The Parish Council has written to the electorate of Alderley Edge to explain their plans to build a new medical centre, create a community hub at the festival hall, and improve parking in the village.
Households have now received leaflets titled Parish Pledge, which outline their three point plan and invite residents to respond with their opinion. Councillors agreed to undertake this exercise at their October meeting so they can prove that the majority of residents support their plans.
Until now members of the public have not been formally consulted on the controversial plans, which they have been working on for a number of years. The plans have been met with resistance from some allotment holders and some local residents who have been gathering support by organising a petition.
Speaking at the October Parish Council meeting, Cllr Mike Williamson, Chairman of Alderley Edge Parish Council, said "I am quite confident that the overwhelming majority in this village supports the construction of the medical centre and the provision of parking space on the Heyes Lane allotment site and we are going to prove that.
"So what I am going to do is propose to you that we conduct a survey. We will write to every member of the electorate of the village and invite them to tell us what they think."
He added "This will provide us with the confidence that we are acting in the best interests of the whole village, rather than just a specific minority."
The Parish Council voted in October 2011 to take over the management of the three allotment sites in the village from Cheshire East Council. Then in March 2013 they voted unanimously to convert the Heyes Lane allotment site into a car park and enter into discussions with Alderley Edge School for Girls to establish a new statutory allotment site at Lydiat Lane, on land owned by the school.
The leaflet explains that the Parish Council will provide a new £2 million Medical Centre for 8000 patients at the front of the Festival Hall, at no cost to local tax payers, because the existing medical centre on George Street is not designed for purpose and fails CQC standards for disability.
On the leaflet a statement from George Street Medical Centre says "At the moment we are overcrowded in a building that can't comply with modern standards. The new medical centre will give us space and facilities to provide 21st century care for the community."
Alderley Edge Parish Council took over management of the Festival Hall in 2009 after a review, carried out by consultants on behalf of Macclesfield Borough Council in 2005, concluded that the hall was underused, losing money and out of touch with the modern community. Since then, local taxpayers have been paying for the building's upkeep, through the Parish Precept, to a tune of £50,000 a year - which amounts to 42% of the total annual Alderley Edge Precept.
The Parish Council plans to create a modern multi-purpose centre which will be self-funding. This will include a new entrance off Heyes Lane, new kitchen, bar and reception, a new office for the PCSO, so she can be based there, and 200 movable seats for events.
Festival Hall Manager Ashley Comiskey Dawson said "After listening carefully to the wishes of our regular clients and hosting a multitude of events we have produced a user friendly design for a new hall which guarantees accessibility and increases the universal appeal. We want to fuse the best of the 1929 features with a contemporary finish reflecting the traditions of what has always been a forward thinking community."
The third aspect off the Parish Council plan is to create a landscaped 'Greencrete' car park on Heyes Lane on the current allotment site. This is designed to move all day parking away from residential roads close to the village centre. The new car park will be pay and display with 150 spaces, an undefined number of which will be made available to permit holders.
The Parish Council then intends to make the South Street car park short term only and limit all day parking on certain residential streets, following a consultation with local householders.
John Tomlinson, Vice-Chairman of Alderley Edge Allotments & Garden Society, handed over a petition at October's Parish Council meeting which contained the signatures of just over 1800 adults who are objecting to the Heyes Lane allotment site being turned into a car park.
He said "The sound of villagers saying no is reaching a crescendo. Any reasonable group of nine people would listen to the views of over 1800 people.
"Alderley Edge residents do not want the Heyes Lane site converted into a car park, we urge you to drop this unpopular move and work with Cheshire East and the Highways Authority to develop other solutions to the parking problems in Alderley Edge and leave Heyes Lane allotment site for allotments."
In the leaflet posted to the electorate, Chairman of the Parish Council Mike Williamson said "We understand the concerns of our allotment holders who have been offered transfer to a new larger site on Lydiat Lane and we appreciate we are losing an open space in the village.
"We believe more importantly the medical needs of an ageing population, the commercial realities faced by local business people and the need to secure a vibrant future for our Parish Hall makes this an essential decision in the interests of the wider community."
At the end it states that the leaflet is not intended to be a diktat, but "part of the consultation exercise".
It states "We have heard from a small number with long term vested interested, we really want to hear from the rest of the community."
