Councillor Craig Browne confirmed at this week's Parish Council meeting that schemes to introduce parking restrictions on Trafford Road and Greystoke Drive will go out to public consultation by the end of this week.
The Council was proposing to introduce additional double yellow lines and parking bays, the latter with a 2-hour waiting limit and no return within 2 hours, on Greystoke Drive but following representation from Cheshire Police, who had raised concerns about emergency access, this has now been changed to no parking at all.
Whilst on the top section of Trafford Road, from Chapel Road to Macclesfield Road, the plan is to introduce double yellow lines on the left hand side going uphill and remove a small number of parking bays coming downhill to prevent vehicles coming downhill being forced onto the wrong side of the road on a blind bend.
The work is expected to be carried out by late January or early February.
Councillor Browne was also pleased to confirm that the Local Area Partnership, which is responsible for allocating funds for minor highways work, has agreed that the remaining £9000 of their budget will be allocated to Alderley Edge.
This money will be used for Traffic Regulation Orders and new schemes for both Macclesfield Road and Talbot Road.
On Macclesfield Road double yellow lines will be introduced on the right hand side as you head up the hill, on a blind bend, as there as been a long term problem with contractors' vehicles being parked here.
Speaking about Talbot Road, Cllr Craig Browne said "This will help to ensure short term parking is available opposite the medical centre, possibly not quite by 1st April but otherwise very soon after."
"What I have asked for is a criss cross box at the end of Talbot Road to prevent people from parking and blocking the new access and for the other side of Talbot Road a number of short stay bays which includes one or two disabled bays."
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Is this the comprehensive solution to parking problems , I hope not
Perhaps might be better to have no rules at all , at least that would be fair and we could all park where we like rather than just the selfish and arrogant
Thank you for your comments.
Yellow lines are a necessary part of the comprehensive solution we are seeking to implement. Due to the costs and range of challenges involved, it is necessary to take a carefully considered step-by-step approach, rather than trying to do everything at once.
The next step will be to publish our (fully costed) proposals for creating significant additional parking spaces at multiple sites around the village. These proposals should go out to public consultation in January, when everyone will have chance to give their feedback.
Best wishes,
Craig
As for the longer term plans - can I enquire are those the ones that may potentially take 5 years to fully implement ?
I understand completely that the residents don't want streams of cars up and down the roads to their properties but what is the council doing to provide alternative parking arrangements for those of us that need to park for 8 hours a day 5 days a week?
Also if shop owners can't park anywhere to open their own shops then Alderley Edge will continue to go in decline for boutique shopping
i was told that an account of the Parish Council's solution/s to the parking situation would be coming through my door in December.
That's 7 months of 'time for thought'.
Does the entry by Craig (see above) mean that the document is being delayed by another month?
If so, in the meantime can we please at least be told where the quoted 'multiple sites' are. Please!
Why don't you wait for the public consultation in January.
The current PC doesn't write up its plans on the back of an envelope like the last lot.
You have been informed (along with the rest of us) on several occasions that the PC will hold an informal public meeting "Early in the New Year" to update us on their findings following some pretty comprehensive research that they have undertaken into the parking issues.
I (for one) would rather see proper and thorough consideration given to what is clearly a very sensitive process - the outcome of which is likely to involve a series of compromises.
As has already been stated (and you will know this better than most) any long term solution is bound to be tied up in further bureaucracy at CE level.
But take heart, the old PC were fifteen years in office and were unable to find a proper solution to the problem. The new guys have barely stretched their legs under their desks and are already tackling what has become, a very thorny issue.
Festival Hall: 51
South Street car park: 45
West Street car park: 20
London Road (Nat West to Grill on Edge): 5
Congleton Road: 7
Lydiat Lane: 7
West Street: 2
Without wishing to debate the merits of each of the above individually, it totals 137 cars which are now presumably parking in residential areas (“displacement parking”). The changes to Trafford Road, Greystoke Drive, Talbot and Macclesfield Road will doubtless push another 12 vehicles into the residential streets.
We are told that a parking census was undertaken during the summer 2015 school holidays and that the results will be published soon for public review. However between the census taking place and its publication someone has taken the decision to remove 52 “commuter spots”. (Despite this being against the recommendations of the last published parking review of the town centre.) I’m unclear what the mandate for this was.
We now have the crazy situation where commuters are swapping short stay spaces between themselves every two hours (eg from South Street to Waitrose to LWBs and back), which benefits no one.
