Cheshire East Council is to press ahead with two key walking and cycling routes – to encourage people to leave their cars on the drive and get healthier.
One route will be created in Wilmslow with the other in the Leighton area of Crewe.
In Wilmslow, the new 2.1km route will link the railway station with the town centre, Wilmslow High School, the Royal London campus and Alderley Park. Construction could begin as early as the autumn.
Councillor Laura Crane, Cheshire East Council's cabinet member for highways and waste, said: "Our ambition is to improve walking and cycling facilities across the borough by investing in high-quality infrastructure to provide safe and attractive routes connecting local amenities and places of work.
"Our 2017 cycling strategy sets a target to double the number of people cycling at least once per week by 2027. If there is one upside from the pandemic, it is that more people have taken up cycling, either to commute to work or for leisure."
Council deputy leader Councillor Craig Browne said: "As a council we recognise that traffic congestion and parking provision are significant issues in Wilmslow. One of the ways in which we are seeking to address both is by managing demand for car journeys.
"Where possible, we want to encourage residents and businesses to choose alternative modes of travel and this scheme is one of the ways in which we can make it safer for them to do that."
The consultation on the proposed Wilmslow walking and cycling route scheme is open until 24 July. To take part visit the council's website.
The council has set a budget of £2.8m for both schemes and has £1.6m in grant funding confirmed from Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership. Developer contributions and funding from the council will be required to meet the balance.
Discussions are taking place with some landowners and the council is hopeful of acquiring all the land required without the need to compulsorily purchase. A community consultation is ongoing for the Wilmslow scheme, while the A530 scheme in Crewe has already received positive feedback from a consultation carried out in 2019.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
1.30488 miles,
I think 2.8m would be better spent on the repairing potholes on our roads.
The budget for both parts is around £750,000. However, the grant Cheshire East is getting for this must be spent on cycling and walking, so it cannot be diverted into other areas.
This consultation process now underway to find people’s views on the plans. Therefore, if enough people in Wilmslow object then I am sure Cheshire East will have no shortage of other towns who will happily want the money spent on them instead.
However, I am confident that the vast majority of Wilmslow’s residents will welcome this scheme and that after decades of seeing the town starved of funds by the Conservative controlled Cheshire East, they will be very pleased to see some of it is finally returning to our town.
Mark Goldsmith
Residents of Wilmslow
Wilmslow West & Chorley ward, Cheshire East & WTC
For the extortionate cost of producing cycle tracks - past and planned - may I respectfully suggest that it is made an offence for cyclist to ride on the road where a cycle track is available? Those who don’t are simply increasing the danger to other road users as well as their self indulgent selves. Don’t get me wrong - I love cyclist - they have beautiful bottoms. But some of them seem to keep their brains in there too! No offence intended.
You wouldn't know it from the behavior of a minority of motorists and the attitudes displayed by some posting here, but cyclists have as much legal right to use the road as does a car and probably have a taxed and insured and MOTed car sitting on their drive at home not causing traffic congestion or pollution. If you find yourself sitting in your car stuck in traffic, reflect on the fact that YOU are part of that traffic.
It's a pity that the foot/cycle path through the tunnels on the A538 Altrincham Road and up the hill to Morley (Green) is not continued at least as far as the Waters roundabout.
You take your life in your hands trying to walk round the bends from the Honey Bee to get past Waters. And if you're on a bike the traffic has to stay behind you through this section.
Surely Waters ought to have coughed up for such an extension to the path when they got their planning consent ? Doesn't National Trust own the land on the north side of Altrincham Road at this point ?
The council make no attempt to manage or enforce a standard. In this way they allow their (our) assets to be degraded. In some cases, it is clear to see that repairs have been made properly - therefore asking the question, why not in others. The cost of rebuilding massively outways the cost of enforcing a standard. That extra cost wastes resources.
If a contractor repaired your own house in such a slap dash manner, I suspect trading standards would be alerted. But trading standards doesn't appear to put its own house in order. That is because it is someone elses money!
There is a little-known, quieter route direct from Mobberley Road through to the cycle route on Altrincham Road which comes out past Waters. It is much safer and obviously quieter.
