Chorley Hall Lane will be closed from from the junction with Blackshaw Lane to the junction with Carlisle Street on Monday, 25th September.
The closure is to enable an investigation to be carried out into the bridge structure and road surface, in preparation for the footpath widening and introduction of a one-way system between Greenlands Walk and Carlisle Street.
Councillor Craig Browne said "The attached diagrams show the proposed method of extending the footpath, permanently closing off a section of footpath using polymer lane separators with reflective strips bolted into the road surface.
"There will be a formal public consultation on this scheme, later in the year."
Pedestrian access to any premises situated within the temporary closure will be maintained at all times and access for emergency vehicles and residents will be maintained where possible.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Is the bridge really that dangerous that other "traffic calming" measures can't be utilised.
This just seems like its pushing a small problem into another location to create a bigger problem.
Thank you for your comments. The results of the assessments were published via this website earlier this year and you can follow the links here:
http://bit.ly/2fbtxVx
http://bit.ly/2xwPnx9
Further assessment work will be carried out on Monday and the results of that will be published in due course.
The proposal is then to launch a formal public consultation before the end of October.
Kind regards,
Craig
Many thanks for the update.
May I ask what time of the day the traffic assessments were conducted? Although the numbers up and down CHL are similar, one of my concerns would be the amount of traffic diverted at school drop off and pick up times. Was a time of day study undertaken? Apologies if I missed this detail but I think it's critical to the viability of the proposal.
I also believe the creation of one way traffic will increase speeds over a blind bridge into the village. Despite the pavement being narrow, I understand there have been no reported accidents on the bridge? On the contrary, the relationship between increased speed (over the bridge) and traffic (through the village) and accidents is well documented.
I hope we are not addressing a small issue to only create real problems elsewhere.
May I take this opportunity to thank you and the Parish Council for your hard work and transparency. I hope miserable gits like me aren't grinding you down!
Thanks for your question.
The assessment was done electronically and covered 24/7 for a period of one week. If you would like to drop me an email (), I can send you the charts illustrating the exact details of which hours recorded the heaviest volumes of traffic, as well as the numbers of each classification of vehicle (unfortunately it is not possible to attach the data via this forum).
Could I also add that the creation of the additional on-street parking spaces (on the redundant carriageway) will have the impact of reducing the width of the driveable road surface and that this in itself is expected to result in reduced vehicle speeds. I would also say that, unlike laying tarmac over green spaces (for example, allotment, parkland or sports field) the materials proposed mean that this project will be reversible, should it not work out.
Many thanks, again, for your comment.
Kind regards,
Craig
The survey/assessment was carried out between 22nd - 29th March, whereas Easter Sunday was 16th April.
I have checked back to look at the holiday dates for our local schools, which were as follows:
AECPS - 1st to 17th April
AES4G - 5th to 23rd April
Ryleys - 1st to 17th April
The assessment dates were carefully chosen to coincide with the schools being in, in order to ensure a representative survey.
Kind regards,
Craig
I appreciate the work you put in on these issues. I note you say that "just under 100 residents replied to the survey". That was in an article on this website on 7 March 2017. I don't think the survey can therefore have been carried out on the dates you state above i.e. "The survey/assessment was carried out between 22nd - 29th March, whereas Easter Sunday was 16th April". Have I misunderstood please?
I wasn't aware there was a survey, who was asked to reply please?
Surely less than 100 people (0.02% of the Alderley Edge population) is not representative. Only 0.01% of the population (61% of the survey) thought a one way system was a solution to the problem. Therefore 99.99% were either against that solution, or didn't have an opinion / were not asked.
Finally you say that the measures are reversible. I think it will be very difficult to remove "the new on street car spaces" from Chorley Hall Lane once they are in position. Can you imagine the comments once the headline "X number of car spaces to be scraped"
There are only two streets allowing East - West travel in Alderley Edge, Chorley Hall Lane and Ryleys Lane. Making one of them one way, is surely not the solution to this problem.
Thanks for your comments.
Just to clarify, in early February I door-knocked every resident of Chorley Hall Lane and gave them a letter which included a link to an online survey. It is the results of this survey that were published on 7th March.
The residents survey was followed up with a traffic survey, which was carried out by CE Highways between 22nd - 29th March. The results of this survey were published in early April.
So, there were in fact two surveys. I hope this helps to clear up any confusion.
Best regards,
Craig
So just less than 99% of the Alderley Edge population were either against that solution, or didn't have an opinion / were not asked.
As the proposal impacts the whole of Alderley Edge I thought perhaps a wider survey would have been more appropriate. I appreciate it shouldn't be left to Craig to deliver surveys to the whole of Alderley Edge.
Thanks both for your contributions to the discussion.
I set up the initial survey, because I wanted to establish whether there was any support for the proposal from the residents who would be most affected (i.e. those living on Chorley Hall Lane & Greenlands Walk). The stats were roughly 60% in favour, 30% against and 10% undecided. Had there not been a majority view in favour, then I would not have sought to progress the scheme any further; but as there was, then I felt a responsibility to do so.
I wholly accept that residents in other streets/parts of the village may be impacted upon, but the plan has always been that these residents would have an opportunity to have their say during the formal consultation, which CE Highways expect to carry out in late October or early November. I always try to act in the best interests of as many residents as possible, albeit with the extremely limited resources made available to me by CEC.
Best regards,
Craig