£400,000 scheme aims to revive Bacup town centre

The planned new-look town centre

The planned new-look town centre

First published in North West by , Reporter

TRADERS have welcomed plans to transform Bacup’s historic crossroads and create a pedestrian-friendly ‘shared space’.

The £400,000 regeneration project would make the area more attractive to shoppers and visitors and ease congestion on the busy junctions of Burnley Road, Yorkshire Street, St James Square and Market Street, traders said.

Street surfaces will be replaced with materials more in tune with the appearance of the surrounding buildings, the roundabout will be removed and narrow pavements and busy roads will be changed with the aim of allowing traffic to flow more freely.

Space to accommodate on-street activity, such as stalls, fairs and street cafes, has also been planned.

Alison Fyldes, owner of Forget Me Nots florists in St James Square, said the plans might encourage more people to come into the town centre.

She said: “Near the roundabout at the moment you hear beeping and shouting from near collisions. It’s a really bad roundabout, so it would be good if this solution was to stop that.

“It looks like it won’t divert people out of the centre, and will have space for people to have cafes, which is great, because at the moment there’s no reason for people to come into the town centre.

“Maybe it will mean the derelict buildings across the road will be able to have new businesses in too, which would be really good.”

Theresa Halstead, negotiator at Eley Long estate agents in Market Street, said the plans could make the roads less dangerous for elderly people.

She said: “It looks like it might solve the problems at the crossing.

“It also looks cleaner and tidier with the trees and new materials than it does at the moment.

“It would be sad to lose the fountain on the roundabout, but it looks like that would be the only bad thing about it.”

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:47pm Fri 11 Jul 14

mysay.com says...

maybe the traders as a whole should be consulted before making a sweeping and inaccurate report like this.

https://www.facebook
.com/groups/29742079
3732753/436563896485
108

https://www.facebook
.com/groups/13748810
9709589

Two links to facebook pages with open forums about this very subject read up for yourselves.

A whole report of this nature based on two shops which would probably be among the very few who would directly benefit from this project.

The traders as a group (meaning more than 2) are not against this project but have some major concerns as were discussed at a traders meeting this Tuesday gone, where consultation with the THI representatives took place.

If LET would like a more accurate report, maybe they should ask more than just 2 traders.
maybe the traders as a whole should be consulted before making a sweeping and inaccurate report like this. https://www.facebook .com/groups/29742079 3732753/436563896485 108 https://www.facebook .com/groups/13748810 9709589 Two links to facebook pages with open forums about this very subject read up for yourselves. A whole report of this nature based on two shops which would probably be among the very few who would directly benefit from this project. The traders as a group (meaning more than 2) are not against this project but have some major concerns as were discussed at a traders meeting this Tuesday gone, where consultation with the THI representatives took place. If LET would like a more accurate report, maybe they should ask more than just 2 traders. mysay.com
  • Score: 5

3:18am Sat 12 Jul 14

Ivor Feltersnatch says...

That road layout is ridiculous. They envision street cafes?.. Really?.. This is East Lancashire not the Mediterranean.

What Bacup needs is proper investment into shops and the area by sorting out the derelict buildings and encourage more businesses. They need to attract decent shops and decent folk and get rid of the problem pubs/drinkers which are polluting the town.

And whatever happens, one thing is a definate. KEEP THE FOUNTAIN. Pull the flowers out and switch the water back on - That wouldn't cost much and improve the look of our town a lot.
That road layout is ridiculous. They envision street cafes?.. Really?.. This is East Lancashire not the Mediterranean. What Bacup needs is proper investment into shops and the area by sorting out the derelict buildings and encourage more businesses. They need to attract decent shops and decent folk and get rid of the problem pubs/drinkers which are polluting the town. And whatever happens, one thing is a definate. KEEP THE FOUNTAIN. Pull the flowers out and switch the water back on - That wouldn't cost much and improve the look of our town a lot. Ivor Feltersnatch
  • Score: 6

