By Mike Dudley-Jones on behalf of Alderley Edge Parish Council
An Open Letter to Residents of Alderley Edge and to those working in our village
This Thursday evening we are holding a formal consultation meeting at the Methodist Church on Chapel Road at 7.00pm to present the initial findings from the Parish Council's Car Park Review. We hope you will join us there.
To ensure the success of that meeting we want to make a few important points to you in advance:
First, what we are presenting are proposals. We are not issuing instructions, nor are we telling you how it must be.
As Councillors, we are simply residents who have volunteered to give up our time (a great deal of it) – unpaid - to do what we can to improve life in our village. We ask you to respect that and not subject us to unwarranted abuse for the work we have put in, even if you strongly disagree with us.
Secondly, what we shall be presenting is the start of a process of consultation, not its end point. It is important that everyone involved in village life responds with their views. If we do not get a clear direction from you, then we shall take this as meaning that the village prefers to continue as it is.
Our predecessors proposed creating one large 142 space car park at Heyes Lane. We understand their reasons for doing that, but the proposal met with considerable public resistance, as well as legal challenges, and their consultation exercise failed to give them the endorsement they had sought.
We have chosen a different route, but we fully recognize that it could well result in just the same outcome - if we as a village cannot agree on a way forward.
What we have done is put a lot of work into analysing the problems and assessing options and costing them. What we presented in the village newsletter is – as you will see - just a small summary of the work done.
The purpose of Thursday's meeting will be to present information to you in a straightforward way. It will not be a platform to allow individuals with strong views to press their own views. We want to provide you with as much information as we can so that you can make your own judgment. You will then be able to feed back your views to us in writing - either online using a link that will go live later this week, by email or by letter.
We realise that some of our proposals will be unpopular with those most directly affected – whether on Chorley Hall Lane or on Heyes Lane. We have already seen strong responses online. We understand that. We all want to be able to park our own cars easily, but none of us wants to give up space for a car park close to our own home.
Sadly some of the hostile responses online have also included personal attacks on Councillors. We hope you will join us in deploring this.
This is an important time for our village. If we cannot agree on a route forward then we must live with the consequences. Doing nothing is every bit as much a decision as doing something. There are drawbacks and challenges with each option open to us. We intend to spell these out clearly – including those relating to our own proposals.
In the event that you cannot make it to Thursday's presentation we shall on Friday be publishing a report setting out the work we have done and our findings. You will be able to download this from alderleyedge.com or the Council's website. A paper copy will also be available to read at Alderley Edge Library.
Please give us your responses. We need to hear from as many people as possible and you will be able to reach us either in writing (by email or letter), or online via the link from the Parish Council website.
We shall then compile the feedback and publish it so that everyone can see what has been said. (Please note that your feedback will be reported anonymously).
We shall present the views you have expressed at our second public meeting - on Thursday 11th February, also to be held at the Methodist Church.
Thanks and Best wishes
Mike Dudley-Jones
Alderley Edge Parish Council
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
One last go from Savill at just one strand of parallel initiatives to supplement the good stuff above.
That strand being lift sharing.
I believe that the PC team identified a hard core volume of vehicles parked in and around the village for the day. I am assuming employees / business owners.
Lets go wild and say 250 cars (I can't remember the exact figure from the survey).
Imagine if a proportion (not knowable what proportion at the moment as no source data - see below) could share a daily lift with another.
Demonstrated savings to an individual participating in such a scheme could play out as follows:
- Assuming a share of two people who would otherwise have a single occupancy journey
- Assume a avg distance of 10 miles each way
- Assume running cost of £0.25 per mile (designed to include wear and tear, fuel, depreciation etc)
- Assume initially no parking charge (parking on the roads somewhere)
- Assume shared costs or half and half use of cars between the two "sharers"
we get
(mileage x 2) = 20 * (cost per mile ) = 0.25 = £5 per day.
halve for shared cost = £2.50 per day = £50 per month
lets say 10 sharable months (assuming no mutual holiday dates etc) = £500 per year.
So the saving would be £500 each.
If you factor in a modest daily parking charge of £2.50 per day the saving rises to £750.00 per participant.
Non financial benefits:
- reduce emmisions by 40% (would be 50% but have factored in a 10-20% increase in distance due to picking up the second person)
- the non driver doesn't have the stress / frustrations of driving
- friendship / social element
on the negative side we often hear:
- less flexible start times, finish times and joint responsibility to get in on time and back on time.
- slightly extended journey time for driver (assuming there is some element of pick up and drop off)
- travelling to another place other than home straight from work not possible because of the passenger.
Though of course you still have your own car to use if particular days are not practical to share.