Residents are invited to email the Clerk of the Parish Council to tell them what you think, no deadline has been provided for the 'consultation exercise'.
Did you receive a copy of the Parish Pledge leaflet? What did you think about it and the outlined plans? Share your views via the comment box below.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
The small minority of Allotment Holders who are opposing these plans are a disgrace. They should move to the new Allotments created by the Council.
The Allotments on Heyes Lane / Festival Hall look a mess anyway and the proposed car park cannot look any worse, and may look a damned sight better, thereby creating many more car parking spaces the village is screaming out for.
Incidentally, how many of these Allotment Holders actually live in the village ?
Looking forward to the new car park and Doctors Surgery !!!
I just hope the Council don't offer any bribes for these stubborn Allotment Holders. After all, every penny offered to them is from OUR Council Tax.
Why should I pay for someone else who's just being awkward ?
Perhaps we might enquire what list was used ?
Fenton
Simpson
Chairman AEAGS
Mr Simpson appears to be trying to make a cheap point with his comment regarding sending the leaflet to a recently deceased resident of Chelford.
Whilst I am very sorry that a Chelford family has recently lost a relative, such mistakes in mailing lists are inevitable. Recently bereaved relatives do not prioritise up-dating local council mailing lists.
Reading between the lines of Mr Simpson's comment, it seems likely that the recently deceased individual from Chelford was a member of the AEAGS. If this is correct then I suggest that other non- Alderley Edge residents who want their own allotment plots should look at their own villages to provide one.
I do live in the village and I didn't receive a leaflet which unnerves me slightly. I would have liked to have seen a leaflet drop with the local newspaper to ensure it covers all addresses.
I also have not seen a clear result over the covenant debate. If this land is protected, it should remain so. How is this being progressed? The last I saw we had a standoff and lawyers were being consulted?
I agree that parking is needed, but not at the expense of a green space, no matter if it's not pleasing to everyone's eye. In my opinion the village has not tried to open up the existing parking at the site (although with the development that's now not possible) and see what impact that would have had, as for some bizarre reason it was made permit holders only and vastly underused. I find that frustrating as we should take developments like this seriously and exhaust all other options before paving over a green space.
On that basis, I feel I have to object to this proposal.
How more leaflets have gone out to non residents in the village ? Will their feedback be entered into the consultation ?
The medical centre project has my full support but it's not linked to the allotment site at Heyes lane. The parish council has not followed the correct process. There is still no alternative site ready. The PC don't recognise the petition etc etc
Despite all the arguments for and against lets get back to basics.
A piece of green space land is given or deeded to the people of Alderley,under a covenant of protection,to stop said land being used for development of any kind.
One would think the local PC would be hell bent on protecting this land for the people who vote them in.
Instead they are hell bent on destroying it.
They signed a lease with CEC for this land,it seems AEPC don't think think this is worth the paper it was written on.
A vast sum must have been spent on layers etc to draw up this lease,to no avail.
The Allotments may not be manicured - thank goodness- but they are a green oasis in the heat of our village and should be protected as a precious resource.
Nobody lives in Alderley Edge because it has plenty of car parks , they live here because it is a village and the Heyes Lane allotments help define it as such.
Emerson have renewed planning permission to put another deck on their car park by the station, surely there is a deal around public access capable of being done there?
Anyhow, my vote is for no car park
We personally do not yet appear to have received the Council's paper as yet (despite living in Alderley Edge!) and so cannot comment in detail but, as others have noted, there appear to be two basic issues that need resolving before any decision is made: 1. the legal situation - it the Council are so sure of their advice, why isn't it being made public? After all, it was paid for with taxpayers money. ; and 2. to 'delink' the issue of the medical centre (which, I suspect has far greater support) from the carpark.
My belief is that until these two issues are clarified, there will always be the smell of manure between the vested interests of the allotment holders on the one hand and, on the other hand, those wanting to replace land which has been cultivated for best part of a century with tarmac so they can have their own personal allotment for their own car.
We haven't received ours yet, but we did all sign the petition against the Car park.
