffic to return to normal levels after these bridges have been closed. It's lucky people like me have nothing better to be doing with their time so as not to inconvenience megacorps like Peel Holdings eh?

No "alternative route" suggestions then? Righto.
The alternative route for the person in question would be to head towards Wash lane and use the cantilever bridge. However his journey it would still be taking place during the expected normal rush hour whether the swing bridges are in use or not.. This is all about planning your journey and also as part of the planning taking in to account of road conditions and any time constraints.
[quote][p][bold]Billy Porter[/bold] wrote: "You don't plan, you just have to suck it up..." Thanks for that - those who've suggested "planning your journey properly", please take note. Btw, as suggested above, it often takes more than 15 minutes for traffic to return to normal levels after these bridges have been closed. It's lucky people like me have nothing better to be doing with their time so as not to inconvenience megacorps like Peel Holdings eh? No "alternative route" suggestions then? Righto.[/p][/quote]The alternative route for the person in question would be to head towards Wash lane and use the cantilever bridge. However his journey it would still be taking place during the expected normal rush hour whether the swing bridges are in use or not.. This is all about planning your journey and also as part of the planning taking in to account of road conditions and any time constraints. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 0

5:38pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
PageA wrote:
Reader wrote:
100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ?
Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.
I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u








k
It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!!








! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah








ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc!
Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds!
Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water)
Don't you forget about me lalalalala
Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?
Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you!
The big H is where you land!
Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)
The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing
Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe....
Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)
A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson
"When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference".

I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples

No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land
PageA spelling of their or there is neither here or there the facts are simple you live there and I live here and that obviously annoys you as does spam your kids, while you and the misses stuff M&S food which is self evident that you can not really afford. Shop at M&S and live where you do Penketh/Sankey me guesses, what a **** hole! I will enjoy my night knowing that everything I pay for is done so using a debit card not a credit card. Please stop trying to teach me English PageA it's getting really drab. Oh by the way have android phones not reached your part of town yet? very sad if not. get with it PageA maybe if you had made it to PageB you would have earned a better future for your kids, wife.
Still Grumpy (but **** glad I ain't wearing PageA's shoes)
The meat is from Warrington Market Sherlock, the wine was from Mark's and Spencer. and no I don't live in Penketh or Sankey although It's good to see your sh**list getting longer by the day. Yes I'm sure teachers using mobile phones in lessons to peruse the internet would be much more agreeable and although I appreciate your concern ... our future's so bright we gotta wear shades!
Debit card...thats such a weird thing to say. What an odd way to validate oneself. You're such a muppet Still Grumpy and you're right..you could never fill these shoes
[quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reader[/bold] wrote: 100 extra openings at rush hour OVER a year ? Sounds bad but then there's 365 days in a year, 2 rush hours a day so realy not a huge difference if you do the maths.[/p][/quote]I think they're being quite conservative with these figures. What's the point of the Atlantic Gateway project if it's not to open up the waterways to commercial traffic and reduce carbon emissions ? Atlanticgateway.co.u k It looks like an exciting project. To the shop owners and reasonable people in Stockton Heath I send my commisarations. To the poster Grumpy Parent, who repeatedly mocks those in other wards including at times of flooding I say..hahahahahahah!! ! Hahahahahahah shah!,, ha hahahahahahah!!,,! Ohohohohohoho!,, that hurts!,..hahahahahah ah a!! Hope you have a good selection of Gary Barlow(e) CDs in the Merc![/p][/quote]Hahahhaha PageA as you may have noticed I have not commented on this subject, let me see why, oh yes it does not affect me in the slightest I couldn't care less if the bridges were open 24/7 to be honest. In fact I think the swing bridges should only close for 30 mins every day to keep the likes of you out of our wonderful villages hahahahaha. PageA I told you I got rid of the Merc on a previous post and I recently purchased a CD to remind me of the people of other wards in the town. It's called Simple Minds! Still Grumpy (but still glad I am on this side of the water) Don't you forget about me lalalalala[/p][/quote]Haha, you haven't commented because it's so close to home. Remember you said you're glad you bought a house on a hill? I'm glad I bought a house I can drive to. This is going to be massive. Simple minds...mmm.m.did they sing' on the waterfront'?[/p][/quote]Yeh waterfront is track 1 and as previously stated PageA I have no need to cross the water to Warrington I have everything I need here thanks. By the way PageA does everyone you know drive? there are other modes of transport look up that's me waving at you! The big H is where you land! Still Grumpy (but listening to Simple Minds as we speak)[/p][/quote]The human imagination is a weird and wonderful thing[/p][/quote]Well I am here and you are their PageA it's not my fault you failed in life and in a recent post you stated that you feel underpaid and overworked. Guess your one of those I feel sorry for myself teachers!. Either way I can assure you I will not be eating Spam tonight! Yes you know where I am going with that PageA. Leave those kids alone, Floyd I believe.... Still Grumpy (Snow White ain't complaining though)[/p][/quote]A teacher...who is posting on the guardian website at school time....mmm your powers of deduction never cease to fail to astound me. Every day's a school day for you Grumpy ..Todays lesson "When to use 'their' and when to use 'there' - a subtle but massive difference". I haven't failed in life because..it ain't over yet. Yesterday is history...and tomorrows a mystery..but today..today I decide how much I pay myself and if I want more.. I work a bit harder. Simples No spam tonight!..or ever to be honest. Tonight it's grilled Pork Souvlaki, using the Greek trinity, served with cous cous and a glass of gewurztraminer from the Alsace..via Marks and Spencer's of course. Enjoy your night in la la land[/p][/quote]PageA spelling of their or there is neither here or there the facts are simple you live there and I live here and that obviously annoys you as does spam your kids, while you and the misses stuff M&S food which is self evident that you can not really afford. Shop at M&S and live where you do Penketh/Sankey me guesses, what a **** hole! I will enjoy my night knowing that everything I pay for is done so using a debit card not a credit card. Please stop trying to teach me English PageA it's getting really drab. Oh by the way have android phones not reached your part of town yet? very sad if not. get with it PageA maybe if you had made it to PageB you would have earned a better future for your kids, wife. Still Grumpy (but **** glad I ain't wearing PageA's shoes)[/p][/quote]The meat is from Warrington Market Sherlock, the wine was from Mark's and Spencer. and no I don't live in Penketh or Sankey although It's good to see your sh**list getting longer by the day. Yes I'm sure teachers using mobile phones in lessons to peruse the internet would be much more agreeable and although I appreciate your concern ... our future's so bright we gotta wear shades! Debit card...thats such a weird thing to say. What an odd way to validate oneself. You're such a muppet Still Grumpy and you're right..you could never fill these shoes PageA
  • Score: 0

5:50pm Fri 24 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

"page a" social life is on here commenting on anything ! and his comments are so long and BORING !! get a life "it" or go a brothel !
"page a" social life is on here commenting on anything ! and his comments are so long and BORING !! get a life "it" or go a brothel ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -5

5:52pm Fri 24 Jan 14

stewlycoscom says...

The back log takes so long to clear after an opening on knutsford road and stockton heath swing bridges is the terrible traffic lights to the rat runs on either side. Block them off and make everyone go on the main road and then remove the lights. This would definitely help on knutsford road as when the traffic is bad you can actually see people coming off the main road onto thelwall new lane to cut the queue therefore triggering the lights to change more making the queue wait, increasing its length until more come off and go down the rat run etc. I drive into warrington this way most mornings on my bus and see this happen a lot.
The back log takes so long to clear after an opening on knutsford road and stockton heath swing bridges is the terrible traffic lights to the rat runs on either side. Block them off and make everyone go on the main road and then remove the lights. This would definitely help on knutsford road as when the traffic is bad you can actually see people coming off the main road onto thelwall new lane to cut the queue therefore triggering the lights to change more making the queue wait, increasing its length until more come off and go down the rat run etc. I drive into warrington this way most mornings on my bus and see this happen a lot. stewlycoscom
  • Score: -1

5:54pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

MAD 4 IT wrote:
"page a" social life is on here commenting on anything ! and his comments are so long and BORING !! get a life "it" or go a brothel !
Haha! If I wanted to you'd be the first person I'd consult MAD4IT. You've demonstrated good awareness of these establishments in the past
[quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: "page a" social life is on here commenting on anything ! and his comments are so long and BORING !! get a life "it" or go a brothel ![/p][/quote]Haha! If I wanted to you'd be the first person I'd consult MAD4IT. You've demonstrated good awareness of these establishments in the past PageA
  • Score: -2

7:18pm Fri 24 Jan 14

local man says...

I can't help but wonder if MAD 4 IT and Grumpy are one and the same. If not they should consider getting together.
I can't help but wonder if MAD 4 IT and Grumpy are one and the same. If not they should consider getting together. local man
  • Score: 5

7:48pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

local man wrote:
I can't help but wonder if MAD 4 IT and Grumpy are one and the same. If not they should consider getting together.
Spot on!
[quote][p][bold]local man[/bold] wrote: I can't help but wonder if MAD 4 IT and Grumpy are one and the same. If not they should consider getting together.[/p][/quote]Spot on! PageA
  • Score: 4

8:35pm Fri 24 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

It always humours me on debates like this how people will find any excuse to be deliberately antagonistic. Coming up with all kinds of nonsense statements to back up their bloody-mindedness.

The facts are;

Yes, it benefits everyone for as much freight as possible to be moved via the ship canal and rail network. if it gets HGV's off the road, then it can only be a good thing. That is not the issue here.

Consideration has to be given to the disruption caused to the traffic flow, especially at peak times and especialyl in a town like Warrington which already has major issues by being surrounded by 3 motorways.

The people saying that peak time bridge openings only hold up traffic for '20 minutes' are living in cloud cuckoo land. They are, obviously, fortunate enough to not have to use the roads during peak times. Unfortunately, a huge number of us aren't so lucky. We have no choice. Do you think that people drive at peak times just for the sake of it?

Some basic planning and a little respect for the people of Warrington by Peel Ports would go a long way.