With the postcodes of the 250 employees who commute each day by car and a fairly simple algorithm showing possible car sharing nodes to show and demonstrate
a more accurate actual saving; factoring into the algorithm tolerances such as 1 mile radius of sharer nodes and % shared work start times / end times with a tolerance
of 30mins each way and you get to a number of possible car sharing commuters.
The "Alderley Edge village centric lift share scheme" (need a pithier title) web link would be born, promoted by the village for people who work in the village.
If you look at the commercial lift share sites and try and test Alderley Edge as a destination you will see that there isn't really a critical mass.
The beauty of a village specific solution is that it focuses on that one destination and could be promoted to all the businesses fairly easily.
There are of course employees who have awkward hours / home locations not near others for whom the above is irrelevant. Fair do's nothing here to help them.
I wouldn't mind seeing all those postcodes though and seeing what comes out!!
Just a thought.
I very much regret that a previous engagement will prevent me from attending the meeting on Thursday, but I do hope that the report on the meeting (on this website) reflects that attendees have conducted themselves with dignity and mutual respect, regardless of their views.
I look forward to reviewing the information which will be made available to people like me who are unable to attend the meeting, and to sharing my own views with the Parish Council. I encourage everyone to do the same. Consultations only work if those invited (i.e. the entire community) respond.
In addition to Jonathan Savill's excellent point above, I was thinking today of how much space could be available within walking distance of the village if residents were willing to consider renting out parking spaces in their vacant drives during the work day. Lots of people in Alderley Edge have very big drives which sit empty a lot of the time. The challenge, as always, will be to convince people to become part of the solution...
How is "our agreement" to be expressed and evaluated? Who are the "us?"
At the moment, responses to proposals are met with a mixture of rational argument and/or personal vitriol.
I fully understand Mr Duncan -Jones' wish to prevent Thursday's meeting becoming a shouting match and a stage for the more ebullient amongst us.
Following all the necessary consultation and promulgation, what next?
If a referendum is considered a suitable solution to the issue of this nation's economic and cultural future, do we not consider that such a procedure would be capable of giving our local leaders a clear, unambiguous indication of the village's wishes?
Unfortunately I am not available to attend the meeting due to work commitments but would like to say what a breath of fresh air the new parish council have been.
Whilst Mike has acknowledged that the plans made by the previous PC may come to fruition at least we all know that a full survey and consultation has been conducted rather than us all just being told 'this is what is happening'.
Best of luck to everyone on Thursday and let's hope it's the start of a great solution for the village.
Hopefully the PC are sufficiently open minded to see there are other options and approaches available than those proposed?
However, on carefully reading through what has been written, I notice that I have been granted a new name. The danger for me is that it might not be too long before I become Duncan-Smith or worse perhaps Duncan-Herald!!
Cheap, I know - but fun!!
Mike Dudley-Jones
By the way, I am extremely sorry about getting your name wrong.
So, having re-read my comments, I will avoid any ambiguity and ask the following:
Question1 If not at the meeting, for reasons which are well understood. "How is our opinion to be expressed and evaluated?"
Question 2. Who are the "us" and or "our?" I request that the "us/our" be defined as the council tax payers of Alderley Edge and no-else.
Question 3 Following the presentation of the information to the public, do our representatives intend taking measurable, recordable data of "us/our" (defined as above) opinion through a mechanism such as a referendum?
Thank you for your apology. It is appreciated - but really not necessary. Its normally Dudley-Moore!
If you read my letter carefully you will see that I have explained how you feedback to us - twice.
You will be able to see what everyone has written, with no exceptions, in the Feedback Document which will be published before the Thursday 11th February meeting. Some 'scoring' of responses will allow us all to see where opinions lie at a glance but you may be certain we will show it the way it is.
As elected Parish Councillors, we are here to represent the residents of our Village. So 'us' is the Village indirectly as any opinions expressed to us will be passed openly and transparently back to them as we act as a conduit for them. I hope that helps.
We will almost certainly need to 'explore' further the results of the feedback and it would be good to hear from someone like you if you wanted to join us in helping to reach the best possible route forward. You clearly have your own views on these matters so your help would be most welcome. If that might interest you please contact me through the parish website and you could join 'us'.
'Working parties' might work well then - but until we see where opinions lie it is a little early to say. Ultimately though, some form of vote or referendum will need to take place in the future otherwise there would be no mandate for any action.How far into the future of course, I cannot answer.
Some people have taken this as "this is what's going to happen" and are already sending out leaflets (re Chorley hall lane option).
Why not go through the process of consultation and make your feelings heard via the correct channels then see what happens?
you are worried that you might become Duncan-Herald. What a strange remark!
