Crossing the Runcorn Gap: Proposed New Bridge

For many years it has been obvious that the Jubilee Bridge linking Widnes and Runcorn was becoming increasingly inadequate. Ask any motorist who had to negotiate the bridge during the rush hour or had waited patiently (?) when an accident has caused a hold-up.

When the bridge was built in the sixties it was a tremendous improvement on the old transporter bridge, but the traffic forecasts of the time were soon proved wrong, and as early as the eighties the bridge was under pressure.

Local Councils have long been pressing for governmental assistance for a new crossing, but now at last permission has been granted to go ahead with a new bridge and approach roads.

A number of surveys have been completed, and numerous borings made in the bed of the River Mersey, to establish the best and cheapest route. This resulted in four possible routes being identified.

The first lay alongside the existing bridge and would go through built-up areas of both towns, involving considerable expense and disturbance to traffic and the local population during the construction work. The bridge would be the same size as the present structure and therefore the most economical.

The second and third routes lay to the east across the wider part of the Mersey. These involved the construction of new roundabouts on both banks of the river but passed through areas with few buildings. Route two joined Rhodia and Astmoor, whilst route three linked Ashley Way with the Central Expressway. The bridges and embankments would be three time as long as the present crossing.

The last route lay furthest to the east, heading south east from the Widnes by-pass to a position to the south of Fiddlers Ferry power station where it turned more or less southwards to meet the Daresbury Expressway near Manor Park. Although the route crossed no built up areas it was the longest of all and therefore a costly alternative regarding construction costs.

So where does SCARS figure in this development? All but the first route crossed the course of the Sankey and it was necessary to ensure that adequate head room was being left for navigation along the canal. SCARS representatives attended various meetings, supported by the boat clubs, to have this condition included in the planning document. The final meeting was assured that the clearance above water level would be the same as on the original canal. The spokesman was a little taken aback when it was pointed out that the original boats were coastal sailing flats with very tall masts but the decision had been made and is to stand.

In recent weeks it has been announced that route three has been selected so road users in the region can look forward to an easing of traffic congestion within a few years. For how long remains to be seen. Details of the proposed bridge will be covered in the next issue of Canal Cuttings.

Peter Keen

Index for this issue     Index of all Canal Cuttings issues      Home Page

Site design and content © 2002 - 2005 Sankey Canal Restoration Society
Site design by Phil D.Long