It really isn't rocket science. Maybe basic manners and consideration for others really ARE things of the past.
It always humours me on debates like this how people will find any excuse to be deliberately antagonistic. Coming up with all kinds of nonsense statements to back up their bloody-mindedness. The facts are; Yes, it benefits everyone for as much freight as possible to be moved via the ship canal and rail network. if it gets HGV's off the road, then it can only be a good thing. That is not the issue here. Consideration has to be given to the disruption caused to the traffic flow, especially at peak times and especialyl in a town like Warrington which already has major issues by being surrounded by 3 motorways. The people saying that peak time bridge openings only hold up traffic for '20 minutes' are living in cloud cuckoo land. They are, obviously, fortunate enough to not have to use the roads during peak times. Unfortunately, a huge number of us aren't so lucky. We have no choice. Do you think that people drive at peak times just for the sake of it? Some basic planning and a little respect for the people of Warrington by Peel Ports would go a long way. It really isn't rocket science. Maybe basic manners and consideration for others really ARE things of the past. A.P.Moore
  • Score: 2

8:38pm Fri 24 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

OofT72 wrote:
Flashcoffy. If you travel out of Warrington via Manchester Rd and the Warburton bridge then how do you know how long traffic takes to get back to normal following a bridge movement, when you don't go anywhere near the area at peak times? As I have said it takes an hour for traffic to return to normal at any time following a bridge movement, not just at peak times. This figure is taken from traffic surveys, not from WG cooking the books to 'rabble rouse''

The aim of the petition, whether brought by Mr Moore or the WG, is not to shut the canal or cause further inconvenience to anyone, it is to request that Peel addresses the issue to the satisfaction of 40,000 plus residents., who cannot all simply up sticks and move if they don't like it! If you could take action which may help decrease your travel time then wouldn't you? This is a real issue for a lot of local people and as such is deserving of debate in the local press.
Thank you, Ooft72.

A voice of reason!
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: Flashcoffy. If you travel out of Warrington via Manchester Rd and the Warburton bridge then how do you know how long traffic takes to get back to normal following a bridge movement, when you don't go anywhere near the area at peak times? As I have said it takes an hour for traffic to return to normal at any time following a bridge movement, not just at peak times. This figure is taken from traffic surveys, not from WG cooking the books to 'rabble rouse'' The aim of the petition, whether brought by Mr Moore or the WG, is not to shut the canal or cause further inconvenience to anyone, it is to request that Peel addresses the issue to the satisfaction of 40,000 plus residents., who cannot all simply up sticks and move if they don't like it! If you could take action which may help decrease your travel time then wouldn't you? This is a real issue for a lot of local people and as such is deserving of debate in the local press.[/p][/quote]Thank you, Ooft72. A voice of reason! A.P.Moore
  • Score: 4

9:10pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

John__ wrote:
PageA wrote:
Freeborn John wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
Port Warrington might also be an issue
I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore.
Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year.
Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky..
the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.
'Expansion of the port facilities at the Port of Liverpool, Port Salford, and Port Warrington along with the Manchester Ship canal will transform the supply chain across Atlantic Gateway and will reduce the premium on transport costs for northern based businesses. This will assist in rebalancing the economy by turning the Atlantic Gateway into one of the most competitive business locations with reduced transport costs, decreased congestion on UK routes and reduced carbon emissions.'

A £14 billion investment, supporting the development of green infrastructure...Pie in the sky? They're talking about Transforming the water network..Transformin
g...Transforming. Not doing the same or less as last year or 2006
[quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freeborn John[/bold] wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?[/p][/quote]Port Warrington might also be an issue[/p][/quote]I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore. Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year. Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky.. the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.[/p][/quote]'Expansion of the port facilities at the Port of Liverpool, Port Salford, and Port Warrington along with the Manchester Ship canal will transform the supply chain across Atlantic Gateway and will reduce the premium on transport costs for northern based businesses. This will assist in rebalancing the economy by turning the Atlantic Gateway into one of the most competitive business locations with reduced transport costs, decreased congestion on UK routes and reduced carbon emissions.' A £14 billion investment, supporting the development of green infrastructure...Pie in the sky? They're talking about Transforming the water network..Transformin g...Transforming. Not doing the same or less as last year or 2006 PageA
  • Score: 2

9:32pm Fri 24 Jan 14

John__ says...

PageA wrote:
John__ wrote:
PageA wrote:
Freeborn John wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
Port Warrington might also be an issue
I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore.
Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year.
Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky..
the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.
'Expansion of the port facilities at the Port of Liverpool, Port Salford, and Port Warrington along with the Manchester Ship canal will transform the supply chain across Atlantic Gateway and will reduce the premium on transport costs for northern based businesses. This will assist in rebalancing the economy by turning the Atlantic Gateway into one of the most competitive business locations with reduced transport costs, decreased congestion on UK routes and reduced carbon emissions.'

A £14 billion investment, supporting the development of green infrastructure...Pie in the sky? They're talking about Transforming the water network..Transformin

g...Transforming. Not doing the same or less as last year or 2006
im sorry but Peel have talked about Port Warrington and Port Salford for years. it may be a 14billion investment but no work has actually started on these projects yet. just like wirral waters etc etc.. its been on the cards for years.. i believe they are pipe dreams but even if things start to happen it will be years away.. nothing in the original article talks about increased traffic in 2014.
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freeborn John[/bold] wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?[/p][/quote]Port Warrington might also be an issue[/p][/quote]I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore. Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year. Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky.. the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.[/p][/quote]'Expansion of the port facilities at the Port of Liverpool, Port Salford, and Port Warrington along with the Manchester Ship canal will transform the supply chain across Atlantic Gateway and will reduce the premium on transport costs for northern based businesses. This will assist in rebalancing the economy by turning the Atlantic Gateway into one of the most competitive business locations with reduced transport costs, decreased congestion on UK routes and reduced carbon emissions.' A £14 billion investment, supporting the development of green infrastructure...Pie in the sky? They're talking about Transforming the water network..Transformin g...Transforming. Not doing the same or less as last year or 2006[/p][/quote]im sorry but Peel have talked about Port Warrington and Port Salford for years. it may be a 14billion investment but no work has actually started on these projects yet. just like wirral waters etc etc.. its been on the cards for years.. i believe they are pipe dreams but even if things start to happen it will be years away.. nothing in the original article talks about increased traffic in 2014. John__
  • Score: -1

9:45pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

John__ wrote:
PageA wrote:
John__ wrote:
PageA wrote:
Freeborn John wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?
Port Warrington might also be an issue
I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore.
Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year.
Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky..
the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.
'Expansion of the port facilities at the Port of Liverpool, Port Salford, and Port Warrington along with the Manchester Ship canal will transform the supply chain across Atlantic Gateway and will reduce the premium on transport costs for northern based businesses. This will assist in rebalancing the economy by turning the Atlantic Gateway into one of the most competitive business locations with reduced transport costs, decreased congestion on UK routes and reduced carbon emissions.'

A £14 billion investment, supporting the development of green infrastructure...Pie in the sky? They're talking about Transforming the water network..Transformin


g...Transforming. Not doing the same or less as last year or 2006
im sorry but Peel have talked about Port Warrington and Port Salford for years. it may be a 14billion investment but no work has actually started on these projects yet. just like wirral waters etc etc.. its been on the cards for years.. i believe they are pipe dreams but even if things start to happen it will be years away.. nothing in the original article talks about increased traffic in 2014.
Wirral waters that received planning permission in 2012?
I'm sorry, It looks like you're saying that it's ok because nothing dramatic will change in 2014. If that's the case, and you're just contesting the text in the article then you may be right..maybe there wont be any visible increase in 2014 and maybe it'll be ok when we do see a visible difference (2015?..2016?..)beca
use by that time we'll all have hover-boards!

http://www.peel.co.u
k/projects/oceangate
way "Ocean Gateway is a reality."
[quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John__[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freeborn John[/bold] wrote: The problem stems from the fact that Peel Holdings have recently built a large ship/rail container hub, Port Salford, just up the canal, and the traffic to it, each and every ship, will cut Warrington in two on its way there and then coming back. In my opinion the town has been allowed to sleepwalk into this situation by its politicians and media, are they scared of Peel Holdings perhaps?[/p][/quote]Port Warrington might also be an issue[/p][/quote]I doubt Port Warrington would be an issue seeing as its at Moore. Plus i dont think it will be up and running this year. Same with Port Salford. Still in the planning stages. both of these are still pie in the sky.. the vessel movements are no different to last year and the year before. in fact vessel movements have declined since 2006 but they have played on words in this article to make us believe it is worse than it really is.[/p][/quote]'Expansion of the port facilities at the Port of Liverpool, Port Salford, and Port Warrington along with the Manchester Ship canal will transform the supply chain across Atlantic Gateway and will reduce the premium on transport costs for northern based businesses. This will assist in rebalancing the economy by turning the Atlantic Gateway into one of the most competitive business locations with reduced transport costs, decreased congestion on UK routes and reduced carbon emissions.' A £14 billion investment, supporting the development of green infrastructure...Pie in the sky? They're talking about Transforming the water network..Transformin g...Transforming. Not doing the same or less as last year or 2006[/p][/quote]im sorry but Peel have talked about Port Warrington and Port Salford for years. it may be a 14billion investment but no work has actually started on these projects yet. just like wirral waters etc etc.. its been on the cards for years.. i believe they are pipe dreams but even if things start to happen it will be years away.. nothing in the original article talks about increased traffic in 2014.[/p][/quote]Wirral waters that received planning permission in 2012? I'm sorry, It looks like you're saying that it's ok because nothing dramatic will change in 2014. If that's the case, and you're just contesting the text in the article then you may be right..maybe there wont be any visible increase in 2014 and maybe it'll be ok when we do see a visible difference (2015?..2016?..)beca use by that time we'll all have hover-boards! http://www.peel.co.u k/projects/oceangate way "Ocean Gateway is a reality." PageA
  • Score: -2

9:54pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Billy Porter says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
Billy Porter wrote:
"You don't plan, you just have to suck it up..."

Thanks for that - those who've suggested "planning your journey properly", please take note. Btw, as suggested above, it often takes more than 15 minutes for traffic to return to normal levels after these bridges have been closed. It's lucky people like me have nothing better to be doing with their time so as not to inconvenience megacorps like Peel Holdings eh?

No "alternative route" suggestions then? Righto.
The alternative route for the person in question would be to head towards Wash lane and use the cantilever bridge. However his journey it would still be taking place during the expected normal rush hour whether the swing bridges are in use or not.. This is all about planning your journey and also as part of the planning taking in to account of road conditions and any time constraints.
Whichever bridge swings - and if one does, they all do - Loushers Lane gets congested at both ends.

Yes, 5.00pm is rush hour, and if a bridge swings it makes congestion worse, why are some people struggling to understand this simple point?

If I finish work at 5.00pm, my "journey plan" doesn't really have any option other than turning left or right on to Loushers Lane.