I've just read the remarks posted this evening; you are to greatly increase the 'tax' that you will get from the citizens of A.E. You are to indulge yourself with £10,000 to spend on a plan that you have been cautioned will very probably cost more and to no great benefit. You seem to be saying there that there won't actually be any car park.
I don't think you need to worry about being called Duncan-Herald. Try Scrooge. Or even Mike Promise-Breaker|/
Good Luck mate; you are going to need it.
Thank you for your post.
I have just read Duncan's post.
Mike DJ
"We are not issuing instructions, nor are we telling you how it must be." - then surely all views should be welcomed any taken on board?
Just a thought
I am including below my comments on the recent “parking proposals” published in the newsletter and on alderleyedge.com. I understand that more information will be presented at the meeting on the 14th, but as I am not able to attend that meeting I can only comment on what has been published. I would suggest that in future publication of all relevant information before such consultation meetings would help both the cause of openness and clarity. For example, some of my comments maybe redundant because of this additional information, but I have no idea. It has also been stated that there will be some sort of online survey. As of now I haven’t been able to locate such a survey, so I am emailing these comments to the PC as my formal response to the “parking proposals”.
The proposals outlined in the newsletter appear to be the answer to the question “which bit of land do we turn into a car park for 144 cars? “ Inevitably, this has caused a divide between those who want to save one bit of land over another, for whatever reason.
As has been pointed out many times on this site, this is not real the problem, and the question needs to be reframed into one about getting people and goods around the village. This would naturally bring into play other issues that need considering by any modern village as it seeks to provide a better place to live, work and play for villagers and visitors alike.
Instead of trying to solve the narrow problem of “where do I park my car so I walk the least distance?”, how about “How do we make Alderley Edge a better place for people to live, work and play? “ . No doubt, that will involve some cars and parking spaces, but maybe it might consider pollution, energy, safety, health and well being issues alongside the demands of cars.
I accept that enlightenment of the sort I suggest is unlikely despite the talents of the village and most people will just smile and put it in the too difficult box. Well, even if its just about parking then make sure all the relevant issues are considered and then offer a range of options with a recommendation if appropriate, rather than the current narrow approach wrapped in woolly words of democracy.
Surely any attempt at coming up with a parking solution needs to at a minimum:
- Demonstrate the requirements in terms of who needs to park where and when, from residents to school buses, from school runs to delivery vehicles, from workers to visitors and more
- Identify what current parking areas exist, with or without restrictions and the potential for new parking spaces from reallocation of use.
- Address current parking issues including:
• School buses and associated cars dropping off / picking kids up and causing traffic congestion
• Taxi and other cars parking on pavements and in “restricted” areas throughout the village
• The empty resident parking areas during the day
• Delivery and other vehicles loading and unloading in “restricted” areas
• Current parking tariffs and restrictions
- Look at viable options for new build car parks
- Investigate innovative schemes that reduce car park need eg
• Drive parking
• Shared electric vehicles/cycles
• Incentives for parking and walking
In terms of the specific proposals re Heyes Lane and Chorley Hall Lane then they would seem both to be expensive and its unclear how they would be funded and where risk might lie. Given the way the Festival Hall / Medical Centre has gone in terms of finance; I wonder if the PC really wants to get into the car park business. One point I still haven’t worked out – why is now ok to build on the allotments (I know part) when before it was supposedly not legal.
In conclusion, I am against the “parking proposals” on the grounds both that they are a solution to the wrong problem and that they will reduce the amount of valuable green space in the village, irrespective of who is the current beneficiary …. football players , kids or allotment holders.
Best regards
Vin
Thank you for the reply. My issue is that whilst anybody can comment to you through any number of channels, the collective view of council tax payers will never be considered in the round. Individual comments can be recorded as I am sure you may be doing. However, in my view and it may be that I am the only one with this view, a single community statement determined by ballot should be the primary, if not the only way of providing our representatives with the village's choice.
My way ahead would be give us the options and let us vote.
One group of village users that you have omitted are the disabled. There are very few spaces available in the village (5 I think, 3 at Waitrose and 2 by the Library) People have told me that they frequently cannot park and have to take their business to Wilmslow and other places.
Heyes Lane proposal maintains a "green lung", somewhat reduced, but what many people wanted to see. Congratulations and thanks to the people who have put in the work, and so much better than simply wanting to "put up a parking lot."
It would effect 7 plots on Heyes lane, and yes I'm the chairman of AEAGS. I've never hidden that, I don't feel the need to put my voluntary job title after every post. I usually do if it an official society comment.
Regards
Fen
Apologies , Yes the disabled are a group that needs taking care of ... and there are probably others , my point was that we need to understand the totality of the need before jumping to solutions. Guess would help also if able bodied people didn't park or block disabled slots as well
best
Vin