11:50am Sat 12 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

We have been here before. Last time the plan was market stalls in the middle of the road.
Will the derelict Woolworth building or the bingo hall really bring tourism? Dream on!! Typical Labour council nonsense.
And what about the drunks and druggies and the unemployable dossers and tossers who laze around the town centre.
We have been here before. Last time the plan was market stalls in the middle of the road. Will the derelict Woolworth building or the bingo hall really bring tourism? Dream on!! Typical Labour council nonsense. And what about the drunks and druggies and the unemployable dossers and tossers who laze around the town centre. Loving lances
  • Score: 8

11:54am Sat 12 Jul 14

GAC says...

one of the biggest issues wont be touched by this i bet, hgv using bacup as a cut through from burnley and tod.
one of the biggest issues wont be touched by this i bet, hgv using bacup as a cut through from burnley and tod. GAC
  • Score: 9

2:36pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

GAC wrote:
one of the biggest issues wont be touched by this i bet, hgv using bacup as a cut through from burnley and tod.
Will Helen Jackson dare to mention this to Andy McNae?
[quote][p][bold]GAC[/bold] wrote: one of the biggest issues wont be touched by this i bet, hgv using bacup as a cut through from burnley and tod.[/p][/quote]Will Helen Jackson dare to mention this to Andy McNae? Loving lances
  • Score: 6

3:12pm Sat 12 Jul 14

GAC says...

andy has selective hearing anyways. how else do you think he's handled the farce that is the halo led bulbs from last year, £27k and he still hasn't shown the tourist numbers for that thing.
andy has selective hearing anyways. how else do you think he's handled the farce that is the halo led bulbs from last year, £27k and he still hasn't shown the tourist numbers for that thing. GAC
  • Score: 5

4:35pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Iand61 says...

GAC wrote:
one of the biggest issues wont be touched by this i bet, hgv using bacup as a cut through from burnley and tod.
Fully agree with what has been said but.
It's not really a case of hgv's using it as a short cut ; more the fact that two of East Lancashire major roads meet in the centre of Bacup.
Of these one is the recognised link between Burnley and Rochdale, the other links the Rossendale Valley with West Yorkshire and both carry a lot of heavy goods traffic.
No bypass exists or has been planned so how the traffic can be kept away from the town centre sufficiently to call it even partially pedestrianised I'd love to see.
Love it or hate it, Bacups unique traffic island allows a flow to continue and by removing it, only lights would do the job and looking at the proposed alignment of the bottom end of Todmorden Road, it looks like two sets would be needed.
Ad to that pelican crossings and we've got a traffic flow of the speed currently outside Asda in Rawtenstall.
And all this for 400k.
A pint of what the planners are on me thinks.
[quote][p][bold]GAC[/bold] wrote: one of the biggest issues wont be touched by this i bet, hgv using bacup as a cut through from burnley and tod.[/p][/quote]Fully agree with what has been said but. It's not really a case of hgv's using it as a short cut ; more the fact that two of East Lancashire major roads meet in the centre of Bacup. Of these one is the recognised link between Burnley and Rochdale, the other links the Rossendale Valley with West Yorkshire and both carry a lot of heavy goods traffic. No bypass exists or has been planned so how the traffic can be kept away from the town centre sufficiently to call it even partially pedestrianised I'd love to see. Love it or hate it, Bacups unique traffic island allows a flow to continue and by removing it, only lights would do the job and looking at the proposed alignment of the bottom end of Todmorden Road, it looks like two sets would be needed. Ad to that pelican crossings and we've got a traffic flow of the speed currently outside Asda in Rawtenstall. And all this for 400k. A pint of what the planners are on me thinks. Iand61
  • Score: 8

8:03pm Sat 12 Jul 14

GAC says...

like many things the council doesnt have a clue what its doing.

cant wait for september and the new bin rounds to start all because they have a new manager who wants to put his stamp on it, AGAIN, the last time he was there he left before he could change it, seems this time he's got his way fast.