Sheesh, flash's "suck it up" approach is beginning to look like the most sincere answer so far.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Billy Porter[/bold] wrote: "You don't plan, you just have to suck it up..." Thanks for that - those who've suggested "planning your journey properly", please take note. Btw, as suggested above, it often takes more than 15 minutes for traffic to return to normal levels after these bridges have been closed. It's lucky people like me have nothing better to be doing with their time so as not to inconvenience megacorps like Peel Holdings eh? No "alternative route" suggestions then? Righto.[/p][/quote]The alternative route for the person in question would be to head towards Wash lane and use the cantilever bridge. However his journey it would still be taking place during the expected normal rush hour whether the swing bridges are in use or not.. This is all about planning your journey and also as part of the planning taking in to account of road conditions and any time constraints.[/p][/quote]Whichever bridge swings - and if one does, they all do - Loushers Lane gets congested at both ends. Yes, 5.00pm is rush hour, and if a bridge swings it makes congestion worse, why are some people struggling to understand this simple point? If I finish work at 5.00pm, my "journey plan" doesn't really have any option other than turning left or right on to Loushers Lane. Sheesh, flash's "suck it up" approach is beginning to look like the most sincere answer so far. Billy Porter
  • Score: -1

10:02pm Fri 24 Jan 14

PageA says...

There isn't another way Billy. Maybe all the fuss about Hs2 is just a smoke screen.
There isn't another way Billy. Maybe all the fuss about Hs2 is just a smoke screen. PageA
  • Score: -1

10:17pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
It always humours me on debates like this how people will find any excuse to be deliberately antagonistic. Coming up with all kinds of nonsense statements to back up their bloody-mindedness.

The facts are;

Yes, it benefits everyone for as much freight as possible to be moved via the ship canal and rail network. if it gets HGV's off the road, then it can only be a good thing. That is not the issue here.

Consideration has to be given to the disruption caused to the traffic flow, especially at peak times and especialyl in a town like Warrington which already has major issues by being surrounded by 3 motorways.

The people saying that peak time bridge openings only hold up traffic for '20 minutes' are living in cloud cuckoo land. They are, obviously, fortunate enough to not have to use the roads during peak times. Unfortunately, a huge number of us aren't so lucky. We have no choice. Do you think that people drive at peak times just for the sake of it?

Some basic planning and a little respect for the people of Warrington by Peel Ports would go a long way.

It really isn't rocket science. Maybe basic manners and consideration for others really ARE things of the past.
Some of the commentators would in all possibility accuse you of such intolerant behaviour in a similar fashion. But, that is debating in case you hadn't realised.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: It always humours me on debates like this how people will find any excuse to be deliberately antagonistic. Coming up with all kinds of nonsense statements to back up their bloody-mindedness. The facts are; Yes, it benefits everyone for as much freight as possible to be moved via the ship canal and rail network. if it gets HGV's off the road, then it can only be a good thing. That is not the issue here. Consideration has to be given to the disruption caused to the traffic flow, especially at peak times and especialyl in a town like Warrington which already has major issues by being surrounded by 3 motorways. The people saying that peak time bridge openings only hold up traffic for '20 minutes' are living in cloud cuckoo land. They are, obviously, fortunate enough to not have to use the roads during peak times. Unfortunately, a huge number of us aren't so lucky. We have no choice. Do you think that people drive at peak times just for the sake of it? Some basic planning and a little respect for the people of Warrington by Peel Ports would go a long way. It really isn't rocket science. Maybe basic manners and consideration for others really ARE things of the past.[/p][/quote]Some of the commentators would in all possibility accuse you of such intolerant behaviour in a similar fashion. But, that is debating in case you hadn't realised. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 1

10:33pm Fri 24 Jan 14

A.P.Moore says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
A.P.Moore wrote:
It always humours me on debates like this how people will find any excuse to be deliberately antagonistic. Coming up with all kinds of nonsense statements to back up their bloody-mindedness.

The facts are;

Yes, it benefits everyone for as much freight as possible to be moved via the ship canal and rail network. if it gets HGV's off the road, then it can only be a good thing. That is not the issue here.

Consideration has to be given to the disruption caused to the traffic flow, especially at peak times and especialyl in a town like Warrington which already has major issues by being surrounded by 3 motorways.

The people saying that peak time bridge openings only hold up traffic for '20 minutes' are living in cloud cuckoo land. They are, obviously, fortunate enough to not have to use the roads during peak times. Unfortunately, a huge number of us aren't so lucky. We have no choice. Do you think that people drive at peak times just for the sake of it?

Some basic planning and a little respect for the people of Warrington by Peel Ports would go a long way.

It really isn't rocket science. Maybe basic manners and consideration for others really ARE things of the past.
Some of the commentators would in all possibility accuse you of such intolerant behaviour in a similar fashion. But, that is debating in case you hadn't realised.
I base my argument on facts and experience, not on half-truths about delay times and non-existent 'alternative routes'.

Btw, the last time I was held up by a bridge opening, I timed it.

It took 21 minutes from the barriers going down to them being raised again. The traffic can't even begin to return to normal until the barriers are raised. That rather blows the claims of a 'just a 20 minute delay' out of the water, don't you think?

The council's own data states that it takes between 40 minutes and an hour for traffic to return to normal after a bridge closure.

Speak with data, not hearsay and opinions.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: It always humours me on debates like this how people will find any excuse to be deliberately antagonistic. Coming up with all kinds of nonsense statements to back up their bloody-mindedness. The facts are; Yes, it benefits everyone for as much freight as possible to be moved via the ship canal and rail network. if it gets HGV's off the road, then it can only be a good thing. That is not the issue here. Consideration has to be given to the disruption caused to the traffic flow, especially at peak times and especialyl in a town like Warrington which already has major issues by being surrounded by 3 motorways. The people saying that peak time bridge openings only hold up traffic for '20 minutes' are living in cloud cuckoo land. They are, obviously, fortunate enough to not have to use the roads during peak times. Unfortunately, a huge number of us aren't so lucky. We have no choice. Do you think that people drive at peak times just for the sake of it? Some basic planning and a little respect for the people of Warrington by Peel Ports would go a long way. It really isn't rocket science. Maybe basic manners and consideration for others really ARE things of the past.[/p][/quote]Some of the commentators would in all possibility accuse you of such intolerant behaviour in a similar fashion. But, that is debating in case you hadn't realised.[/p][/quote]I base my argument on facts and experience, not on half-truths about delay times and non-existent 'alternative routes'. Btw, the last time I was held up by a bridge opening, I timed it. It took 21 minutes from the barriers going down to them being raised again. The traffic can't even begin to return to normal until the barriers are raised. That rather blows the claims of a 'just a 20 minute delay' out of the water, don't you think? The council's own data states that it takes between 40 minutes and an hour for traffic to return to normal after a bridge closure. Speak with data, not hearsay and opinions. A.P.Moore
  • Score: -1

10:54pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

Continue then with such passion if you must, but you are on the road to nowhere. The odds for anything to change on this issue are against you and from your point of view. You, no doubt will just have to get used to the traffic conditions in Warrington for the time being and use the factual information and data you currently have for any future journey planning, including factoring in time delays for the inevitable and the continuing traffic issues you have described and witnessed.
Continue then with such passion if you must, but you are on the road to nowhere. The odds for anything to change on this issue are against you and from your point of view. You, no doubt will just have to get used to the traffic conditions in Warrington for the time being and use the factual information and data you currently have for any future journey planning, including factoring in time delays for the inevitable and the continuing traffic issues you have described and witnessed. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 4

11:00pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

Newarrival wrote:
irishwire wrote:
They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population.
If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?
How can you say it affects only 1% of the population? The congestion caused by the swing bridges extends all the way to Warrington city centre, causing gridlock. Anyone travelling in or out of the city, or across the city in any direction, is trapped. This means almost every working person in and around the city centre. A lot more than 1% !
Warrington is not a City it is currently classified as a Town.
[quote][p][bold]Newarrival[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: They can't afford to take them on for such a trivial matter that affects probably less than 1% of the Warrington population. If you bother to read the article it states clearly that the costs are high and in an age when councils are cost cutting you expect them to waste money on this?[/p][/quote]How can you say it affects only 1% of the population? The congestion caused by the swing bridges extends all the way to Warrington city centre, causing gridlock. Anyone travelling in or out of the city, or across the city in any direction, is trapped. This means almost every working person in and around the city centre. A lot more than 1% ![/p][/quote]Warrington is not a City it is currently classified as a Town. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 3

11:09pm Fri 24 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

I'm sure the suffragettes thought they too were on the road to nowhere SAC, but persevere they did. And won in the end! Every little helps so they say! Especially when 3.5 million litres of it are sailing past my back door!!
I'm sure the suffragettes thought they too were on the road to nowhere SAC, but persevere they did. And won in the end! Every little helps so they say! Especially when 3.5 million litres of it are sailing past my back door!! OofT72
  • Score: -1

11:22pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

OofT72 wrote:
I'm sure the suffragettes thought they too were on the road to nowhere SAC, but persevere they did. And won in the end! Every little helps so they say! Especially when 3.5 million litres of it are sailing past my back door!!
I do not suppose that A.P.Moore has that much passion and perseverance or any notions of martyrdom in his quest for his perfect journey across the Manchester Ship Canal.
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: I'm sure the suffragettes thought they too were on the road to nowhere SAC, but persevere they did. And won in the end! Every little helps so they say! Especially when 3.5 million litres of it are sailing past my back door!![/p][/quote]I do not suppose that A.P.Moore has that much passion and perseverance or any notions of martyrdom in his quest for his perfect journey across the Manchester Ship Canal. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: -3

2:02am Sat 25 Jan 14

Billy Porter says...

SUCK IT UP!

or

MOVE!

Heaven forfend that those who are otherwise quite happy here should try to make things just a little bit better.

Oh, and I'd like to be the first to mention HITLER!

He would've walked all over us with the attitude shown by some here...so long as he didn't get bridged, that is.
SUCK IT UP! or MOVE! Heaven forfend that those who are otherwise quite happy here should try to make things just a little bit better. Oh, and I'd like to be the first to mention HITLER! He would've walked all over us with the attitude shown by some here...so long as he didn't get bridged, that is. Billy Porter
  • Score: -2

7:30am Sat 25 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning!
How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning! OofT72
  • Score: -3

7:49am Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

OofT72 wrote:
How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning!
What on earth are you referring to as it makes no sense at all! There was no aspersions casted and he has quite a few comments of his own volition to suggest how passionate he is on the subject at issue which I have respectfully acknowledged. Me defeatist, not in a million years!.