So far my only objection has been one of process. Naturally, presented with sound reasons for creating a car park and shifting allotments I would be for the change, and without them I would not. Perusing the materials on the PC website and here results in finding only an intimation of why it would be beneficial but no real demonstration of the benefits (the number of spaces has yet to be determined). Having noted that, Duncan has addressed some of these issues in his reply to me for which I am most grateful. I believe the approach the PC has taken reflects their certainty that all but an awkward few, that any sensible person, would want the new car park, and I believe this certainty has led to some unfortunate if well meant actions.
The purpose of the brochure, while a good update on the progress of the three projects, was not to solicit opinion (Have Your Say) but to somehow demonstrate the popularity of the car park, to prove (as it says above) that the majority approve the plan. It does not justify the car park in any of the ways it could have -that added services at the Festival Hall with more events would be better served, that it could serve as a pick up/drop off for school children- nor does it mention practical issues such as timeline and whether the space would serve as a site entrance for the duration of the MC and FH construction. Any of a number of things weren't bothered to be mentioned because, see above, the certainty of the PC of the support is such that such clarity isn't seen as necessary.
On the back page of the leaflet is a small entreaty to get in touch with the PC to let them know your feelings regarding the plan, and reassuring the reader that the leaflet is part of a consultation exercise and not a dictat. Unfortunately, because of the PC's certainty of support, no mention is made of what it would take for them to reconsider the plan, and no closing date for replies given, making it essentially a dictat. This means that, while gradually being won over to the advantages of the car park (although I still have too little data, see above), I feel that those that signed the petition who have no vested interest in the allotments have had their opinions disregarded in a cavalier fashion.
If the PC feel that they were elected to get on with it and make precisely these kinds of local governance decisions in what they feel is the best interests of the village, fair enough, that works for me as I'm grateful for the time they put in -but please do so without the certainty that all but the awkward share their view.
You write that the P.C. has interlinked the two proposals i.e. the Medical Centre and the proposed car park at Heyes lane. This has been refuted so often;please let me try again. The proposed car park has several proposed uses i.e. commuters, patients of the Medical Centre, Staff of the Medical Centre, shoppers, people who work in the village. local businesses etc. Please, it is not interlinked only with the Medical Centre.
Hi John,
you are correct I believe in writing that nobody lives in A/E because there are lots of car parks, but if the lack of parking spaces causes the village to 'silt up' won't businesses just up and leave? Thus less employment etc. etc. ? Thus not a thriving village, but another suburb. Would you agree?
Hi Victoria (again),
I too deplore the 'stand-off'. I'm sure that if the whole matter could be re-played, both the 'Allotments Soc.' and the P.C. would do it differently. But we are where we are; I do wish that more of the people opposed to the proposed car park would accept that turning an unused field into new allotments, with a greater area, is beneficial. Do you agree?
It's difficult to argue against a new medical centre when the old one is said to be 'not fit for purpose'. Whether this is the best building and best location is another matter. However there's no link between this and the allotment car park...
Look to chorley hall lane and part of the barely used playing fields for immediate parking relief in the village...
1. C.H.Lane playing field 'belongs' to Cheshire East and they have repeatedly refused to use it for ought but sports (and one day parking for the May Fair).
2. You say that most people have internet access and so could be consulted; so we thus ignore those who don't have internet? Its not as simple as it seems?
3. You question that putting the new medical centre onto the Festival Hall as not being the best location. (a) all that has been discussed for actually years and in the end, most people agreed that the Festival Hall was the best place. (b) I always ask whoever questions the location, to suggest a better one; mind you it is 'academic' now as building is underway.
4. Again the bit about linking the Medical Centre with the Hall. Please see the opening para of my post 2 places up?
After all, how many of them ....... 50 ? 100? 150 ?
I'm not really bothered how many actually, but what concerns me is this small band of selfish individuals have tried to block what are sensible proposals for the majority of people wishing to have more parking spaces to help the businesses, shops and restaurants in our village to survive in this highly competitive world, especially as shoppers and diners can visit so many other places not a million miles away, without the huge hassle of trying to find a parking space.
I think the comment by Gillian Martin hits the nail on the head, namely ............
"The petition in favour of retaining the allotments was a farce - I know of people who simply signed it without thinking about its implications because they didn't want to offend the person who was thrusting it under their nose" ! ..
If a survey was done TODAY to see who was in favour or against the proposed parking facilities replacing the allotments on Heyes Lane, I am sure the majority would vote IN FAVOUR of moving the allotments and having the extra parking spaces in the village.