god help us.
like many things the council doesnt have a clue what its doing. cant wait for september and the new bin rounds to start all because they have a new manager who wants to put his stamp on it, AGAIN, the last time he was there he left before he could change it, seems this time he's got his way fast. god help us. GAC
  • Score: 6

5:38am Sun 13 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

What does Rossendale Transport (Rosso) think of this plan. Bus drivers wll not be happy!
What does Rossendale Transport (Rosso) think of this plan. Bus drivers wll not be happy! Loving lances
  • Score: 5

9:28am Sun 13 Jul 14

Iand61 says...

Loving lances wrote:
What does Rossendale Transport (Rosso) think of this plan. Bus drivers wll not be happy!
To me an opportunity was missed when the culvert works were done a few years ago.
I would have left the river open between the library and the South Street bridge, put a bus station on the spare land on the corner of South Street and extended the pedestrian area into where the bus stands now are.
That would have given a large space for events.
It's probably a bit late for the river part to happen now but the other is still feasible .
As for the current plans, keep the section of road from Market Street to Yorkshire Street in front of the King George, old Woolworths buildings so only a single set of lights is necessary and put the pedestrian area in front of the library.
This would link with the existing traffic free section in St James Street and give a large usable space rather than two separate sections.
Maybe it would be possible to incorporate the fountain in the space and even the War memorial,
On a separate note, do the public get a chance to speak on these plans.
[quote][p][bold]Loving lances[/bold] wrote: What does Rossendale Transport (Rosso) think of this plan. Bus drivers wll not be happy![/p][/quote]To me an opportunity was missed when the culvert works were done a few years ago. I would have left the river open between the library and the South Street bridge, put a bus station on the spare land on the corner of South Street and extended the pedestrian area into where the bus stands now are. That would have given a large space for events. It's probably a bit late for the river part to happen now but the other is still feasible . As for the current plans, keep the section of road from Market Street to Yorkshire Street in front of the King George, old Woolworths buildings so only a single set of lights is necessary and put the pedestrian area in front of the library. This would link with the existing traffic free section in St James Street and give a large usable space rather than two separate sections. Maybe it would be possible to incorporate the fountain in the space and even the War memorial, On a separate note, do the public get a chance to speak on these plans. Iand61
  • Score: 7

12:56pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

The public can see the plans in Bacup library on Saturday, but if this is like the consultation exercise on the new bus station and town centreplans for Rossendale, then I suspect Andy McNae and his cronies will not give a care.
The public can see the plans in Bacup library on Saturday, but if this is like the consultation exercise on the new bus station and town centreplans for Rossendale, then I suspect Andy McNae and his cronies will not give a care. Loving lances
  • Score: 4

12:54pm Mon 14 Jul 14

mysay.com says...

the plans are "allegedly" in their early stages, as yet the full plans have not even been printed which encompass the whole of the centre.

Allegedly, Rosso are in support of this new design and union street being turned into a one way street going upwards, (which strangely enough they objected to as did LCC when it was suggested a few years ago.

As for the result of consultation, regarding the bus station, in case you haven't noticed, the bus station has not gone ahead, this was because a third option was suggested to them which gave a better location, better bus station, better traffic etc, so they went back to the drawing board.....so sometimes consultation does work, but it needs enough people to get involved.

the idea of doing that area, to be fair, is to make the old woolworths and that area, more appealing for new investors, but the difficulties for HGV's for those 2 major trunk roads will cause more problems in the view of many who have commented, both traders and residents alike.

the suggestion to incooperate the fountain in the "paved area" has been made, as has the suggestion of making the whole thing a one way system, this way traffic from all routed would have to go the same way around the centre, this may alleviate some of the problems this new road layout will cause.