Don't forget the old saying:
Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.
Benjamin Franklin.

(it also applies as much to women]
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning![/p][/quote]What on earth are you referring to as it makes no sense at all! There was no aspersions casted and he has quite a few comments of his own volition to suggest how passionate he is on the subject at issue which I have respectfully acknowledged. Me defeatist, not in a million years!. Don't forget the old saying: Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise. Benjamin Franklin. (it also applies as much to women] SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: -4

8:40am Sat 25 Jan 14

PageA says...

Billy Porter wrote:
SUCK IT UP!

or

MOVE!

Heaven forfend that those who are otherwise quite happy here should try to make things just a little bit better.

Oh, and I'd like to be the first to mention HITLER!

He would've walked all over us with the attitude shown by some here...so long as he didn't get bridged, that is.
No disrespect Billy but to me it's like....there's a hurricane a'comin' and some people are complaining about a few leaves In their driveways. The use of that stretch is about to be Transformed. How much of an increase in canal traffic would justify the use of that word? Combine the swing Bridges with a toll charge on the new crossing then add an increase in footfall in and out of Warrington town centre due it being a smashing new place to be...throw in an occasional snarl up on the m6 and we might just have the perfect storm
[quote][p][bold]Billy Porter[/bold] wrote: SUCK IT UP! or MOVE! Heaven forfend that those who are otherwise quite happy here should try to make things just a little bit better. Oh, and I'd like to be the first to mention HITLER! He would've walked all over us with the attitude shown by some here...so long as he didn't get bridged, that is.[/p][/quote]No disrespect Billy but to me it's like....there's a hurricane a'comin' and some people are complaining about a few leaves In their driveways. The use of that stretch is about to be Transformed. How much of an increase in canal traffic would justify the use of that word? Combine the swing Bridges with a toll charge on the new crossing then add an increase in footfall in and out of Warrington town centre due it being a smashing new place to be...throw in an occasional snarl up on the m6 and we might just have the perfect storm PageA
  • Score: -1

9:02am Sat 25 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
OofT72 wrote:
How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning!
What on earth are you referring to as it makes no sense at all! There was no aspersions casted and he has quite a few comments of his own volition to suggest how passionate he is on the subject at issue which I have respectfully acknowledged. Me defeatist, not in a million years!.

Don't forget the old saying:
Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.
Benjamin Franklin.

(it also applies as much to women]
Yes thank you for your advice, I'll bear that in mind! Perhaps you ought to have noted that I was up before 7am then SAC! 👍

I fail to see what's difficult to understand about my comment, you did in fact cast aspersions on his character by assuming he wasn't committed enough to see his campaign through! You might want to re-read what you actually wrote in the first place. 'I do not suppose he has enough passion and perseverance to see his quest through' or words to that effect!. That doesn't seem very respectful to me!
You are quick to pounce on others for their grammatical misdemeanours and yet much of what you've just posted makes no sense whatsoever!!
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning![/p][/quote]What on earth are you referring to as it makes no sense at all! There was no aspersions casted and he has quite a few comments of his own volition to suggest how passionate he is on the subject at issue which I have respectfully acknowledged. Me defeatist, not in a million years!. Don't forget the old saying: Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise. Benjamin Franklin. (it also applies as much to women][/p][/quote]Yes thank you for your advice, I'll bear that in mind! Perhaps you ought to have noted that I was up before 7am then SAC! 👍 I fail to see what's difficult to understand about my comment, you did in fact cast aspersions on his character by assuming he wasn't committed enough to see his campaign through! You might want to re-read what you actually wrote in the first place. 'I do not suppose he has enough passion and perseverance to see his quest through' or words to that effect!. That doesn't seem very respectful to me! You are quick to pounce on others for their grammatical misdemeanours and yet much of what you've just posted makes no sense whatsoever!! OofT72
  • Score: -2

9:21am Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

OofT72 wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
OofT72 wrote:
How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning!
What on earth are you referring to as it makes no sense at all! There was no aspersions casted and he has quite a few comments of his own volition to suggest how passionate he is on the subject at issue which I have respectfully acknowledged. Me defeatist, not in a million years!.

Don't forget the old saying:
Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.
Benjamin Franklin.

(it also applies as much to women]
Yes thank you for your advice, I'll bear that in mind! Perhaps you ought to have noted that I was up before 7am then SAC! 👍

I fail to see what's difficult to understand about my comment, you did in fact cast aspersions on his character by assuming he wasn't committed enough to see his campaign through! You might want to re-read what you actually wrote in the first place. 'I do not suppose he has enough passion and perseverance to see his quest through' or words to that effect!. That doesn't seem very respectful to me!
You are quick to pounce on others for their grammatical misdemeanours and yet much of what you've just posted makes no sense whatsoever!!
Continue to fail to understand as you clearly stated if you so wish. I was making reference to the comment about the Suffragettes and their world changing campaign for the rights of women. I still attest that A P Moore hasn't got the same passion and perseverance for his bespoke issues, however much you personally fail to understand or how much you disagree with me and other people with similar views.
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: How on earth would you know that SAC? You cannot cast aspersions on a mans character based on what you read in a local rag news article. Ridiculous!! It's a good job we aren't all as defeatist as you, we'd never get out of bed in the morning![/p][/quote]What on earth are you referring to as it makes no sense at all! There was no aspersions casted and he has quite a few comments of his own volition to suggest how passionate he is on the subject at issue which I have respectfully acknowledged. Me defeatist, not in a million years!. Don't forget the old saying: Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise. Benjamin Franklin. (it also applies as much to women][/p][/quote]Yes thank you for your advice, I'll bear that in mind! Perhaps you ought to have noted that I was up before 7am then SAC! 👍 I fail to see what's difficult to understand about my comment, you did in fact cast aspersions on his character by assuming he wasn't committed enough to see his campaign through! You might want to re-read what you actually wrote in the first place. 'I do not suppose he has enough passion and perseverance to see his quest through' or words to that effect!. That doesn't seem very respectful to me! You are quick to pounce on others for their grammatical misdemeanours and yet much of what you've just posted makes no sense whatsoever!![/p][/quote]Continue to fail to understand as you clearly stated if you so wish. I was making reference to the comment about the Suffragettes and their world changing campaign for the rights of women. I still attest that A P Moore hasn't got the same passion and perseverance for his bespoke issues, however much you personally fail to understand or how much you disagree with me and other people with similar views. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: -1

10:20am Sat 25 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

My comparison to the suffragettes (and yes I am fully aware of their history) was merely a reference to the fact that people CAN instigate changes if they so wish. I could have referenced David and Goliath or Ghandie, but the point is easy enough to comprehend..for most people.

Unfortunately you are the pseudo-intellectual failing to understand these basic references.........i
t's quite amusing really!! YOU don't know Mr Moore from Adam do you, so how can you say what he is and isn't capable of? Your nonsensical diatribe is getting tiresome....oh and Mr Moore's issue is far from 'bespoke' it affects a quarter of Warrington.
My comparison to the suffragettes (and yes I am fully aware of their history) was merely a reference to the fact that people CAN instigate changes if they so wish. I could have referenced David and Goliath or Ghandie, but the point is easy enough to comprehend..for most people. Unfortunately you are the pseudo-intellectual failing to understand these basic references.........i t's quite amusing really!! YOU don't know Mr Moore from Adam do you, so how can you say what he is and isn't capable of? Your nonsensical diatribe is getting tiresome....oh and Mr Moore's issue is far from 'bespoke' it affects a quarter of Warrington. OofT72
  • Score: -4

10:25am Sat 25 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work !
protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: 0

11:46am Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

OofT72 wrote:
My comparison to the suffragettes (and yes I am fully aware of their history) was merely a reference to the fact that people CAN instigate changes if they so wish. I could have referenced David and Goliath or Ghandie, but the point is easy enough to comprehend..for most people.

Unfortunately you are the pseudo-intellectual failing to understand these basic references.........i

t's quite amusing really!! YOU don't know Mr Moore from Adam do you, so how can you say what he is and isn't capable of? Your nonsensical diatribe is getting tiresome....oh and Mr Moore's issue is far from 'bespoke' it affects a quarter of Warrington.
That is your opinion and quite obviously congruent with your style of humor. Don't forget that we have the right of free speech in this realm thus enabling us to express our own opinions and beliefs.

I find it satisfying to learn then that the majority of Warrington people consider that there is no real issue with the ingress and egress of the area of Warrington to the south of the Manchester Ship Canal.

The only way to resolve your issue is to have the relevant Acts of Parliament repealed and for that you will need to consult with your MP and a knowledgeable legal team, however Warrington Borough Council may not or more to the point, will not understandably offer financial support for you and others to go for that option. Perhaps you or A P Moore can raise the cash, but I emphatically expect that you will not Don't you agree?

(lol!)
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: My comparison to the suffragettes (and yes I am fully aware of their history) was merely a reference to the fact that people CAN instigate changes if they so wish. I could have referenced David and Goliath or Ghandie, but the point is easy enough to comprehend..for most people. Unfortunately you are the pseudo-intellectual failing to understand these basic references.........i t's quite amusing really!! YOU don't know Mr Moore from Adam do you, so how can you say what he is and isn't capable of? Your nonsensical diatribe is getting tiresome....oh and Mr Moore's issue is far from 'bespoke' it affects a quarter of Warrington.[/p][/quote]That is your opinion and quite obviously congruent with your style of humor. Don't forget that we have the right of free speech in this realm thus enabling us to express our own opinions and beliefs. I find it satisfying to learn then that the majority of Warrington people consider that there is no real issue with the ingress and egress of the area of Warrington to the south of the Manchester Ship Canal. The only way to resolve your issue is to have the relevant Acts of Parliament repealed and for that you will need to consult with your MP and a knowledgeable legal team, however Warrington Borough Council may not or more to the point, will not understandably offer financial support for you and others to go for that option. Perhaps you or A P Moore can raise the cash, but I emphatically expect that you will not Don't you agree? (lol!) SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 2

12:39pm Sat 25 Jan 14

grey-area says...

As usual this type of discussion descends into personal attacks, irrelevant grammatical corrections and distorted opinions, then unbelievable comparisons. Worse than the school playground.

