Latest Road Traffic Statistics

 Department of Transport Statistics: Road Traffic and Speeds (

 Lancashire 2004-2010









million vehicle









 Road usage in Lancashire is now flat lining.

This is an international trend. Yet part of the justification for the Link Road (made in 2006) was that vehicle numbers would increase, year after year, for 60 years. But in the 5 years since that prediction was made, it has proved false.

 Why do we need a new, destructive road?

This schematic is from LCC data

Traffic Flows


There were no 2008 baseline traffic data or 2029 future projections for traffic flows presented at the exhibitions. This meant that visitors were not able to put the 2014 traffic flow figures into context. These ARE calculated because a small selection are presented in Table 2.2.4 (p2.11) of the Preliminary Environmental Information. This infers that LCC deliberately with-held key traffic flow information from scrutiny.


While the Road Side Interview (RSI) data is included in the original 2009 Mouchel Report, allowing some comparison and calculation of 2008 AADT figures manually, no Automated Traffic Count (ATC) data has been included and therefore the majority of the figures produced for the traffic flow diagrams cannot be validated.


LCC officials acknowledged that there is much less traffic growth than previously forecast and current modelling software shows that considerably less traffic transfers to the link road - 22% less across the HM6L and 30% less on the new bridge. My calculations from the RSI data that I can use suggests that several roads show decreases in traffic especially around the port routes and feeder roads to the proposed HM6L.


Several local roads will have increased traffic because of the road:

Ÿ         Westgate 1.9%

Ÿ         B5321 Lancaster Road 7.4%

Ÿ         A6 S of Link access 1.2%

Ÿ         A6 N 0f Link access 47.6%

Ÿ         Caton Rd E of J34 6.6%

Ÿ         Halton village 73.9%

Ÿ         Hest Bank Lane 45.2%

Ÿ         M6 N of J34 7.9%

Ÿ         M6 S of J34 5.5%



Table 2.2.4 shows representative increases of 8 - 13% between 2008 and 2014. However, 2001 data suggests several of the locations used had decreased traffic between 2001 and 2008. It is impossible to provide meaningful analysis without the full data set.

The highly selective nature of the traffic flow diagrams presented and the lack of key information from the Preliminary Environmental Information makes me deeply suspicious that the traffic data results are being manipulated and disadvantageous data is being excluded.