Turn left after the Texaco garage, as you cycle out of Wilmslow, then turn right towards the farm. This takes you along a quiet, country lane and comes out on Altrincham Road just where the cycle lane starts.
@Mark Goldsmith - Residents of Wilmslow
Thank you for your comments, mainly: "This consultation process now underway to find people’s views on the plans. Therefore, if enough people in Wilmslow object then I am sure Cheshire East will have no shortage of other towns who will happily want the money spent on them instead."
I'm sure we all want the funds spent in Wilmslow and, as a new cyclist I welcome town centre cycle lanes with open arms so I don't need to take the car. I'm certainly looking forward to having a beautiful bottom!!!!
It is only right that they are subject to the rules applied to any other road user.
They should be treated equally.
But why should motorists be more closely regulated than cyclists? Why should children be allowed to cycle but not drive motor vehicles? Because motor vehicles are potential killing machines, bicycles are machines on which you can potentially get killed.
Cars have crumple zones, seat belts, air bags etc to protect the occupants in the event of an accident. Cyclists have none of this, nor the 'road presence' of a car so are only too aware of their vulnerability on the road. This leads to cyclists 'self policing'. Act like a d*ck in a car, you'll potentially kill someone. Act like a d*ck on a bicycle, there's a good chance you'll get yourself killed.
Some countries have introduced cycle registration schemes in the past (notably, not countries like Denmark and the Netherlands which have a strong cycling culture), but nearly all have since been dropped, like dog licencing in UK, as being uneconomic and ultimately, pointless. Would it be applied to child cyclists? To horse riders? To pedestrians? One thing compulsory bicycle registration would do is discourage people from cycling, which would be a bad thing for the environment and for personal health. Hopefully, in these more 'aware' times, that is not the direction we wish to go.
The question to me is what is the aim? Is this to help people get to work from the station? Or is it to encourage people to use bikes more for recreational use?
If it is the former, then it seems aimed primarily at people who work at Royal London and come to work by train. So, I guess the hope is that once RL moves to Alderley Park they will use their bikes to get to AP, instead of their cars. I suppose that is a mildly interesting little muse?
Or, if it's to encourage recreational use, then I think the idea lacks ambition - essentially all it does is provide the new section on Alderley Rd, which I accept is good. So, how about improving access to the top end of Alderley Rd to more Wilmslow residents?
However, your wait may be longer to see a cyclist jump a red light than to see a car exceed the speed limit. And I need hardly point out (as I implied in my post) that a cyclist jumping a red light may well pay for it with his / her life, while a speeding motorist might take a life (even small increases in speed significantly extend stopping distances).
I do agree, however, that public transport in UK is woefully underfunded (outside London).
I agree there is no point perpetrating such nonsense, but there is much merit for the environment and personal health in instigating segregated and properly maintained cycle tracks.
The answer is significant investment in segregated cycle ways where bikes and vehicles don't meet. It's a huge up-front cost but it will be paid back many times over in health and environmental benefit
The model for this is Holland where, for many years, no road has been built without a parallel, separated cycle path. No coincidence that the Dutch are one of the healthiest nations in Europe and suffer the least amount of traffic congestion in their towns and villages.
In my view the proposed scheme has a serious flaw in that it doesn't properly connect Alderley Edge village and thereby excludes (among others) hundreds of school children from the benefits of cycling to school - with the consequent reduction in school-run traffic and effects on parking.
The section that is to Alderley park feels more singular and less useful at a broader town level and would not be my choice - but good to hear re. wilmslow to handforth.
I think most peoples points here are that there are different areas worth investment to improve walking and cycling in wilmslow; the general state of the roads as mentioned but also cliff road is very dangerous and if this budget is to aid walking, then it could be used to make that less dangerous.
I found Mark Gs info useful but I wasnt sure what was meant by this comment? .... 'This consultation process now underway to find people’s views on the plans. Therefore, if enough people in Wilmslow object then I am sure Cheshire East will have no shortage of other towns who will happily want the money spent on them instead' .... it is written to infer people are being ungrateful? That to have an opinion different to the proposed plan is not cool?
Anyways my thoughts is its a nice plan but i think there are more urgent areas in this town where we know there is an issue that require being made safe more than a link to a business park where there is no real evidence it will be used.