Basically - the article is sensationalist as the openings are similar to previous years. But it's provoked a huge response. Job done.
When the three swing bridges open in turn, it takes only minutes for the traffic to back up to and beyond Bridge Foot, so many more vehicles are affected than north/south traffic. It then takes about an hour to get back to normal when not at peak times. At peak times the traffic backs up well into the north of Warrington as a result.

Using those big road traffic signs in the outskirts for notifications of all traffic issues is a good idea.
But that's life living and driving in Warrington. It would be good PR if Peels did put canal traffic through outside peak times. Not putting money on it though.
Money talks - always has, always will.
As usual this type of discussion descends into personal attacks, irrelevant grammatical corrections and distorted opinions, then unbelievable comparisons. Worse than the school playground. Basically - the article is sensationalist as the openings are similar to previous years. But it's provoked a huge response. Job done. When the three swing bridges open in turn, it takes only minutes for the traffic to back up to and beyond Bridge Foot, so many more vehicles are affected than north/south traffic. It then takes about an hour to get back to normal when not at peak times. At peak times the traffic backs up well into the north of Warrington as a result. Using those big road traffic signs in the outskirts for notifications of all traffic issues is a good idea. But that's life living and driving in Warrington. It would be good PR if Peels did put canal traffic through outside peak times. Not putting money on it though. Money talks - always has, always will. grey-area
  • Score: 4

1:34pm Sat 25 Jan 14

happytee39 says...

These bridges have been in this town for years, boats have passed through for years, its the history of this town, like many other towns and cities all over..drivers are just in too much of a rush these days, bridges or no bridges, warrington has too much traffic anyway, full of people speeding to get places,maybe the bridges will slow people down a bit.
These bridges have been in this town for years, boats have passed through for years, its the history of this town, like many other towns and cities all over..drivers are just in too much of a rush these days, bridges or no bridges, warrington has too much traffic anyway, full of people speeding to get places,maybe the bridges will slow people down a bit. happytee39
  • Score: 2

3:46pm Sat 25 Jan 14

OofT72 says...

There isn't an issue with accessing and egressing the south of the town, so long as you're already IN the south of the town and you don't wish to cross to say, the north, east or west!

I won't be raising monies toward a legal challenge you are quite correct, as fortunately, the bridge swings don't really have a detrimental effect on my quality of life, so it's not really something that I'm particularly passionate about. In the same way that the issues surrounding the Arpley Landfill Site, or flooding on the Mersey don't affect me but it doesn't mean that I should just dismiss people who are affected, like many have done on this thread.

What I do however find objectionable is the vitriol that has been directed towards the people who ARE affected and have the audacity to complain about it. And yet those very same people are bleating on about free speech. It's laughable honestly!
There isn't an issue with accessing and egressing the south of the town, so long as you're already IN the south of the town and you don't wish to cross to say, the north, east or west! I won't be raising monies toward a legal challenge you are quite correct, as fortunately, the bridge swings don't really have a detrimental effect on my quality of life, so it's not really something that I'm particularly passionate about. In the same way that the issues surrounding the Arpley Landfill Site, or flooding on the Mersey don't affect me but it doesn't mean that I should just dismiss people who are affected, like many have done on this thread. What I do however find objectionable is the vitriol that has been directed towards the people who ARE affected and have the audacity to complain about it. And yet those very same people are bleating on about free speech. It's laughable honestly! OofT72
  • Score: 5

4:07pm Sat 25 Jan 14

chrislee1275@aol.com says...

I know it's a hobby horse of mine but if you think it's going to be bad in 2014 just wait till the Mersey Gateway Crossing at Runcorn/Widnes come into operation and the tolls charged divert even more traffic through Warrington. Oh and by the way one of the backers of the Mersey Gateway is - Peel Holdings. Tallk about having the cake and the halfpenny!
I raised this issue at the Mersey Gateway and was told the two issues are unrelated just how is tha the case?
I know it's a hobby horse of mine but if you think it's going to be bad in 2014 just wait till the Mersey Gateway Crossing at Runcorn/Widnes come into operation and the tolls charged divert even more traffic through Warrington. Oh and by the way one of the backers of the Mersey Gateway is - Peel Holdings. Tallk about having the cake and the halfpenny! I raised this issue at the Mersey Gateway and was told the two issues are unrelated just how is tha the case? chrislee1275@aol.com
  • Score: 4

4:26pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Freeborn John says...

PageA wrote:
Billy Porter wrote:
SUCK IT UP!

or

MOVE!

Heaven forfend that those who are otherwise quite happy here should try to make things just a little bit better.

Oh, and I'd like to be the first to mention HITLER!

He would've walked all over us with the attitude shown by some here...so long as he didn't get bridged, that is.
No disrespect Billy but to me it's like....there's a hurricane a'comin' and some people are complaining about a few leaves In their driveways. The use of that stretch is about to be Transformed. How much of an increase in canal traffic would justify the use of that word? Combine the swing Bridges with a toll charge on the new crossing then add an increase in footfall in and out of Warrington town centre due it being a smashing new place to be...throw in an occasional snarl up on the m6 and we might just have the perfect storm
Pagey, you've put your finger right on it.
Peel Ports are going to restart serious commercial traffic on the MSC after many years of the canal just ticking over, a measly 7% of its potential shipping traffic has been using the waterway...until now.
The towns traffic system is permanently teetering on the edge of a nervous breakdown as it is, future developments will almost certainly put it into a strait jacket!
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Billy Porter[/bold] wrote: SUCK IT UP! or MOVE! Heaven forfend that those who are otherwise quite happy here should try to make things just a little bit better. Oh, and I'd like to be the first to mention HITLER! He would've walked all over us with the attitude shown by some here...so long as he didn't get bridged, that is.[/p][/quote]No disrespect Billy but to me it's like....there's a hurricane a'comin' and some people are complaining about a few leaves In their driveways. The use of that stretch is about to be Transformed. How much of an increase in canal traffic would justify the use of that word? Combine the swing Bridges with a toll charge on the new crossing then add an increase in footfall in and out of Warrington town centre due it being a smashing new place to be...throw in an occasional snarl up on the m6 and we might just have the perfect storm[/p][/quote]Pagey, you've put your finger right on it. Peel Ports are going to restart serious commercial traffic on the MSC after many years of the canal just ticking over, a measly 7% of its potential shipping traffic has been using the waterway...until now. The towns traffic system is permanently teetering on the edge of a nervous breakdown as it is, future developments will almost certainly put it into a strait jacket! Freeborn John
  • Score: 4

4:37pm Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

OofT72 wrote:
There isn't an issue with accessing and egressing the south of the town, so long as you're already IN the south of the town and you don't wish to cross to say, the north, east or west!

I won't be raising monies toward a legal challenge you are quite correct, as fortunately, the bridge swings don't really have a detrimental effect on my quality of life, so it's not really something that I'm particularly passionate about. In the same way that the issues surrounding the Arpley Landfill Site, or flooding on the Mersey don't affect me but it doesn't mean that I should just dismiss people who are affected, like many have done on this thread.

What I do however find objectionable is the vitriol that has been directed towards the people who ARE affected and have the audacity to complain about it. And yet those very same people are bleating on about free speech. It's laughable honestly!
So you are now speaking for and on behalf of A P Moore.

Viterol, you have not seen the like on here, as yet that is. Our fellow commentators have been very moderated in their use of language language and very minimal insults.

If you want a debate then continue by all means, if you don't then go away.

As a fellow commentator has so eloquently stated; Pot, Kettle, Black!
[quote][p][bold]OofT72[/bold] wrote: There isn't an issue with accessing and egressing the south of the town, so long as you're already IN the south of the town and you don't wish to cross to say, the north, east or west! I won't be raising monies toward a legal challenge you are quite correct, as fortunately, the bridge swings don't really have a detrimental effect on my quality of life, so it's not really something that I'm particularly passionate about. In the same way that the issues surrounding the Arpley Landfill Site, or flooding on the Mersey don't affect me but it doesn't mean that I should just dismiss people who are affected, like many have done on this thread. What I do however find objectionable is the vitriol that has been directed towards the people who ARE affected and have the audacity to complain about it. And yet those very same people are bleating on about free speech. It's laughable honestly![/p][/quote]So you are now speaking for and on behalf of A P Moore. Viterol, you have not seen the like on here, as yet that is. Our fellow commentators have been very moderated in their use of language language and very minimal insults. If you want a debate then continue by all means, if you don't then go away. As a fellow commentator has so eloquently stated; Pot, Kettle, Black! SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: -4

6:46pm Sat 25 Jan 14

exwarringtonian says...

I lived by the cantilever bridge for the first 25 years of my life and 4 members of my family worked on the ship canal, reading the comments made make it very clear that the majority do not know the workings of the canal, it is tidal from the Mersey up to Latchford locks so that any ships, depending on their tonnage have to wait for the tide to enter the canal at the Liverpool end and like wise to leave, now the argument that they could travel at certain times would simply mean that say if three ships came up the canal together then the bridges would have to remain open longer which would virtually mean all three bridges would be open at the same time due to the proximity of them likewise when they made the return sailings.
I lived by the cantilever bridge for the first 25 years of my life and 4 members of my family worked on the ship canal, reading the comments made make it very clear that the majority do not know the workings of the canal, it is tidal from the Mersey up to Latchford locks so that any ships, depending on their tonnage have to wait for the tide to enter the canal at the Liverpool end and like wise to leave, now the argument that they could travel at certain times would simply mean that say if three ships came up the canal together then the bridges would have to remain open longer which would virtually mean all three bridges would be open at the same time due to the proximity of them likewise when they made the return sailings. exwarringtonian
  • Score: 4

7:06pm Sat 25 Jan 14

fedster says...

easy use the AIS
site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks.

then you can plan your journey like a pro
easy use the AIS site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks. then you can plan your journey like a pro fedster
  • Score: 3

7:10pm Sat 25 Jan 14

fedster says...

coastal deniz does the majority of the transport back n fro

this time of year a few of the grain boats (arklows) pass up and down.

but in the last 2 weeks only one has passed through in rush hour
the rest have been after 7 PM

the ferries pass from march to sept

maybe 3 times a week and again its about 130 to 230 pm they pass through the bridges (and mostly weekends)

so i just dont see the issues

if i see the boats heading up when iam about to travel i adjust accordingly

and ive never had an issue getting over cantilever bridge in rush hour in fact i use it more
coastal deniz does the majority of the transport back n fro this time of year a few of the grain boats (arklows) pass up and down. but in the last 2 weeks only one has passed through in rush hour the rest have been after 7 PM the ferries pass from march to sept maybe 3 times a week and again its about 130 to 230 pm they pass through the bridges (and mostly weekends) so i just dont see the issues if i see the boats heading up when iam about to travel i adjust accordingly and ive never had an issue getting over cantilever bridge in rush hour in fact i use it more fedster
  • Score: 5

7:17pm Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

fedster wrote:
easy use the AIS
site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks.

then you can plan your journey like a pro
Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.
[quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: easy use the AIS site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks. then you can plan your journey like a pro[/p][/quote]Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 4

7:40pm Sat 25 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

GET A LIFE !!! all these comments are just about the same thing ! boring ! get out more !
GET A LIFE !!! all these comments are just about the same thing ! boring ! get out more ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -2

7:42pm Sat 25 Jan 14

fedster says...