Sadly whenever the subject comes up on this forum it seems to descend into a bun fight between the current and previous parish councillors. As someone concerned both about the lack of both employee and customer parking through the village I just wish we could have some positive improvements rather than the regular deterioration that has occurred over the past seven months and the four years previous to them.
And as to removing ‘a small number of parking bays coming downhill to prevent vehicles coming downhill being forced onto the wrong side of the road on a blind bend’ it would surely be necessary to prohibit parking (there are no ‘parking bays’) for the entire length of Trafford Road from Macclesfield Road to the junction with Woodbrook Road, which is a continuous blind bend. (It is also a blind bend for traffic going uphill from Chapel road to the junction with Woodbrook Road!)
I understand that this is just a plan and that a public consultation will be held before final decisions are taken, but given that this plan appears to be so far off the mark, I think it might be advantageous for Councillors to take a walk up this section of Trafford Road before formally submitting the plan to the public consultation.
For what it’s worth, I think Ann Melling’s suggestion to make this road one way is very sensible, provided the one way is down the road and not up, thereby avoiding traffic having to queue up at the roundabout at the bottom of Macclesfield Road in order to swing out onto London Road and back up Chapel Road.
I have been told that the document setting out the P.C's parking proposals would be posted through my door (and everyone else's doors) in December. This info. came to me directly from the P.C. I would very much like someone from the P.C. to deny that, so that I can qoute where my info. came from! Go on, I double dare you!
If my memory serves me aright, we have been promised such a document on more than one occasion. The most recent delay, from December to January is just another delay.
Why an informal meeting ? Informal is 'not in proper form' (don't you just love a dictionary?). Why on earth can't the P.C. just issue a document, over which everyone can pore.
We were told last May that solving the parking problem was the number 1 priority for the P.C. Now its to be 8 months before we can expect to see ought. It took less time to write Magna carta and/or the American Declaration of Independence!
I for one am not going to be surprised if the January deadline slips into February!
Is it any surprise that people are starting to doubt that the P.C. has any solution?
Is there disagreement within the P.C.?
Also why are you trying to affix blame for delay onto C.E. If C.E. are delaying an actual proposal from the P.C., perhaps we mere voters may be allowed to know what exactly is being delayed. Transparency? Hah!
Why write that the former P.C. 'were unable to find a proper solution'? Can you honestly say that the proposal to build a car park on Heyes Lane was not a proper solution? You as an individual may have disagreed, but you can't say that it was not a 'proper solution'.
Fiona,
what are you blethering on about re. Horseshoe Lane? Don't be cryptic; tell us.
Fenton,
I note your small piece of inanity.
You accuse the former P.C. of writing plans on the back of an envelope; if that's what produced the wonderful Medical Centre, perhaps the 'new lot' should lay in a store of envelopes?
Why oh why can you not reveal any detail of your parking solution/s? At least the 'old lot' had a plan and revealed it to the general public; unlike you?
I do wonder if part of the reason for the delay is that some of the 'new lot' have come to see that the solution of the 'old lot' i.e. a large car park on Heyes Lane is the best solution?
Just to finish on: can you describe to us exactly how you intend to consult the public? I have politely asked this question before and not had an answer. Perhaps this time you will tear aside the veil of secrecy and reveal your consultancy plans?
A Merry Xmas to all (?) our Good Readers.
It may come to pass that all or part of Heyes Lane allotments are used for car parking, as well as Chorley Hall Playing Fields, The Park, Castle Rock and Stormy Point.
If it is decided that all of these places should be sacrificed for car parking, and that decision comes as a result of proper and thorough consideration and due process, then we will reluctantly have to give them up.
But that is NOT the way that the previous PC planned things and it IS the reason why the previous PC were stuffed 9-0 in the cup final.
If the events in May taught you anything, it should be that there are a large and often silent majority in Alderley Edge that don't wish to see the village destroyed by poor and hasty "planning" that lines the pockets of a few opportunists whilst stealing all of the values that make The Village a very special place.
'It may come to pass'; but when oh when oh when?
'thorough consideration and due process'; fairly meaningless management gobbledegook?
If the leader of C.E.C. used those words, you'd be at him 'like a frog up a pump'?
Please tell us all exactly who the 'few opportunists' are and tell us clearly exactly how 'they' have lined their pockets. I believe that the new P.C. have used the same builder etc. that the old P.C. proposed to use? Oh and by the way, are you able to describe for us the tendering process used by the new P.C. re. the Festival Hall works; I am happy with the use of 'Emersons', but since AE1st did bang on about tendering process in the past?
