Government deemed unresolved road issues less important than getting Ulnes Walton prison built

The Deputy Prime Minister agreed with an independent planning inspector that a series of road safety concerns over a proposed new prison in rural Chorley had not been “fully resolved” – but still gave the green light to the development because of a difference in the weight she attached to their significance.

It was announced on Tuesday that Angela Rayner had approved the 1,715-inmate facility, in Ulnes Walton, alongside the existing Garth and Wymott jails.

The assessments of both Ms. Rayner and inspector Tom Gilbert-Wooldridge have now been published and reveal a shared recognition of the potential problems – but very different conclusions.

The deputy PM – acting in her capacity as Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government – gave the nod to the scheme three years after it was first rejected by Chorley Council.

Her role – and a decision by the previous Conservative government to ‘recover’ an appeal by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) against the council’s decision – meant Ms. Rayner had the final say.

She acknowledged four unresolved concerns in relation to the impact on the local road network of what will be five years of construction activity – with as many as 200 HGV trips a day sometimes being made along the narrow Ulnes Walton Lane.

However, unlike Tom Gilbert-Wooldridge, she did not consider them significant enough to block the proposed scheme – and instead concluded in each case that the harm they risked causing was “limited”.

The inspector first chaired a public inquiry into the plans following the MoJ’s appeal in 2022. Although he recommended the decision to reject the planning application be upheld, the then Communities Secretary Michael Gove instead said he would be “minded to” go against that recommendation – if the highways issues raised could be satisfactorily addressed.

The inquiry was reopened to consider that matter in March this year, with Mr.Gilbert-Wooldridge hearing days of detailed new evidence about the potential impact of the prison build on the surrounding road network – and he was far from convinced that enough had been done to make the plans safe.

The inspector said he had assessed “the likelihood and frequency of hazards and risks” and considered “alleged worst-case scenarios to robustly test the evidence”. His overall conclusion was that the revised proposal would “continue to have an unacceptable impact on highway safety”.

In stark contrast, Angela Rayner concluded there would be no such effect – meaning the plans passed the test set in national planning guidance which determines the circumstances in which a development can be refused permission for road-related reasons.

She considered that the remaining adverse impacts of the project should carry only “moderate weight” against the proposal, while “significant weight” was given to the actual need for the development.

Ms. Rayner also attached only moderate significance to anecdotal evidence from locals about deficiencies in how the local road network around the prison site already functions, focusing instead on official accident data which showed “no clusters or patterns” of injury-causing incidents in the area.

“Notwithstanding the evidence presented by UWAG [the Ulnes Walton Action Group] and other residents, which show multiple examples of poor traffic behaviour, congestion, tight junctions and bends, near misses, and unreported incidents, the Inspector states that it is difficult to fully verify these examples,” a letter written on behalf of Ms. Rayner read.

Lancashire County Council highways officials also offered no objection to the fresh plans.

‘‘No-go”

This is what the inspector had to say about three of the four issues that Angela Rayner considered unresolved.

Construction traffic

The problem: increased volume of heavy goods traffic on Ulnes Walton Lane during construction of the prison.

The plan: improvements at both the junctions with the A581 Southport Road and Moss Lane.

The conclusion: the inspector heard evidence that during the five-year construction period, there would be a four-month window that would see as many as 199 HGV trips a day along the route and 80 weeks when there would be more than 100 such movements.

He noted that almost half of the 1.5km section of Ulnes Walton Lane between the A581 and Moss Lane is too narrow for two HGVs to pass by in opposite directions at the same time – and that no mitigation measures at all are planned for that stretch.

The inspector said: “Like any traffic movement, HGVs will not depart at strict intervals or travel at the same speeds. Thus, it is likely that at a rate of one HGV movement every 90 seconds along a 1.5km section of road, larger vehicles risk meeting each other head-on, particularly as the road is already used by tractors, buses, delivery lorries and emergency services.

“Temporary traffic lights for places like Lostock Bridge have not been fully assessed or discussed with the LHA [local highways authority] and could potentially need to be operational for up to five years.

“[A planning] condition…requires the approval of a [construction management plan] that would address matters such as hours of operation, routeing, daily risk assessments and induction training. This would help to reduce some of the risks and hazards, but the physical limitations and hazards of Ulnes Walton Lane would remain.”

A581/Ulnes Walton Lane junction

The problem: ability of the existing T-junction to cope.

The plan: new mini-roundabout to be installed.

The conclusion: the inspector noted that a modified design submitted to the inquiry would prevent “even the largest vehicles” from straying into the opposite carriageway, as had been the case with a previous version.

He also dismissed the suggestion made by a highways expert who appeared at the inquiry on behalf of Chorley Council, who stated that the private driveways should be considered as official “arms” of the roundabout – meaning it would have an “extremely unusual” six.

Although concluding the roundabout would work better than the existing junction, the inspector noted that the original problematic design had not been officially withdrawn and that there had been no assessment of the impact of the updated version on “non-motorised users” – such as pedestrians and cyclists.

”Therefore, it is not possible to conclude that the design would be acceptable,” he said.

Safety of Ulnes Walton Lane and its junction with Moss Lane

The problem: speed along the route and speed and visibility at the junction

The plan: traffic calming measures around the junction

The conclusion: the inspector noted after the 2022 inquiry that forward visibility for vehicles turning right into Moss Lane was “restricted” and that approaching vehicles were “often only seen just as drivers make the turn”, creating the risk of a collision.

He acknowledged that, two years later, there are now proposed traffic-calming measures, including signage and a special surface treatment, which will “warn of hazards ahead and help to address speeds to some extent”.

However, the inspector added: “While the measures would cover around 110m, nothing additional is proposed further south on Ulnes Walton Lane until the A581 junction. Given the various risks and hazards along this route, this is a missed opportunity to address and improve traffic conditions.”

Subscribe: Keep in touch directly with the latest headlines from Blog Preston, join our WhatsApp channel and subscribe for our twice-a-week email newsletter. Both free and direct to your phone and inbox.