MAD 4 IT wrote:
protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work !
wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is.

only so many turning points on the canal

as for tidal since when ?

once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down.

getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides.

its so easy for people to complain
yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that.

if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly.

iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.
[quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work ![/p][/quote]wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is. only so many turning points on the canal as for tidal since when ? once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down. getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides. its so easy for people to complain yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that. if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly. iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well. fedster
  • Score: 5

7:50pm Sat 25 Jan 14

grey_man says...

fedster wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work !
wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is.

only so many turning points on the canal

as for tidal since when ?

once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down.

getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides.

its so easy for people to complain
yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that.

if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly.

iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.
I think that's the point people are making. The infrastructure in Warrington is inadequate and the town invariably gridlocks whenever there is an incident on the motorways. Now we have to factor in the potential for more traffic on the ship canal and the tolling of the Mersey which will divert traffic into the town, not to mention a council that is planning to slow traffic down so each car spends more time on the roads as we all as constantly installing new road layouts at bottlenecks and traffic lights where none are needed. As PageA says, it all adds up to disaster.
[quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work ![/p][/quote]wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is. only so many turning points on the canal as for tidal since when ? once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down. getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides. its so easy for people to complain yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that. if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly. iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.[/p][/quote]I think that's the point people are making. The infrastructure in Warrington is inadequate and the town invariably gridlocks whenever there is an incident on the motorways. Now we have to factor in the potential for more traffic on the ship canal and the tolling of the Mersey which will divert traffic into the town, not to mention a council that is planning to slow traffic down so each car spends more time on the roads as we all as constantly installing new road layouts at bottlenecks and traffic lights where none are needed. As PageA says, it all adds up to disaster. grey_man
  • Score: 4

7:53pm Sat 25 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

good luck living in stockton heath !! permanent gridlock there between 7.30am to 7pm
good luck living in stockton heath !! permanent gridlock there between 7.30am to 7pm MAD 4 IT
  • Score: 0

7:56pm Sat 25 Jan 14

fedster says...

A.P.Moore wrote:
irishwire wrote:
Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad!
Obviously, you aren't affected by the bridges opening at peak times. If not, then good for you.

However, it is costing me and other businesses in Warrington REAL MONEY!! That's why it's an issue!

Btw, I don't know where the 'Birchwood' thing came from. I live in Latchford. I can't even get out of my own street sometimes when the bridges open.
maybe its me i can get to the majority of locations in warrington in rush hours its just about improvising.

is their no way you can just jump on the M6 or M62 to get to location sure it may be a extra 3 or 4 miles
9 more for me to get to daresbury in rush hour but alas No lights not many hold ups and a constant drive so less fuel is used.

this country is the best in the world but moaning but not backing it up

so much for improvise adapt and overcome.
[quote][p][bold]A.P.Moore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]irishwire[/bold] wrote: Jesus wept, you know you have no life when you all you have to moan about is a boat causing traffic. If you dont like it move! And Andrew from Birchwood is just sad![/p][/quote]Obviously, you aren't affected by the bridges opening at peak times. If not, then good for you. However, it is costing me and other businesses in Warrington REAL MONEY!! That's why it's an issue! Btw, I don't know where the 'Birchwood' thing came from. I live in Latchford. I can't even get out of my own street sometimes when the bridges open.[/p][/quote]maybe its me i can get to the majority of locations in warrington in rush hours its just about improvising. is their no way you can just jump on the M6 or M62 to get to location sure it may be a extra 3 or 4 miles 9 more for me to get to daresbury in rush hour but alas No lights not many hold ups and a constant drive so less fuel is used. this country is the best in the world but moaning but not backing it up so much for improvise adapt and overcome. fedster
  • Score: 1

8:12pm Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

fedster wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work !
wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is.

only so many turning points on the canal

as for tidal since when ?

once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down.

getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides.

its so easy for people to complain
yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that.

if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly.

iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.
There is a gap at weston for the River Weaver/Witton Brook to flow into the Mersey I believe.
[quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work ![/p][/quote]wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is. only so many turning points on the canal as for tidal since when ? once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down. getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides. its so easy for people to complain yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that. if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly. iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.[/p][/quote]There is a gap at weston for the River Weaver/Witton Brook to flow into the Mersey I believe. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 4

8:29pm Sat 25 Jan 14

fedster says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
fedster wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work !
wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is.

only so many turning points on the canal

as for tidal since when ?

once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down.

getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides.

its so easy for people to complain
yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that.

if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly.

iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.
There is a gap at weston for the River Weaver/Witton Brook to flow into the Mersey I believe.
good point sac not sure how much this effects the canal

due to weirs and other controlled measures

and lets not forget that 100 + licenses have been handed out for barges and pleasure boats to pass up and down this year.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work ![/p][/quote]wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is. only so many turning points on the canal as for tidal since when ? once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down. getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides. its so easy for people to complain yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that. if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly. iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.[/p][/quote]There is a gap at weston for the River Weaver/Witton Brook to flow into the Mersey I believe.[/p][/quote]good point sac not sure how much this effects the canal due to weirs and other controlled measures and lets not forget that 100 + licenses have been handed out for barges and pleasure boats to pass up and down this year. fedster
  • Score: 3

9:13pm Sat 25 Jan 14

ninearches says...

When the motorways were built round Warrington its historic traffic problems were made a lot easier because through traffic could by pass town, but now there are so many vehicles on the roads it is reaching grid lock proportions again which is only made worse when there are motorway disruptions & traffic diverts through parts of the town. The council have had over 40 years since the motorways first arrived in Warrington ,when the traffic died down for a few years, to get some high level crossings built over the canal & be ready for the increased in demand for road space.
When the motorways were built round Warrington its historic traffic problems were made a lot easier because through traffic could by pass town, but now there are so many vehicles on the roads it is reaching grid lock proportions again which is only made worse when there are motorway disruptions & traffic diverts through parts of the town. The council have had over 40 years since the motorways first arrived in Warrington ,when the traffic died down for a few years, to get some high level crossings built over the canal & be ready for the increased in demand for road space. ninearches
  • Score: 6

9:43pm Sat 25 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

ninearches wrote:
When the motorways were built round Warrington its historic traffic problems were made a lot easier because through traffic could by pass town, but now there are so many vehicles on the roads it is reaching grid lock proportions again which is only made worse when there are motorway disruptions & traffic diverts through parts of the town. The council have had over 40 years since the motorways first arrived in Warrington ,when the traffic died down for a few years, to get some high level crossings built over the canal & be ready for the increased in demand for road space.
It would have been the Counties of Lancashire and Cheshire that were responsible for the motorways and the planning for a transport strategy then latterly the Highways Agency although the Warrington Borough would have had a representative on the respective County Council Highways Committee.
[quote][p][bold]ninearches[/bold] wrote: When the motorways were built round Warrington its historic traffic problems were made a lot easier because through traffic could by pass town, but now there are so many vehicles on the roads it is reaching grid lock proportions again which is only made worse when there are motorway disruptions & traffic diverts through parts of the town. The council have had over 40 years since the motorways first arrived in Warrington ,when the traffic died down for a few years, to get some high level crossings built over the canal & be ready for the increased in demand for road space.[/p][/quote]It would have been the Counties of Lancashire and Cheshire that were responsible for the motorways and the planning for a transport strategy then latterly the Highways Agency although the Warrington Borough would have had a representative on the respective County Council Highways Committee. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 3

9:34am Sun 26 Jan 14

exwarringtonian says...

fedster wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
fedster wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work !
wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is.

only so many turning points on the canal

as for tidal since when ?

once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down.

getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides.

its so easy for people to complain
yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that.

if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly.

iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.
There is a gap at weston for the River Weaver/Witton Brook to flow into the Mersey I believe.
good point sac not sure how much this effects the canal

due to weirs and other controlled measures

and lets not forget that 100 + licenses have been handed out for barges and pleasure boats to pass up and down this year.
The point that I made about the tide was that ships entering or leaving the canal at Liverpool come in or go out on the tide, I may be an old codger but as I stated earlier I lived by the canal at the Cantilever bridge and in the 1940' s ships had to at times stop and wait for the water level to drop before they could get under the Cantilever and the railway bridge by the locks, there were times when the water level would rise 6 feet or more..
[quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: protest when the bridges open for peel holdings then ! ALL TALK ! NO ACTION ! if your that keen on not letting ships pass at rush-hour "DONT LET THE BRIDGE OPEN" a human chain underneath the closing gates would work ![/p][/quote]wont the chain just make many motorist turn into road rage idiots as the bridge will stay locked down till the boat goes through as it cant turn round where it is. only so many turning points on the canal as for tidal since when ? once your in the gates at eastham the tide does not effect the canal as its all locked down. getting from the bar to the gates depends on tides. its so easy for people to complain yes ive been stuck in traffic their on a sat morning leaving warr at about 7 am and i was still for about 10 minutes if that. if a 10 minute delay or even 20 is going to ruin you day again plan accordingly. iam betting the M56 M62 or the M6 when theirs been a incident causes more traffic jams than the bridges so should we get rid of them as well.[/p][/quote]There is a gap at weston for the River Weaver/Witton Brook to flow into the Mersey I believe.[/p][/quote]good point sac not sure how much this effects the canal due to weirs and other controlled measures and lets not forget that 100 + licenses have been handed out for barges and pleasure boats to pass up and down this year.[/p][/quote]The point that I made about the tide was that ships entering or leaving the canal at Liverpool come in or go out on the tide, I may be an old codger but as I stated earlier I lived by the canal at the Cantilever bridge and in the 1940' s ships had to at times stop and wait for the water level to drop before they could get under the Cantilever and the railway bridge by the locks, there were times when the water level would rise 6 feet or more.. exwarringtonian
  • Score: 3

1:28pm Sun 26 Jan 14

PageA says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
fedster wrote:
easy use the AIS
site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks.

then you can plan your journey like a pro
Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.
This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: easy use the AIS site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks. then you can plan your journey like a pro[/p][/quote]Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.[/p][/quote]This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked. PageA
  • Score: 0

2:18pm Sun 26 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

PageA wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
fedster wrote:
easy use the AIS
site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks.

then you can plan your journey like a pro
Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.
This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.
I am assured that there are paramedics based in the said areas, and the service responds well in all traffic conditions. Drivers seem to let them through when they use blues & twos mostly and even during times when the town is so called grid-locked.
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: easy use the AIS site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks. then you can plan your journey like a pro[/p][/quote]Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.[/p][/quote]This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.[/p][/quote]I am assured that there are paramedics based in the said areas, and the service responds well in all traffic conditions. Drivers seem to let them through when they use blues & twos mostly and even during times when the town is so called grid-locked. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 4

3:06pm Sun 26 Jan 14

PageA says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
PageA wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
fedster wrote:
easy use the AIS
site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks.

then you can plan your journey like a pro
Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.
This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.
I am assured that there are paramedics based in the said areas, and the service responds well in all traffic conditions. Drivers seem to let them through when they use blues & twos mostly and even during times when the town is so called grid-locked.
Well, let's put our trust in those that make the assurances.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: easy use the AIS site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks. then you can plan your journey like a pro[/p][/quote]Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.[/p][/quote]This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.[/p][/quote]I am assured that there are paramedics based in the said areas, and the service responds well in all traffic conditions. Drivers seem to let them through when they use blues & twos mostly and even during times when the town is so called grid-locked.[/p][/quote]Well, let's put our trust in those that make the assurances. PageA
  • Score: -2

4:04pm Sun 26 Jan 14

chrislee1275@aol.com says...

To put thigs into perspective. A few years ago I attended a conference organised by the Lancashire Police. One of the items on the agenda was the M6 and Lancashire County Council produced some interesting statistics which a relative to this discussion.
Prior to the building of the M6 traffic surveys were carried out on the A49 to help justify the need for the motorway. These were undertaken in the 1950's. In the late 1990's new survey were undertaken at the same locations and these showed three times the traffic flows. By that logic we need two more M6 motorways!
Iknow this seems ridiculous but the point illustrates the explosion in traffic over 40+ years. The thing is when the canal traffic was at its peak road traffic volumes were very low. In more recent times the canal has been grossly underused whilst road traffic has vastly increased. What we are now looking at is a return to full usage of the canal with present day traffic flows. That is why the situation has such potential for traffic chaos in Warrington. If, as Peel Ports have suggested, canal traffic increases ten fold I doubt if anyone will be able to get over the canal without meeting a traffic jam other than in the ealy hours of the morning.
This is not exaggerating the figures don't lie.
To put thigs into perspective. A few years ago I attended a conference organised by the Lancashire Police. One of the items on the agenda was the M6 and Lancashire County Council produced some interesting statistics which a relative to this discussion. Prior to the building of the M6 traffic surveys were carried out on the A49 to help justify the need for the motorway. These were undertaken in the 1950's. In the late 1990's new survey were undertaken at the same locations and these showed three times the traffic flows. By that logic we need two more M6 motorways! Iknow this seems ridiculous but the point illustrates the explosion in traffic over 40+ years. The thing is when the canal traffic was at its peak road traffic volumes were very low. In more recent times the canal has been grossly underused whilst road traffic has vastly increased. What we are now looking at is a return to full usage of the canal with present day traffic flows. That is why the situation has such potential for traffic chaos in Warrington. If, as Peel Ports have suggested, canal traffic increases ten fold I doubt if anyone will be able to get over the canal without meeting a traffic jam other than in the ealy hours of the morning. This is not exaggerating the figures don't lie. chrislee1275@aol.com
  • Score: 8

4:57pm Sun 26 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

i see that "sad" sac & schoolboy page a have nothing to do as usual ! instead of commenting on this ! put your actions into REAL-LIFE ! when all these ships come down the canal ! a HUMAN-CHAIN underneath the closing gates will get PEEL-HOLDINGS attention and the ship on the canal will be STRANDED !
i see that "sad" sac & schoolboy page a have nothing to do as usual ! instead of commenting on this ! put your actions into REAL-LIFE ! when all these ships come down the canal ! a HUMAN-CHAIN underneath the closing gates will get PEEL-HOLDINGS attention and the ship on the canal will be STRANDED ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -1

5:13pm Sun 26 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -1

5:45pm Sun 26 Jan 14

Mrs1979 says...

The boats were here first !
It's only now many years later and the town has become
What it is today thousands of cars !
I think if there was something in place to help us motorists
Like the traffic notifications we have to give us times of
The openings so us drivers can give ourself a extra 10 15 mins.
Or regular radio updates on when they will be opening.
Yes the traffic can be bad for the local residents, but they choose to
Live there !!
Maybe another cantilever type bridge ?
But we cannot oppose everything !
The world our town is changing and always will !
We will learn to live with it as always !!
The boats were here first ! It's only now many years later and the town has become What it is today thousands of cars ! I think if there was something in place to help us motorists Like the traffic notifications we have to give us times of The openings so us drivers can give ourself a extra 10 15 mins. Or regular radio updates on when they will be opening. Yes the traffic can be bad for the local residents, but they choose to Live there !! Maybe another cantilever type bridge ? But we cannot oppose everything ! The world our town is changing and always will ! We will learn to live with it as always !! Mrs1979
  • Score: 4

6:08pm Sun 26 Jan 14

fedster says...

PageA wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
PageA wrote:
SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
fedster wrote:
easy use the AIS
site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks.

then you can plan your journey like a pro
Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.
This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.
I am assured that there are paramedics based in the said areas, and the service responds well in all traffic conditions. Drivers seem to let them through when they use blues & twos mostly and even during times when the town is so called grid-locked.
Well, let's put our trust in those that make the assurances.
actually mr iam a genius pageA

the 3 paramedic stations in the area all have a multi screen with
highway agency and ais plus 3 or 4 other sites that constantly update.

why do you amuse that all emergency service are thick
the sat navs also have live feed

and i have seen many people get out the way when they see blues but if its not a police car theirs always that a**hole that swings out and cuts 3 or 4 cars of just to make up some space.

if motorist where a bit more polite in rush hour things would run smoothly but instead bumper to bumper (specially over bridgefoot roundabout)
always in the wrong lane going over onto chester road trying to race down wrong lane and push in.
[quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PageA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: easy use the AIS site for marine traffic its what i use when i want to snap the ships passing through the locks. then you can plan your journey like a pro[/p][/quote]Yes that is a real asset when planning journeys involving the passage of ships both locally and of course world wide. It works in real time and is available for smartphones, I-Pods and other computers devices.[/p][/quote]This Sounds brilliant! Problem solved...wonder if the Ambulance service will use this throughout the day when deciding whether to set off to help a stroke or heart attack victim in the south.. or areas of the North that are gridlocked.[/p][/quote]I am assured that there are paramedics based in the said areas, and the service responds well in all traffic conditions. Drivers seem to let them through when they use blues & twos mostly and even during times when the town is so called grid-locked.[/p][/quote]Well, let's put our trust in those that make the assurances.[/p][/quote]actually mr iam a genius pageA the 3 paramedic stations in the area all have a multi screen with highway agency and ais plus 3 or 4 other sites that constantly update. why do you amuse that all emergency service are thick the sat navs also have live feed and i have seen many people get out the way when they see blues but if its not a police car theirs always that a**hole that swings out and cuts 3 or 4 cars of just to make up some space. if motorist where a bit more polite in rush hour things would run smoothly but instead bumper to bumper (specially over bridgefoot roundabout) always in the wrong lane going over onto chester road trying to race down wrong lane and push in. fedster
  • Score: 4

6:11pm Sun 26 Jan 14

fedster says...

why do you amuse that all emergency service are thickt
hat was ment to say *assume *
why do you amuse that all emergency service are thickt hat was ment to say *assume * fedster
  • Score: -1

7:32pm Sun 26 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

replace swing bridges at latchford and stockton heath with cantilever bridges !
replace swing bridges at latchford and stockton heath with cantilever bridges ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -1

7:46pm Sun 26 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

the only opening for a new cantilever bridge is in between latchford and stockton heath at the end of ackers lane off fairfield road to wash lane at the side of warrington football club ! I WILL SUGGEST THIS TO THE COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT !
the only opening for a new cantilever bridge is in between latchford and stockton heath at the end of ackers lane off fairfield road to wash lane at the side of warrington football club ! I WILL SUGGEST THIS TO THE COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -2

7:57pm Sun 26 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

The Coastal Deniz is on the way up the Manchester Ship Canal and is bound for Irlam and due to dock at 23:00 hrs. The bridges will swing this evening at about 21:30 hrs I estimate.
The Coastal Deniz is on the way up the Manchester Ship Canal and is bound for Irlam and due to dock at 23:00 hrs. The bridges will swing this evening at about 21:30 hrs I estimate. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 3

9:05pm Sun 26 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

The Coastal Deniz has now reached the swing bridges and they should start the sequence of opening.
The Coastal Deniz has now reached the swing bridges and they should start the sequence of opening. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 3

10:18pm Sun 26 Jan 14

ctuk_WA3 says...