Please reveal to us what are the values that are being stolen and by whom these values are being stolen. Lawdy lawdy, you are sounding like a Corbynista.
'poor and hasty planning', in the context of parking? As I keep banging on about, the old P.C. came up with a plan. That plan was chewed over by the public in monthly P.C. meetings for months etc. etc. Where exactly is the 'hasty'?
Come on Alan, be specific in any criticisms and 'lose' the knee-jerk generalisations; you're better than that!
'av an 'appy Advent.
So far, all they have done is REDUCED numerous parking spaces in the village but they have still not announced their remedy to solve this huge problem.
Maybe they got elected under false promises / commitments ?
BTW, which current Councillor (allegedly) made the unbelievable suggestion that if they built a car park near Chorley Hall Lane, then an underground pedestrian tunnel could be built between there and South Street ? Is this true ? and who was the Councillor making this "suggestion" ?
As Jeremy Corbin may say ; I've had a letter from "Bewildered of Alderley Edge" ........
Thanks for the update and look forward to seeing your parking plans in January ; hopefully they will bring together and make sense of current individual piecemeal actions based on perhaps who shouts loudest.
While I welcome an overall approach to parking being developed for the village, it seems to me that is the symptom not the requirement, which is that people and goods need to move around. A more thoughtful and progressive approach would be to address the “mobility” or “transport” issue as a whole, and look for solutions that required less parking rather than simply accept the car as the centre of our universe.
Times are changing as COP21 demonstrated , but action is needed beyond political photo opportunities and all communities will need to contribute if we are to see snow at Christmas again!!
Many things are no doubt beyond the PC’s control, but that shouldn’t stop it providing leadership and debate about the future of the village and looking for more radical solutions to improve life for the village as a whole.
Perhaps some air quality measurements around the schools might convince parents of the potential damage to their kids and encourage walking, at least a few metres.
Time those that block pavements including delivery and builder’s vehicles are told they are not welcome, by establishing a club of more thoughtful businesses, drivers and parkers. If we are unable to enforce current parking rules, rather incentivise those that park well.
Encourage use of cargo bikes to take people’s shopping home. Make sure the new parking includes charging points. How about some meet and greet/valet type services for day long parkers? Encourage lift and drive sharing.Incentivise positive actions in the village through a local currency and reward scheme. Take another look at the mixed use scheme for London Road.
I am sure there are many more ideas if the question is reframed to how do we get people and goods around in a sustainable way rather than simply where do I park my car.
Best
Vin
"BTW, which current Councillor (allegedly) made the unbelievable suggestion that if they built a car park near Chorley Hall Lane, then an underground pedestrian tunnel could be built between there and South Street ? Is this true ? and who was the Councillor making this "suggestion" ?"
If so I'm delighted to see such innovative thinking, the whole point of this review is to think outside the box, not all suggestions will meet with your or my approval but the more ideas and the more free thinking the better IMHO
You're delighted to see such innovative thinking ?
Do you really think suggesting a pedestrian tunnel be built all the way from Chorley Hall Lane to the car park in South Street is a reasonable and constructive idea ? Really ?
You are obviously deluded if you consider ideas from Councillors of this magnitude, if true, are reasonable and cost-effective ?
However, I do ask again if this rumour is true and which Parish Councillor suggested it ?
Would ANYONE admit to suggesting it ?
What I would really like to see are SENSIBLE suggestions from the new Parish Councillors
to satisfy the dozens and dozens of motorists who daily have problems finding parking spaces in Alderley Edge ?
After all, that's the main reason they were elected in the first place, or so we were informed.
I'm not surprised that you should baulk at the thought of "thorough consideration" and "due process."
I am surprised that you seem unaware of the opportunist development of land and property in Alderley Edge that is exacerbating the problems of infrastructure and threatening the removal of amenities.
Have you failed to notice the trend to convert large, period properties into trendy apartment living? There are a couple of such "developments" nearing completion very close to you.
I guess my grouse is that these Developers and Builders are making large profits from their schemes and then expecting that we will give up our allotments and playing fields to deal with the "unexpected" results.
You ask me other questions regarding the planning and conversion of the "Regal Ballroom" which I cant possibly answer as it has nothing to do with me. I understand (anecdotally) that Emersons have been incredibly supportive in ensuring the successful completion of the project but you would have to ask the PC for more detail.
As I am a reasonable man,I have no objection to a considered approach; what I find painful is the time taken. We are now told that there will be an announcement 'in the New Year', which I took to mean January (or is that now February?).