but I would stress, if you want your views heard and known...get to the library this Saturday, have your say
the plans are "allegedly" in their early stages, as yet the full plans have not even been printed which encompass the whole of the centre. Allegedly, Rosso are in support of this new design and union street being turned into a one way street going upwards, (which strangely enough they objected to as did LCC when it was suggested a few years ago. As for the result of consultation, regarding the bus station, in case you haven't noticed, the bus station has not gone ahead, this was because a third option was suggested to them which gave a better location, better bus station, better traffic etc, so they went back to the drawing board.....so sometimes consultation does work, but it needs enough people to get involved. the idea of doing that area, to be fair, is to make the old woolworths and that area, more appealing for new investors, but the difficulties for HGV's for those 2 major trunk roads will cause more problems in the view of many who have commented, both traders and residents alike. the suggestion to incooperate the fountain in the "paved area" has been made, as has the suggestion of making the whole thing a one way system, this way traffic from all routed would have to go the same way around the centre, this may alleviate some of the problems this new road layout will cause. but I would stress, if you want your views heard and known...get to the library this Saturday, have your say mysay.com
  • Score: 1

7:08pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Iand61 says...

mysay.com wrote:
the plans are "allegedly" in their early stages, as yet the full plans have not even been printed which encompass the whole of the centre.

Allegedly, Rosso are in support of this new design and union street being turned into a one way street going upwards, (which strangely enough they objected to as did LCC when it was suggested a few years ago.

As for the result of consultation, regarding the bus station, in case you haven't noticed, the bus station has not gone ahead, this was because a third option was suggested to them which gave a better location, better bus station, better traffic etc, so they went back to the drawing board.....so sometimes consultation does work, but it needs enough people to get involved.

the idea of doing that area, to be fair, is to make the old woolworths and that area, more appealing for new investors, but the difficulties for HGV's for those 2 major trunk roads will cause more problems in the view of many who have commented, both traders and residents alike.

the suggestion to incooperate the fountain in the "paved area" has been made, as has the suggestion of making the whole thing a one way system, this way traffic from all routed would have to go the same way around the centre, this may alleviate some of the problems this new road layout will cause.

but I would stress, if you want your views heard and known...get to the library this Saturday, have your say
If the council are actually talking about making the town centre one way then it's a case of either them not giving the LET the full facts of the story or LET not publishing the facts as available.
However having Union Street as part of that scheme wouldn't work as the gradient and available turning area at the Market Street junction are not suitable as was often proved during the culvert works.
Rosso might not have a problem with it but drivers having to give way whilst a bus tries to pull out of Union Street completely filling both carriageways might beg to differ.
It's just a shame that plans from 40 years ago to extend Lee Street through to Rochdale Road and make it all one way were not followed through at the time.
The bus station bit is confusing me somewhat as I wasn't aware that plans were ever drawn up, certainly not since the 1970's for a bus station in Bacup, irrespective of location.
Are we not getting confused with Rawtenstall's here.
As for the bit about Woolworths and the paved area in front of it.
The building has seen far better days and, much like the old Bingo hall would be better renovated by means of a full demolition job.