So, these 50 / 100 / 150 selfish Allotment Holders have been holding the village to ransom by not agreeing to sensible proposals, bearing in mind they have the opportunity to relocate to the other side of the village to another piece of land designated for their allotment plots.
What is the problem ?
The village desperately needs more parking spaces to survive.
Here is the answer, never mind all this nonsense.
If you and Gillian Martin are suggesting that most of the individuals who signed are so spineless, gullible or unintelligent to sign a petition because they hadn't thought about the implications, or were worried about offending the petition-holder, then now we really do have a fine example of 'nonsense'.
Shoppers and restaurant users will not use a car park at that location. They never did when there were spaces around the Festival Hall. It's too far for them to walk.
Gillian stated that they possibly "didn't want to offend the person who was thrusting it under their nose" ........... (and that is quite reasonable, under the circumstances) ...........
and totally different to what you have stated. How rude you are !!!
I said that there were possibly 50 ? 100 ? or 150 ? Allotment Holders who were creating the problem, and maybe pressurising many others to sign their document ?
However, I bow to your exceptional skill in actually knowing that "Shoppers and restaurant users will not use a car park at that location" You obviously have a knowledge that could be used for better things than addressing problems in Alderley Edge.
Whenever I walked past the Festival Hall parking area the bays were always full, both before and after the Parking Permits were issued.
I can only presume the people parking there were either business people using the village for all day parking, or shoppers and restaurant users, or maybe even residents.
Either way, you are avoiding the problem and are contributing absolutely nothing towards trying to solve the problem ........................
Extra parking places are needed for the village to survive and here is the answer !
it may not be too far to walk if that is the 'only game in town' and by the time the Medical Centre and car park are up and running, that may well be the situation.
If you can suggest somewhere else to allow enough car parking, please tell us.
I agree that a solution needs to be found. I don't have one that hasn't already been suggested by others on this site. I think the Spring Street car-park could, potentially, be extended to a multi storey, but I'm sure there's a reason why that idea won't fly. My point is, that the location of the proposed car park will not, in my humble opinion, solve the problem of inadequate parking in the centre of the village. The PC has to admit, surely, that they cannot be absolutely sure that it will, either. They hope it will. But, ultimately, they are taking a gamble. And if, as I suspect, the car park is underutilised what happens then? Well, obviously, it is sold to developers for the highest price and more houses are built on precious green space that I and another 1,800 or so locals want to protect for generations to come.
And with that, I'm taking my leave from this particular thread. Time for some other people to express their thoughts...
The leaflet does not give a priority to the alleged purpose of the leaflet: for all of those wishing to give their opinion; nor does it provide the intended means of impartial recording of the opinions submitted (by email or post). How will a long stay car park on the allotment site 'secure a vibrant future for our Parish Hall'? The fact that posters on this thread have not all received the leaflet suggests that not all residents of Alderley Edge have been afforded the opportunity to give their opinion.
Derogatory comments aimed at those who signed the petition to keep the allotments where they are situated do not constitute a convincing argument for moving them; but do infer an intolerant attitude towards those who 'dare' to oppose the opinion of those posters.
The leaflet was sent to EVERY person on the electoral register, so if a name is on the register they received a leaflet, even though it was recognised that a very small number may have moved. Cheshire East should have produced an up to date register recently, but, because of local by-elections throughout Cheshire East, they decided to wait until January 2015 to produce the register which would normally have come into effect a few months ago.
Even though households received multiple envelopes, the job of contacting every single elector was achieved.
I don't intend to sound 'silly', but if you can manage it, visit the proposed new site. It is reached by a narrow (at best just 1 car wide) dirt track; I suspect the costs and practicalities of turning that field into a car park is an impossibility.
Also one point of a car park at Heyes Lane is to make available approx. 20+ spaces for users of the new Medical Centre. Without that, users will simply block the surrounding roads, making life somewhat unbearable for the people who live on those roads and probably lead to those people getting 'residents only' facilities and then where would patients park, to get to the medical centre?
I am all for the festival hall as a new medical centre but please make up your minds; it's not linked or it is. In your own post at the beginning of this discussion you stated they are not linked. You restated this in a response towards the middle, directing the reader to your earlier message. Now you say it is for the use of the Medical Center.