I would assume that the new P.C. had at least some ideas about parking before the election in May. Its now going to be 8 months at least since then. Dear me, how long does it take to come up with a parking improvement plan?
Stop trying to wriggle and actually name 'the opportunists' who have, you claim, lined their pockets. If as you offer, that (of course with great reluctance) part of Chorley Hall Lane Playing Field is turned into a car park (see above) then who will be lining their pockets from that? Or will there be a tendering process that avoids giving a large profit to a developer? Good luck with that one .
By the way, has anyone got an indication that C.E. would allow such a change of use? The last I heard, C.E's view was something about dead body and over !
I ask you questions about parking and you go off on a tangent about 'apartment living'. Eh ?
Its a funny old world eh? The former P.C. considered over months and decided that the best immediate solution for parking was a car park on Heyes Lane. Which made the former councilors very bad people.
Now you are suggesting that the new councilors may turn all or some of the Heyes Lane site into a car park. But they will do that with buckets of reluctance, as they are good people.
There was a sitcom called 'Vicar of Dibley', that featured a parish council !
feliz natal
I think you may be confused, I'm guessing an underpass would be from the far corner of Chorley Hall playing field ?...and just under the railway , not bisecting half the village!
I've no problem with lateral thinking, it's sorely needed
Okay, so you've no problem with "consideration." Can we infer therefore that it is only "due process" that troubles you?
This "naming names" game that you wish to play is irrelevant but if you wish to play it, their names are written on the hoardings surrounding the "prestige" developments. They take profit, add to parking (and other) problems and we argue about whether to give up an allotment or a playing field to accommodate them - insane!
I'm not going to indulge in any more "Oh yes it is" / "Oh no it isn't" pantomime banter with you even though it would be much more seasonal than Vic of Dib. I would simply encourage you to look at some of the very sensible suggestions made by Vin Sumner and (previously) Jonathan Savill on alternatives to car park building in the village and reflect on whether they might be much better, healthier and more effective long term solutions.
Nadolig Llawen!
I'm astonished that even now you don't appear to have grasped why all the former Parish Councillors lost their seats in the last election. Why do you think? I'm really curious to know your theory. You must, by now, have one?
In my opinion, they (you) lost, lock, stock and barrel, because of the way they conducted themselves during their time in office. Yes, decisions were made. Apparently with little or no consultation with the community, which they (you) were supposed to be serving.
Then, when one particular decision was announced and aggressive, confrontational steps were taken to implement the plan (remember the threatening letters sent to allotment holders?), the former Parish Council arrogantly ignored and dismissed any concerns that were voiced. Those members of the community who had the temerity to stick their heads above the parapet and voice those objections were summarily 'shot down'. I attended enough Parish Council meetings during that time to witness this first hand. The perception was that the former Parish Council was deliberately opaque in the way many important decisions were made, with few meaningful discussions at open PC meetings, and everything presented at these meetings as 'fait accompli'.
The resounding result of the election demonstrated that the community wanted a Parish Council that operated differently. It is my recollection that the new Parish Council promoted themselves as a group of people who promised to behave ethically, transparently and who would invite views and opinions from the community and LISTEN to them. Yes, this takes time. But it is what the electorate voted for. As far as I can see, the current PC have kept their word in this respect. You seem to expect them to be able to magic a rabbit out of a hat to provide a solution to the parking issue. I'm a bit more realistic. I understand it is a complex problem which, inevitably, is going to demand a complex solution. But I am perfectly happy with the way the Parish Council are going about it.
I do look forward to your theory as to why the whole of the former Parish Council lost.
1. are you accusing me of 'no consultation'? But I was all over alderleyedge.com, telling people what I was trying to do and asking them what they wanted done in the park and the cemetery, which were 'my areas'. Surely you recall?
2. Are you claiming that I was aggresive and confrontational? 100% not. A pussy cat.
3. I don't recall sending a single threatening letter. Not my habit.
4. Me? Opaque? Not at all.
So much for defending myself. I was such a nice councilor !
Now for your defence of the present incumbents:
1. You say that the present P.C. listens. Evidence please. Any example of a consultation?
2. Why are the P. Councilors so absent from alderleyedge.com? Is there a three-line whip forbidding councillors to contribute to this excellent medium?
3. Transparency? I and many others have no idea at all what the P.C. thinks or intends to do 'cos they don't tell us.
4. As to the parking problem. A rabbit from a hat? No. Just some answers before the village gets grid locked !
Its not a complex problem. Its just a problem. Problems are there to solve. Just get on with it. If the P.C. can make a brave stab at solving the problem, in the interests of traders, clients and workers, then I'll be the firsr to cheer them on. But when and what?