Will I call in and look at the plans on Saturday, probably.
Will public consultation have any effect, possibly.
Will it be done for 400k, unlikely.
Will it ever actually get done, wouldn't put my last fiver on it.
[quote][p][bold]mysay.com[/bold] wrote: the plans are "allegedly" in their early stages, as yet the full plans have not even been printed which encompass the whole of the centre. Allegedly, Rosso are in support of this new design and union street being turned into a one way street going upwards, (which strangely enough they objected to as did LCC when it was suggested a few years ago. As for the result of consultation, regarding the bus station, in case you haven't noticed, the bus station has not gone ahead, this was because a third option was suggested to them which gave a better location, better bus station, better traffic etc, so they went back to the drawing board.....so sometimes consultation does work, but it needs enough people to get involved. the idea of doing that area, to be fair, is to make the old woolworths and that area, more appealing for new investors, but the difficulties for HGV's for those 2 major trunk roads will cause more problems in the view of many who have commented, both traders and residents alike. the suggestion to incooperate the fountain in the "paved area" has been made, as has the suggestion of making the whole thing a one way system, this way traffic from all routed would have to go the same way around the centre, this may alleviate some of the problems this new road layout will cause. but I would stress, if you want your views heard and known...get to the library this Saturday, have your say[/p][/quote]If the council are actually talking about making the town centre one way then it's a case of either them not giving the LET the full facts of the story or LET not publishing the facts as available. However having Union Street as part of that scheme wouldn't work as the gradient and available turning area at the Market Street junction are not suitable as was often proved during the culvert works. Rosso might not have a problem with it but drivers having to give way whilst a bus tries to pull out of Union Street completely filling both carriageways might beg to differ. It's just a shame that plans from 40 years ago to extend Lee Street through to Rochdale Road and make it all one way were not followed through at the time. The bus station bit is confusing me somewhat as I wasn't aware that plans were ever drawn up, certainly not since the 1970's for a bus station in Bacup, irrespective of location. Are we not getting confused with Rawtenstall's here. As for the bit about Woolworths and the paved area in front of it. The building has seen far better days and, much like the old Bingo hall would be better renovated by means of a full demolition job. Will I call in and look at the plans on Saturday, probably. Will public consultation have any effect, possibly. Will it be done for 400k, unlikely. Will it ever actually get done, wouldn't put my last fiver on it. Iand61
  • Score: 2

8:10pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Doug Spencer says...

The facts are:
This scheme is NOT needed, we keep being told to look at Poynton and how their congestion problem has been cured....... When is Bacup congested?

A one-way system is, to the best of my knowledge, only being pushed by one person and leads to the obvious questions of which way and which way will Union street be made one-way?

Accidents statistics from LCC's own website show that St. James Street / Bottom of Rochdale Rd., has had the most collisions in the last 5 years - 8,

Market street and Union street are next with 3 each and St. James Square, where this preposterous scheme is proposed, 2!!

It seems to me that this is a case of yet again, a group of people don't want the fountain and this gets rid of it. There is around £500,000 of THI money to be spent on "Public Realm", surely the fountain is classed as that!

I would like to know what happens WHEN this scheme fails? Will traffic lights be introduced? Pelican crossing? How the hell will emergency services get to the inevitable accident when the roads have been narrowed?

Funnily, no-one has come up with answers to these questions yet!!

Councillors NEED to remember, their job is to represent the wishes of the people to the council and NOT to represent the council to the people. There is a massive difference.
The facts are: This scheme is NOT needed, we keep being told to look at Poynton and how their congestion problem has been cured....... When is Bacup congested? A one-way system is, to the best of my knowledge, only being pushed by one person and leads to the obvious questions of which way and which way will Union street be made one-way? Accidents statistics from LCC's own website show that St. James Street / Bottom of Rochdale Rd., has had the most collisions in the last 5 years - 8, Market street and Union street are next with 3 each and St. James Square, where this preposterous scheme is proposed, 2!! It seems to me that this is a case of yet again, a group of people don't want the fountain and this gets rid of it. There is around £500,000 of THI money to be spent on "Public Realm", surely the fountain is classed as that! I would like to know what happens WHEN this scheme fails? Will traffic lights be introduced? Pelican crossing? How the hell will emergency services get to the inevitable accident when the roads have been narrowed? Funnily, no-one has come up with answers to these questions yet!! Councillors NEED to remember, their job is to represent the wishes of the people to the council and NOT to represent the council to the people. There is a massive difference. Doug Spencer
  • Score: 2

5:39am Tue 15 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

An excellent analysis, Doug , which leads me to the following conclusion:
our local councillors, planners and news media are all complete plonkers.
An excellent analysis, Doug , which leads me to the following conclusion: our local councillors, planners and news media are all complete plonkers. Loving lances
  • Score: 1

12:11am Wed 16 Jul 14

mysay.com says...