I quote from the Parish Pledge on the Parking Strategy - opening sentence "Our new medical centre and refurbished festival halls need parking...."
the point I tried to make was that a link between Medical Centre and parking was not the only link.
Yes the medical centre needs parking; as do traders, employers, shoppers,employees et al.
The Parish Pledge document which you quote: the full quote is "Our new medical centre and refurbished festival Hall need parking as does the entire village...". To me that says that the proposed Heyes Lane car park is for the use of people who currently have to scramble for parking in the village.
The Parish Pledge document goes on to make it very clear that the proposed Heyes Lane car park should move all-day parking away from residential roads.
Are you and I argeuing only over an interpretation of a sentance?
May I make the point here, to emphasise the urgent need for parking: in the last year or so, three streets going over to residents only and the loss to the general public of the West St. car park has 'lost' how many spaces? (50? 100?).
Whilst I am rabbiting on, a tad more data: Clifton St. has about 16 residents' spaces; on Weds at 10 am there were only 7 in use (drive by measure) and at 12 o clock on Weds there were only 6 in use (including 2 delivery vehicles) and of the 6, only 2 had permits on the windscreen (walk by measure).
The PC should be congratulated for finally sending out information, although it does have rather a sense of after the event.
I am in favour of improving medical facilities in the village , though of course they will be used by a wider population which is fine ( isn't that a complaint about the allotments !! ) ; I also see value in improving the festival hall as a community asset; assuming an appropriate business plan and funding is in place.
However, I don't agree with the car park on the allotments for a variety of reasons including loss of green space as well as doubt over actual need and likelihood of use. More importantly, before any new parking strategy, is proposed or debated, ( normally strategies have a number of implementation options btw ) , the elephant in the room is enforcement. Until , there is some adequate enforcement of existing parking regulations, then this is the equivalent of blowing in the wind. London Road and Heyes Lane are daily examples of places were people park on yellow lines ; at pelican crossings ; fully on the pavement , at junctions , etc etc ....
I still think the ideas in the shared space plan for Alderley had a lot of merit , but they seem to have ended up on a dusty shelf.
I am already familiar with the limitations of access to the proposed new allotments site, and your comment serves to reinforce the unsuitability of the site for allotments. How are allotment holders supposed to access their 'replacement allotments' with such poor access? Equipment required for maintaining an allotment is quite bulky. How exactly are allotment holders supposed to get their equipment there, and move their produce? Yes there is a need for additional car parking facilities, but not to the detriment of local residents who have allotments, many of whom will struggle to use the proposed new site.
I'll try to answer your points.
Compare the possibility of a relatively small number of allotment users on the proposed new site, with the possibility of 100+ car parkers there. The lesser of two evils?
The access to C.H.Lane allotments is no wider than the entrance to the proposed new site and I assume that equipment can be got to C.H.Lane allotments? So why not to the proposed new site?
Just to mention that the distance from the Heyes Lane site to the centre of the vilage is much the same as the distance from the proposed new site to the centre of the village.
Also to mention that as the proposed new site is significantly larger that the Heyes Lane site, more people will be able to have an allotment to work; an good outcome?
I am glad that you accept the need for additional car parking facilities; I make my usual plea i.e. where, if not a new car park at Heyes Lane?
Overkill?
You might just end up with a feeling that you supported a development that irreversibly destroyed a green area for a two thirds empty strip of white lined nothingness.
Accordingly on balance you may have preferred parking difficulties as a less worst outcome.
A car park with decent spaces between cars instead of bunching up and getting bumps, scratches and dents every time you park your car from other inconsiderate drivers.
The Festival Hall NEEDS a large car park to accommodate the requirements from numerous different groups of car owners;
1) The Surgery ........ The Patients & Medical Staff (Receptionists, Nurses, Doctors, etc)
2) The Festival Hall ... Receptions, Functions, Parties, Bar Staff, Cleaners, etc)
3) The Village ........... All the staff required to run the businesses, restaurants, shops, etc.
4) Everyone else ........ The shoppers and diners and everyone else visiting the village.
What a great parking location and what a great destination Alderley Edge will become when the word spreads around the region that we have adequate parking facilities to cater for everyone.
Plus they have planning permission, surely worth a conversation?
http://bit.ly/1tpBh4r
Maybe not EVERYBODY received one.