By the way; am I correct in remembering that you were 100% anti any attempt to turn the Heyes Lane site into a car park? How will you twist that if the new P.C. does (as we hear on the grapevine) turn a part of the Heyes Lane site into a car park? Will you remount your high horse and attack them? or roll over and acquiesce?
Yes the former P.C. got its ass whupped. But the past is a nice place to visit, but a bad place to live. Stop re-visiting the past and answer the questions that I and others ask, about the now time.
Can we have some calm thoughtful debate about the real issues please, and then perhaps more people might feel able to join in. I accept there is a parking problem and it has got worse in the past 6 months ( I am local resident, have business with employees and have people visit business , so impacted on all front ), and I look forward to comprehensive solutions not point ones. However, I would really like to press the PC to think more broadly and raise the level of innovation by looking at ways in which we can reduce the demand as an alternative to just increasing parking spaces. With some thought we could create a village for the 21st century that was not only a cool place to be but also contributed to the health and well being of its residents and visitors alike , rather than one simply built around the demands of the car.
best
Vin
you are right. A comprehensive re-apraisal involving innovation can only be good. BUT might not a longer time be needed for that? viz the 'shared space' concept in Poynton, which took a very long time to bring in. Can the parking problems in A.E. wait that long? OR might it be best to do something to ameliorate the problem in the short term whilst working on innovative answers for the longer term (and I don't mean years: let a working party be set up asap?). Thus a car park (or some other equally useful answer) for a quick 'fix'?
I also agree with you about neding calm etc. May I offer a few suggestions to help achieve that?
Firstly let's get rid of the niggle about whether the P.C. is or is not taking too long to bring out its answers/plans re. parking solutions. The whole matter can be stopped dead quite easily. I ask the Chairman of the P.C. to name the exact date that the P.C's document will be released. So thus we can all stop the arguement?
Secondly a lowering of sensitivity. Let me give an example. The car park in the park used to have two rubbish bins. One was damaged/vandalised/lost. Might the P.C. press C.E. to replace the missing one? Also there is always rubbish on the floor of that car park. But someone has dumped rubbish there. Many people pick up bits of rubbish and put it in the remaining bin. But pick up dumped stuff? No thanks! Could the P.C. urge C.E. to come clear up?
To me this is simply a member of the public calling something to the attention of the P.C. But others will see me as attacking the P.C. Which I am not.
Thirdly might we lose any habit of vituperation? We truly should not insult each other. I honestly do not intend to insult people. If anyone out there feels that I have insulted them then an apology is freely offered. I would enjoy continuing banter, humour and teasing. But some of the nastyness is just not needed?
Fourthly can we try to cease re-visiting the past? That is now history. The only reason I can see for looking back at what the previous P.C. did, is to learn from it. It may help to save the new P.C. having to re-invent the bicycle? There will not be perfect accord, but the whole 'thing' can move on?
Fifthly might any polite and clear questions posed to the P.C. on this medium get answered? If preferred, the questions could be posed on the P.C's websight? Answers might make arguements not needed.
zhu ni haoyun (pretentious? moi?)
You say "The only reason I can see for looking back at what the previous P.C. did, is to learn from it." I totally agree with you. So what have you learned? I think Claire asked you why the previous PC were not re-elected; however in your very extensive postings you have declined to enlighten us all.
I think the main reason was that few residents believed that the ill-considered quick fix of building a car park on the Heyes Lane allotments, as the previous PC proposed, was going to work. If they didn't believe it then they suspected the PC's intransigent stance on it brought their motives into question. So what was learned? Simply that there are no quick fixes for this issue as it is far more complex than that. Maybe that is why the new PC are taking their time to fully consider this as a broader issue.
Vin Sumner is right in what he says, the PC need to look a a broad range of solutions to this. That is probably why it is taking more time than you would like. However, you had many years in office and, as far as I can see, did very little to improve anything about the parking situation for anyone in the village.
You talk about moving on; I take it that you have noticed that the rest of the PC you served with have moved on and do not post on this site. Even the losing Conservative candidates (or their families) have moved on too.
Why not just let it go?
when I suggested above that a working party be set up to look into 'alternative' / innovative solutions to parking problems, you may have thought that I was just paying lip service. BUT why not try to get the P.C. & Traders & interested parties to do just that, in the new year?
You could speed things along by offering to do the donkey work of setting the whole thing up !