Upcoming A5036/Park Lane junction works - No footbridge

Almost 1,000 people read our recent post promoting the public information events on the A5036/Park Lane junction improvements which took place earlier this month.

We hope that this went some way to addressing the short notice and inconvenient timings of these sessions. This is something we are following up with National Highways, as we saw lots of complaints online about the communication around these events, with just a week's notice.

Still, we went along to the first of these sessions and wanted to briefly summarise what we learned. This was from speaking to National Highways' Project Manager, Steve Mason, and a representative from its subcontractor, Galliford Try, who have been tasked with completing the works:

• As many had said in advance, this was not a consultation exercise. It was letting people know what work WILL be happening, with works commencing on Saturday, 8th November 2025. There was clearly no scope to change anything at this late stage.

• As expected, this work does NOT include a replacement footbridge

• Why not? The cost of a replacement bridge makes it uneconomical using the cost-benefit criteria National Highways has to apply, as a government-owned company with accountability to the Treasury. In addition, initial designs for the bridge meant it would be significantly larger than the original, due to accessibility requirements.

• We raised the north/south divide in relation to expenditure on infrastructure projects. National Highways couldn’t comment on the specifics but said it is true that projects in South will attract greater investment because of the formula used.

• Why wasn't the cost of replacing the footbridge covered by the driver's insurance, after the bridge was hit? We were told that the driver was carrying a load they weren’t insured for, and that action against the driver/his company is still be pursued, to this day.

• What were their views on the ongoing political calls for the bridge to be replaced? Sefton Council's Leader was on Radio Merseyside the previous week and Bootle MP Peter Dowd in parliament the same day, demanding an enquiry into why the bridge was not being replaced. National Highways advised that this work has been planned for some time, so could not comment on the politics.

• Were they absolutely sure that the proposed new crossing will be safe? Our freedom of information request on this subject showed that National Highways' own staff had previously expressed concerns over the safety of a ground-level crossing. Both National Highways and Galliford Try gave their assurances to us that the very latest safety technology has been built into this solution. It is state-of-the-art and numerous features of the crossing make it as safe as a crossing can possibly be. This includes the continuous flow of people across both carriageways - they will not be trapped in the middle, nor surrounded by vehicles. New technology will catch and penalise any drivers running red lights – which has already had a big impact at Switch Island.

• We were told by National Highways that "no safety incidents" have been reported in relation to the temporary crossing which has been in place for 3 years, which we found hard to believe.

• After watching the video of how the new crossing will work, we flagged that it does not accurately reflect either the volume or kind of traffic typically seen on the A5036. We spotted just one HGV.

• We acknowledged how important accessibility is and making a solution that works for people with mobility problems, but flagged that the A5036 isn't a typical road. If the communities around the junction say they want a bridge in order to feel safe, why wasn't this delivered? The subcontractor referred us to National Highways (see their responses) but said they were committed to delivering a safe crossing. They also added that they want to add value to the area they’re working in and are keen to connect with any community groups in the area to see if they can support projects. If you are interested in exploring this, please contact us at info@southseftonalliance.org and we will pass on your details

Conclusions

Before we joined the public information event, we used the road-level "temporary" crossing, which has been in place for 3 years.

This was at school-leaving time and it was heart-in-the-mouth stuff.

Families were trying to keep an eye on their young kids, ensuring they didn’t step out into the road, with HGVs rattling past. The 40mph speed limit felt way too fast in such close proximity to Our Lady of Walsingham primary school.

Drivers of all vehicle types were beeping horns as pedestrians were stranded on the central reservation, waiting for the next set of signals to turn green.

Other drivers were switching lanes at the last minute in an attempt to avoid queues.

Whatever happens, the new junction cannot be as dangerous as what exists today and it is good that something is FINALLY being done.

However, how we've ended up in a position whereby the public asked for a replacement bridge, National Highways' own study showed how much the original was used, but this has then failed to be delivered, is hard to understand.

In terms of what our Alliance can do, we plan to remain in contact with National Highways and Sefton Council on the importance of ensuring that the A5036 - and other busy roads in South Sefton - are as safe as can be and maintained properly and we'll share more on that soon.

For now, if you represent a community group or residents' association along any section of the A5036 corridor and want to work positively and proactively with us, National Highways and Sefton Council, we'd like to hear from you. Please email: info@southseftonalliance.org

Video and images from the event