cool, a few things to respond to

the council are not talking about turning the whole thing into a one way street, if you read the post properly, the are merely talking about turning union street into one way...the post goes on to state that when the idea of the whole town one way was made to LCC a while ago, they objected quoted exactly the problem you just stated about the usablilty of busses and larger vehicles.....the fact is, now they are talking about union street one way going up hill, I pointed out o them exactly the same things you have just quoted....their answer was "maybe we could turn this around"...which would in my own opinion make no difference what so ever, they would cause just as much congestion at both ends, as they already do, entering or leaving union street, they are just too big and that road is too narrow.
the bus station part, my apologies, I failed to point out that the bus station consultation I was referring to was the recent one for rawtenstall, the fact that those plans were scrapped when the 2 options they suggested were trumped by a third option being suggested.
the demolition of woolworths was suggested, the response was that it could not since it was a listed building...but please, turn up and repeat the suggestion, the more that make it, the better.

as for the point of LET not publishing a true representation of the facts, this was my point in the first place, it states that the traders are fully in support of the plans, yet they have only spoken to the two traders who would benefit from it as they are both on the corner of the area in question, so they are the ONLY ones who would (or might) benefit from it, since they would have an improved view form out of their windows.

As for your comments Doug, whilst I agree on most points.....I would go a stage further about the councillors role and duties......ALL council employees.....counci
llors or officers....LCC or RBC or any other council for that matter, need to remember their job description, "public servants" their ultimate responsibility is to serve the public, they work for us, not the other way around, and the sooner they are made to realise this, the better.
cool, a few things to respond to the council are not talking about turning the whole thing into a one way street, if you read the post properly, the are merely talking about turning union street into one way...the post goes on to state that when the idea of the whole town one way was made to LCC a while ago, they objected quoted exactly the problem you just stated about the usablilty of busses and larger vehicles.....the fact is, now they are talking about union street one way going up hill, I pointed out o them exactly the same things you have just quoted....their answer was "maybe we could turn this around"...which would in my own opinion make no difference what so ever, they would cause just as much congestion at both ends, as they already do, entering or leaving union street, they are just too big and that road is too narrow. the bus station part, my apologies, I failed to point out that the bus station consultation I was referring to was the recent one for rawtenstall, the fact that those plans were scrapped when the 2 options they suggested were trumped by a third option being suggested. the demolition of woolworths was suggested, the response was that it could not since it was a listed building...but please, turn up and repeat the suggestion, the more that make it, the better. as for the point of LET not publishing a true representation of the facts, this was my point in the first place, it states that the traders are fully in support of the plans, yet they have only spoken to the two traders who would benefit from it as they are both on the corner of the area in question, so they are the ONLY ones who would (or might) benefit from it, since they would have an improved view form out of their windows. As for your comments Doug, whilst I agree on most points.....I would go a stage further about the councillors role and duties......ALL council employees.....counci llors or officers....LCC or RBC or any other council for that matter, need to remember their job description, "public servants" their ultimate responsibility is to serve the public, they work for us, not the other way around, and the sooner they are made to realise this, the better. mysay.com
  • Score: 0

5:16am Wed 16 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

Mysay, you are spot on. As usual! But I am afraid that ths public servants just regard the public as voting fodder, as useful idiots who will pay their taxes and be happy with an annual carnival. I put these plans into the same category as the announcements in 2002 that (according to the Free Press) the new Futures Park was "the best news for Bacup in 50 years".
The best laid plans of mice and men .......!
Mysay, you are spot on. As usual! But I am afraid that ths public servants just regard the public as voting fodder, as useful idiots who will pay their taxes and be happy with an annual carnival. I put these plans into the same category as the announcements in 2002 that (according to the Free Press) the new Futures Park was "the best news for Bacup in 50 years". The best laid plans of mice and men .......! Loving lances
  • Score: 0

7:23pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Loving lances says...

I went to the "consultation". A complete misnomer because the council and the planners have made up their minds.
I went to the "consultation". A complete misnomer because the council and the planners have made up their minds. Loving lances
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree