Tesco at Little Lever - Dossier - Point No 11

Point No 11 – The Highways Plan

Lever Street One-Way Proposal

The most significant and peculiar part of the Highways Plan (as submitted) is the proposal to make Lever St one-way into the Junction for the last 50 yards or so of its length. (See Appendix)

It is important to realize that the remainder of Lever St from Hilltop up to this point will remain two-way.

I conclude (and the Members may concur) that this can only have been proposed because without this change the computer modeling showed that the Junction would exceed capacity.

Other than for the above reason it is difficult to see why anybody in their right mind would come up with such a disruptive and unnecessary idea which has got the backs up of residents and business owners alike.

The traffic survey shows that at peak times some 100+ vehicles enter Lever St from the Junction and with this Plan they would no longer be able to do so.

There are only two alternative routes available to these vehicles.

1)      Dearden St – accessed directly from Church St or via Fearneyside and Rydal or 

2)      Into Ainsworth Rd then left into Victory Rd.

Dearden St is already notorious for two opposing lanes of traffic being unable to pass each other and going up Ainsworth would be in the face of traffic exiting the development.

Widening the footpath

It is also proposed to widen the pavement on the south side of Lever Street for the length of this one-way stretch.

This would obviously mean that the already narrow-ish carriageway would be narrowed even further.

At the moment, loading restrictions apply for peak periods only. The above would require that loading be prohibited for the whole 24 hrs.

Before a TRO introducing this could be implemented, Bolton Council would be obliged to hold a Public Consultation. (See Appendix)

Two-Way becomes One-way

Commonsense dictates that immediately prior to the point where Lever St becomes one-way, a ‘Turning Head’ must be provided.

Without this and the ability of vehicles to turn around and head back up Lever St to Hilltop, one might as well make Lever St one-way for its whole length.

There is no provision for this in the Highways Plan

Problem

Unfortunately there is nowhere and no place that such a turning head can be provided.

The dedicated pedestrian entrance to the site will be blocked to traffic and the pavement re-instated across its width. The grass strips (Ransom strips) on either side belong to Wainhomes – and they ain’t gonna play ball.

The Tesco Transport Consultant (Mr Mullen) suggested that vehicles could do a three point turn. Members can have their own thoughts about that suggestion.

Widening Ainsworth Rd from the Junction to Crossley St

It isn’t clear how this is going to be achieved.

It cannot be widened on the Memorial gardens side. This is Sacred Ground and Paula Connor has already stated that it can’t be touched.

On the other side, even if the Phone Box and the Telegraph Pole were removed, there remains the problem of the ‘Gas Station’

The land that this sits on is owned not by the Council but by Transco. 

Traffic Calming and Speed Reduction measures.

The suggestion seems to be that introducing Puffin Crossings and other speed reduction measures will facilitate Junction Capacity and allow an easier exit for vehicles from Ainsworth Rd and Lever Street.

This may be the case, but the major consequence of this will be more congestion and more tailbacks on this major arterial route.

The Members may have experienced what happens when the 40mph signs are lit up on the motorway – almost instantly there is greater congestion and tailbacks.

Rat Runs

Nowhere in the Application have the developers conceded that the results of the Highways plan will result in through traffic and even visitors to the site finding ways to avoid the Junction at all costs.

The Rat Run effect will involve Mytham Rd, Aintree Rd, Redcar Rd, Ripon Close, Holcombe Rd and Melrose Ave on the one side, Fearneyside, Rydal Rd and Dearden St on the other side, and for those visiting the site, Arthur St, Heywood St, Independent St and Victory Rd.

Conclusion

In relation to the Lever St one-way system, the Members may conclude that this is a proposal too far in inconveniencing residents and businesses in the affected vicinity and beyond.

It is important to note that the removal of this proposal could not be achieved. Post- Consent, by a Planning Condition

.

Removal of the one-way proposal from this Plan would mean (according to the above argument) that the Junction would exceed capacity and this would render the whole Application to be unacceptable.

This would require a refusal of the Application

Even if this were not the case, the Impact on the Junction modeling would have to be re-done from scratch to show that the Junction could operate within capacity without it.

This would require a deferral of the Application.

Removal of the Puffin Crossing on Market St would create pedestrian safety issues for those pedestrians (hopefully) on linked trips to the Village Centre and in this respect would also increase the unacceptability of the whole Application.

The other matters discussed above may cause the Committee to wonder if this Highways Plan has been thought through as well and as far as it might have been.