"Brian suggests using the Lydiat Lane field as a football pitch, and transforming the chorley hall lane field into a car park. This field is large, and close enough to village centre for any visitors to park there. It's not even ideal for football, as it slopes and is swampy, whereas Lydiat Lane field is flat and better drained."
An awkward truth for those in favour of losing the Heyes Lane allotments is there were usually parking spaces available at the festival hall... because it was considered too far away from centre of village. Chorley Hall field is not. The new medical centre and the allotments are not linked in any way. The doctors have not said they need extra parking. There is adequate parking for medical centre visitors at the festival hall itself.
1. CEC have refused to use the C.H.Lane playing fields for anything else (as far as I know). It may be that the use as a sports field only is unalterable?
2. As others have evidenced, there were not many occasions when the Festival Hall parking was significantly under-used.
3. People say that the doctors have not said that they need extra parking. I have sat in meetings where representatives of the medical practice have clearly said that about 20 parking spaces would be good for them; not a demand, only a request.
4. Once the Medical centre and the new side entrance are built, at the Festival Hall, there will be much less parking available that than was the case prior to the bulding works. Also the Hall has been and will continue to be used by many community groups other than medical patients, so there can be no possibility of the remaining parking spaces, post-building, being exclusive to patients.
The fact the Doctors Surgery is locating there, with all the additional parking spaces required, does not leave much to the imagination for anyone to see there needs to be many, many, more parking spaces near the Festival Hall / Doctors Surgery, hence proposing the parking facilities there instead of the Allotments.
One or two people are complaining that the Festival Hall parking is not near the village ?
Neither is the Chorley Hall Lane site if it were to become a Car Park (which it definitely is NOT, BTW)
In actual fact, if you consider The Bubble Room as being about centre of the village, the Festival Hall is roughly equal distance from the centre of the village as is the proposed Chorley Hall Lane Allotment site.
As I live opposite the allotments, does anyone know whether the space will become a staging ground and site entrance for the work being done on the MC and FH? If so (or if not) could I have the two dates when is it envisioned the allotment would first be cleared and then first be used as a car park?
We all know what is coming - an empty car park for a few years followed by a deal with Jones Homes for housing.
How many times has it been asked who is finding the Tarmac? No answers by anyone at AEPC. When will anyone get these answers ?
This is a link to the Application Form for planning. http://bit.ly/1z5COjG It states that the parking will be reduced from a current 55 spaces to 40 spaces. This was passed with no concerns over the number of parking spaces for the venture.
So if CEC are happy with the parking provision, why then are AEPC not? There is absolutely no mention in the planning application of any need to convert the allotments to a car park. Furthermore, I can find no planning application for the allotment car park.
There seems to be no tangible link between turning the allotments into a car park and the development of the Festival Hall. If the doctors require more parking they need to come right out and state it publicly.
It also strikes me that one thing has been overlooked. If a visit to the doctors requires a person to go by car and park it then surely at present that is happening in the vicinity of South Street car park. So once they have relocated we can look forward to 40 fewer parking spaces needed in that area.
I understand that residents have been invited to comment and imagine at some point the comments will be scrutinised as a whole with a view to understanding whether statistically the majority support the car park or vica versa. I imagine the development points 1 & 2 of the 3 point plan will be roundly supported and applauded. I foresee Point 3, the parking strategy, will be far less clear cut in terms of support.
I would hope the majoritiy's wishes would be honoured either way.
It is unclear (to me at least) on how the scrutiny will take place; will it be independently checked or will the comments be solely available to the parish council team.
Since it isn't a straightforward vote, comments are subject to interpretation and I am aware that the councillors are already *unanimously decided prior to the consultation.
Maybe a framework already exists for ensuring fair play, but I just thought I would ask the question here.
* Unanimously voting to change the status of the allotments which I take to indicate uninamity in terms of support for the car park development.
There is a no comment approach from the surgery as I wrote to them and asked if extra parking was no required.
Perhaps you might have better luck asking them than the chair of the allotment society !
I suspect they don't want to jeopardise the project in anyway.
At every meeting I've been to the NHS haven't signed off on the project due to rent issues. So despite building work started has this all been signed off and ready to go ?
Perhaps we will find out at next Mondays PC meeting...