MAD 4 IT wrote:
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington
[quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington ctuk_WA3
  • Score: 5

10:19pm Sun 26 Jan 14

grey_man says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
The Coastal Deniz has now reached the swing bridges and they should start the sequence of opening.
This is kind of missing the point, which is that if three of the four main routes from one part of town to another are closed completely more often, in conjunction with all the other sources of congestion and hold ups, then it's bad for the town's economy and environment. If everybody suddenly decides to go via the cantilever bridge, then it's still a problem. We need a strategic plan for the town's transport and infrastructure and - from what I can tell - nobody in a position to do anything about it is actually doing it.
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: The Coastal Deniz has now reached the swing bridges and they should start the sequence of opening.[/p][/quote]This is kind of missing the point, which is that if three of the four main routes from one part of town to another are closed completely more often, in conjunction with all the other sources of congestion and hold ups, then it's bad for the town's economy and environment. If everybody suddenly decides to go via the cantilever bridge, then it's still a problem. We need a strategic plan for the town's transport and infrastructure and - from what I can tell - nobody in a position to do anything about it is actually doing it. grey_man
  • Score: -1

10:56pm Sun 26 Jan 14

MAD 4 IT says...

what a waste of time "sac" telling people at 21.30 that the bridges will be closed on a sunday night aswell ! lucky if there is any TRAFFIC on the road !
what a waste of time "sac" telling people at 21.30 that the bridges will be closed on a sunday night aswell ! lucky if there is any TRAFFIC on the road ! MAD 4 IT
  • Score: -4

8:20am Mon 27 Jan 14

PageA says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
The Coastal Deniz has now reached the swing bridges and they should start the sequence of opening.
25 minutes earlier than your estimate...not sure all of us could plan our days like this SAC but you obviously have a system that works for you
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: The Coastal Deniz has now reached the swing bridges and they should start the sequence of opening.[/p][/quote]25 minutes earlier than your estimate...not sure all of us could plan our days like this SAC but you obviously have a system that works for you PageA
  • Score: 2

8:56am Mon 27 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

MAD 4 IT wrote:
replace swing bridges at latchford and stockton heath with cantilever bridges !
Who is to do this, What will it cost and how many businesses and homes need to be compulsorily purchased in order for this theory to become a reality?
[quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: replace swing bridges at latchford and stockton heath with cantilever bridges ![/p][/quote]Who is to do this, What will it cost and how many businesses and homes need to be compulsorily purchased in order for this theory to become a reality? SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 1

12:07pm Mon 27 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

ctuk_WA3 wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington
Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided!
[quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington[/p][/quote]Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided! GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: 3

12:24pm Mon 27 Jan 14

ctuk_WA3 says...

GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
ctuk_WA3 wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington
Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided!
9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.
[quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington[/p][/quote]Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided![/p][/quote]9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges. ctuk_WA3
  • Score: -2

12:55pm Mon 27 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

ctuk_WA3 wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
ctuk_WA3 wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington
Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided!
9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.
I think you will find that 9.9 miles at a constant speed is more greener than 15 miles stop and starting in traffic. No way from Birchwood to Daresbury is quicker through town than my route above it's just impossible. Sorry it's just a fact.
Still Grumpy
[quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington[/p][/quote]Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided![/p][/quote]9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.[/p][/quote]I think you will find that 9.9 miles at a constant speed is more greener than 15 miles stop and starting in traffic. No way from Birchwood to Daresbury is quicker through town than my route above it's just impossible. Sorry it's just a fact. Still Grumpy GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -3

1:17pm Mon 27 Jan 14

ctuk_WA3 says...

GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
ctuk_WA3 wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
ctuk_WA3 wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington
Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided!
9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.
I think you will find that 9.9 miles at a constant speed is more greener than 15 miles stop and starting in traffic. No way from Birchwood to Daresbury is quicker through town than my route above it's just impossible. Sorry it's just a fact.
Still Grumpy
ok grumpy, I'll do 2600 extra miles a year in an attempt to cheer you up ;-)
[quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington[/p][/quote]Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided![/p][/quote]9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.[/p][/quote]I think you will find that 9.9 miles at a constant speed is more greener than 15 miles stop and starting in traffic. No way from Birchwood to Daresbury is quicker through town than my route above it's just impossible. Sorry it's just a fact. Still Grumpy[/p][/quote]ok grumpy, I'll do 2600 extra miles a year in an attempt to cheer you up ;-) ctuk_WA3
  • Score: -3

1:47pm Mon 27 Jan 14

GRUMPY PARENT says...

ctuk_WA3 wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
ctuk_WA3 wrote:
GRUMPY PARENT wrote:
ctuk_WA3 wrote:
MAD 4 IT wrote:
IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington
Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided!
9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.
I think you will find that 9.9 miles at a constant speed is more greener than 15 miles stop and starting in traffic. No way from Birchwood to Daresbury is quicker through town than my route above it's just impossible. Sorry it's just a fact.
Still Grumpy
ok grumpy, I'll do 2600 extra miles a year in an attempt to cheer you up ;-)
Well sorry you will never cheer me up, permanently grumpy here. Thanks for the offer though. I am sure it would make better financial sense though, in my opinion, but I may be wrong either way PageA will let me know that I am sure of.
Still Grumpy
[quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GRUMPY PARENT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ctuk_WA3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MAD 4 IT[/bold] wrote: IS ANDREW MOORE from birchwood or latchford ?? cant see the bridges affecting him in BIRCHWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live in birchwood and work in daresbury, The bridges can affect anyone in Warrington[/p][/quote]Surely M62, M6 then M56 would be your best route then financially and time wise. Why would you need to put yourself in this predicament in the first place. Another car adding to traffic that could be avoided![/p][/quote]9.9 miles through town or 15 miles on the motorway, not only is town the green option but also the quicker option, unless a bridge opens then, the other way would be better, but we never get a timetable for the bridges.[/p][/quote]I think you will find that 9.9 miles at a constant speed is more greener than 15 miles stop and starting in traffic. No way from Birchwood to Daresbury is quicker through town than my route above it's just impossible. Sorry it's just a fact. Still Grumpy[/p][/quote]ok grumpy, I'll do 2600 extra miles a year in an attempt to cheer you up ;-)[/p][/quote]Well sorry you will never cheer me up, permanently grumpy here. Thanks for the offer though. I am sure it would make better financial sense though, in my opinion, but I may be wrong either way PageA will let me know that I am sure of. Still Grumpy GRUMPY PARENT
  • Score: -2

5:05pm Mon 27 Jan 14

bill_paddington says...

To all those who say “Stop moaning or to get a life” remember that tens of thousands gave their lives in order that we have freedom of speech and the right to object to unpopular decisions.

To those who say it’s not really that inconvenient or ague green issues then consider letting Peel Holding turn off your TV or computer for hour each week when it suits them. If you can’t do without telly for an hour a week and instead want to burn 25 tons of coal. It’s exactly the same argument!
To all those who say “Stop moaning or to get a life” remember that tens of thousands gave their lives in order that we have freedom of speech and the right to object to unpopular decisions. To those who say it’s not really that inconvenient or ague green issues then consider letting Peel Holding turn off your TV or computer for hour each week when it suits them. If you can’t do without telly for an hour a week and instead want to burn 25 tons of coal. It’s exactly the same argument! bill_paddington
  • Score: 0

6:13pm Mon 27 Jan 14

PageA says...

SAC

If we were to imagine that traffic on the waterways had stayed at the same high, historic constant level for the past 50,60 years would you agree that housing, supermarket, shopping , transport developments may have been different to reflect the busy waterway?

Would you agree that decisions regarding the above have taken place withouth factoring in a busy waterway and the effect that this would have on traffic in the town?

Would you agree that if peel holdings were to apply for planning permission now to build the manchester ship canal that they would be refused due to the effect on traffic in the town?

Would you agree that the wakening of this sleeping giant will have a sizeable impact on a town which has developed without any regard to it's position and potential capacity?
SAC If we were to imagine that traffic on the waterways had stayed at the same high, historic constant level for the past 50,60 years would you agree that housing, supermarket, shopping , transport developments may have been different to reflect the busy waterway? Would you agree that decisions regarding the above have taken place withouth factoring in a busy waterway and the effect that this would have on traffic in the town? Would you agree that if peel holdings were to apply for planning permission now to build the manchester ship canal that they would be refused due to the effect on traffic in the town? Would you agree that the wakening of this sleeping giant will have a sizeable impact on a town which has developed without any regard to it's position and potential capacity? PageA
  • Score: 2

8:22pm Mon 27 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

I certainly could imagine all that and with hindsight we would have a perfect world, however in reality the current situation is not as you imagined and is by the majority of us accepted as only a minor inconvenience.
I certainly could imagine all that and with hindsight we would have a perfect world, however in reality the current situation is not as you imagined and is by the majority of us accepted as only a minor inconvenience. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: -1

8:45pm Mon 27 Jan 14

PageA says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
I certainly could imagine all that and with hindsight we would have a perfect world, however in reality the current situation is not as you imagined and is by the majority of us accepted as only a minor inconvenience.
I wasn't referring to the current situation, but it's ok.
“Seek the truth or hide your head in the sand. Both require digging."
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: I certainly could imagine all that and with hindsight we would have a perfect world, however in reality the current situation is not as you imagined and is by the majority of us accepted as only a minor inconvenience.[/p][/quote]I wasn't referring to the current situation, but it's ok. “Seek the truth or hide your head in the sand. Both require digging." PageA
  • Score: 0

10:16pm Mon 27 Jan 14

SAC_in_Warrington says...

I know you weren't but it was your suggestion that I shared your imaginary scenario. What truth were you trying to illustrate by the imaginary scenario when in reality the current situation is the truth. I therefore have no need or intention of burying my head in sand or anywhere else you may imagine.
I know you weren't but it was your suggestion that I shared your imaginary scenario. What truth were you trying to illustrate by the imaginary scenario when in reality the current situation is the truth. I therefore have no need or intention of burying my head in sand or anywhere else you may imagine. SAC_in_Warrington
  • Score: 0

10:59pm Mon 27 Jan 14

PageA says...

SAC_in_Warrington wrote:
I know you weren't but it was your suggestion that I shared your imaginary scenario. What truth were you trying to illustrate by the imaginary scenario when in reality the current situation is the truth. I therefore have no need or intention of burying my head in sand or anywhere else you may imagine.
Gosh, you're hard work. I was just trying to engage you in a flight of fancy whereby a massive transport investment company with unrestricted ability to disrupt some of the main arterial routes in and out of Warrington was just about to invest £50 billion pounds into the revitalisation of a major thoroughfare between Greater Manchester and Liverpool. Obviously as an imaginary scenario this would not deserve an extra second of your time. You keep tight hold of your App and everything will be just fine
[quote][p][bold]SAC_in_Warrington[/bold] wrote: I know you weren't but it was your suggestion that I shared your imaginary scenario. What truth were you trying to illustrate by the imaginary scenario when in reality the current situation is the truth. I therefore have no need or intention of burying my head in sand or anywhere else you may imagine.[/p][/quote]Gosh, you're hard work. I was just trying to engage you in a flight of fancy whereby a massive transport investment company with unrestricted ability to disrupt some of the main arterial routes in and out of Warrington was just about to invest £50 billion pounds into the revitalisation of a major thoroughfare between Greater Manchester and Liverpool. Obviously as an imaginary scenario this would not deserve an extra second of your time. You keep tight hold of your App and everything will be just fine PageA
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree