A641 Improvement Scheme

Share A641 Improvement Scheme on Facebook Share A641 Improvement Scheme on Twitter Share A641 Improvement Scheme on Linkedin Email A641 Improvement Scheme link

This engagement has now closed, thank you for taking part.


July 2024 Update

As of July 2024, the scope of this project has been reduced. Calderdale Council will deliver the aspects of the proposals within Calderdale only.

Bradford Council and Kirklees Council remain committed to delivering aspects of the proposals within their boundaries.

Following the consultation that ran from November 2022 to January 2023, Calderdale Council have made changes to the proposals. The changes include:

  • Removing the proposal for a segregated cycle lane along Bradford Road between Bailiff Bridge and Bonegate junction.
  • Removing the proposal for a cycle lane on Armytage Road and Huntingdon Road.
  • Revising proposals for the area next to Brighouse Station.
  • Removing the Community Street improvement areas.

What’s next?

  • The project team will soon start working on the detailed design for the scheme so that the Final Business Case (FBC) for the scheme can be developed. If this is approved by the Combined Authority, Calderdale Council will receive funding for construction.
  • Prior to FBC submission, in summer 2025, Calderdale Council will engage with you on their more detailed plans for the scheme.
  • Subject to approvals, work is planned to start on site in 2026.

The information below was shared during our consultation on this scheme from the 28th November 2022 to 6th January 2023. Please note that this information is now out of date. This includes the documents that were available during the consultation. Please visit Calderdale The Next Chapter for updates.

Calderdale, Kirklees and Bradford councils are working with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to improve the A641 between Bradford, Brighouse and Huddersfield. 

A video has been produced to explain the different proposals in the scheme:


There are a number of transport related issues in this area. These include congestion (especially around Brighouse), poor air quality and the lack of safe and attractive facilities for people walking, wheeling (wheelchairs, scooters, pushchairs and mobility aids) or cycling.  

The scheme supports local businesses, fairer, healthier communities, and less pollution. People will be able to make more active choices for local journeys. Better transport connections will help make the area a greater place to live, work, learn and visit. 

Our proposals

The proposed interventions seek to provide better connections, better access and better places for communities and all users of the A641.  

The schemes have been developed to reflect your feedback from the last consultation in 2021, and you can read about how we’ve responded to your feedback in the You Said, We Did document.

The proposals include: 

  • New crossing facilities and easier access to greenways for people walking or wheeling 

  • Widening, access and surface improvements to off-road paths and new on-road cycle routes for people choosing to cycle 

  • New bus lanes and bus priority measures to improve bus journey times and reliability 

  • An enhanced arrival experience and better access to Brighouse Rail Station 

  • Signalisation and layout changes to junctions to improve safety and crossings  

  • A new river crossing in Brighouse 

  • Enhancement to local community areas near to schools to create safe and healthy street environments, which work well for people of all ages to walk, cycle, rest and play. 

For the purpose of this consultation the corridor has been split into five areas: 

Community Street improvement areas

As part of the scheme, we are developing plans for two Community Street improvement areas to reduce traffic and build safe and healthy environments for people of all ages to walk, cycle, rest and play. One around Shirley Manor Academy in Wyke and the second around St Andrew's Junior School in Brighouse.

We would like ideas from local people to help shape these schemes which is why we’ve created a Commonplace Community Map for each area. These are interactive maps of the local area; you can add your comments and feedback on the maps. The map links below will open a new page.


July 2024 Update

As of July 2024, the scope of this project has been reduced. Calderdale Council will deliver the aspects of the proposals within Calderdale only.

Bradford Council and Kirklees Council remain committed to delivering aspects of the proposals within their boundaries.

Following the consultation that ran from November 2022 to January 2023, Calderdale Council have made changes to the proposals. The changes include:

  • Removing the proposal for a segregated cycle lane along Bradford Road between Bailiff Bridge and Bonegate junction.
  • Removing the proposal for a cycle lane on Armytage Road and Huntingdon Road.
  • Revising proposals for the area next to Brighouse Station.
  • Removing the Community Street improvement areas.

What’s next?

  • The project team will soon start working on the detailed design for the scheme so that the Final Business Case (FBC) for the scheme can be developed. If this is approved by the Combined Authority, Calderdale Council will receive funding for construction.
  • Prior to FBC submission, in summer 2025, Calderdale Council will engage with you on their more detailed plans for the scheme.
  • Subject to approvals, work is planned to start on site in 2026.

The information below was shared during our consultation on this scheme from the 28th November 2022 to 6th January 2023. Please note that this information is now out of date. This includes the documents that were available during the consultation. Please visit Calderdale The Next Chapter for updates.

Calderdale, Kirklees and Bradford councils are working with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to improve the A641 between Bradford, Brighouse and Huddersfield. 

A video has been produced to explain the different proposals in the scheme:


There are a number of transport related issues in this area. These include congestion (especially around Brighouse), poor air quality and the lack of safe and attractive facilities for people walking, wheeling (wheelchairs, scooters, pushchairs and mobility aids) or cycling.  

The scheme supports local businesses, fairer, healthier communities, and less pollution. People will be able to make more active choices for local journeys. Better transport connections will help make the area a greater place to live, work, learn and visit. 

Our proposals

The proposed interventions seek to provide better connections, better access and better places for communities and all users of the A641.  

The schemes have been developed to reflect your feedback from the last consultation in 2021, and you can read about how we’ve responded to your feedback in the You Said, We Did document.

The proposals include: 

  • New crossing facilities and easier access to greenways for people walking or wheeling 

  • Widening, access and surface improvements to off-road paths and new on-road cycle routes for people choosing to cycle 

  • New bus lanes and bus priority measures to improve bus journey times and reliability 

  • An enhanced arrival experience and better access to Brighouse Rail Station 

  • Signalisation and layout changes to junctions to improve safety and crossings  

  • A new river crossing in Brighouse 

  • Enhancement to local community areas near to schools to create safe and healthy street environments, which work well for people of all ages to walk, cycle, rest and play. 

For the purpose of this consultation the corridor has been split into five areas: 

Community Street improvement areas

As part of the scheme, we are developing plans for two Community Street improvement areas to reduce traffic and build safe and healthy environments for people of all ages to walk, cycle, rest and play. One around Shirley Manor Academy in Wyke and the second around St Andrew's Junior School in Brighouse.

We would like ideas from local people to help shape these schemes which is why we’ve created a Commonplace Community Map for each area. These are interactive maps of the local area; you can add your comments and feedback on the maps. The map links below will open a new page.

This engagement has now closed, thank you for taking part.

If you have any questions, please let us know below.

Please note, your username and question will be visible to others, so please don't include any personal details.


  • Share D2: Daisy Road (section D) the quiet route to Woodhouse. The proposed route is through someones garden (Stratton Close) and an unadopted road (Crossley street) the purchase of the land and cost of subsequent legal challenges will cost the tax payer a lot of unecessery costs, disruption and time when there is already a perfectly adequate public footpath already there, from Lords Lane to the top of Stratton Park with spare land to add other fetures to make the area better for all locals? on Facebook Share D2: Daisy Road (section D) the quiet route to Woodhouse. The proposed route is through someones garden (Stratton Close) and an unadopted road (Crossley street) the purchase of the land and cost of subsequent legal challenges will cost the tax payer a lot of unecessery costs, disruption and time when there is already a perfectly adequate public footpath already there, from Lords Lane to the top of Stratton Park with spare land to add other fetures to make the area better for all locals? on Twitter Share D2: Daisy Road (section D) the quiet route to Woodhouse. The proposed route is through someones garden (Stratton Close) and an unadopted road (Crossley street) the purchase of the land and cost of subsequent legal challenges will cost the tax payer a lot of unecessery costs, disruption and time when there is already a perfectly adequate public footpath already there, from Lords Lane to the top of Stratton Park with spare land to add other fetures to make the area better for all locals? on Linkedin Email D2: Daisy Road (section D) the quiet route to Woodhouse. The proposed route is through someones garden (Stratton Close) and an unadopted road (Crossley street) the purchase of the land and cost of subsequent legal challenges will cost the tax payer a lot of unecessery costs, disruption and time when there is already a perfectly adequate public footpath already there, from Lords Lane to the top of Stratton Park with spare land to add other fetures to make the area better for all locals? link

    D2: Daisy Road (section D) the quiet route to Woodhouse. The proposed route is through someones garden (Stratton Close) and an unadopted road (Crossley street) the purchase of the land and cost of subsequent legal challenges will cost the tax payer a lot of unecessery costs, disruption and time when there is already a perfectly adequate public footpath already there, from Lords Lane to the top of Stratton Park with spare land to add other fetures to make the area better for all locals?

    Local Residant asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your feedback.

    The proposals for the A641 have been developed to deliver a more efficient transport network; prioritise walking, wheeling (e.g. bike, wheelchairs, prams), cycling and public transport; make sure communities are better connected; improve safety and create better quality places to support Calderdale Council's priorities whilst also contributing to Calderdale’s response to the Climate Emergency.

    The proposed quiet roads identified throughout the scheme designs will not be open as a through route for vehicles. As part of the A641 scheme it is proposed that quiet roads are routes for people walking, wheeling (wheelchairs, scooters, pushchairs and mobility aids) and cycling only, opening up these routes for people that don't wish to use the proposed new facilities to travel on the A641 highway, and encouraging those less confident and families to use more active modes of travel by providing high quality facilities to do so.

    Since the time of the engagement in December the project team have been looking at potential options to improve the current designs in response to some of the feedback we have received from members of the public. Further options for alternative routes are being considered and any individual land owners impacted will be contacted once these designs have been further developed. There will also be further public consultation at the next stage of design where proposed design changes will be shared.
  • Share Area D2 Daisy Road, the Quiet route to woodhouse, Why would you want to use this route when there already is a public footpath that connects the top of Stratton Park to Lords Lane, surley using this would be the better option, there is also plenty of land there which could be made into a really nice area with a public footpath already in place? on Facebook Share Area D2 Daisy Road, the Quiet route to woodhouse, Why would you want to use this route when there already is a public footpath that connects the top of Stratton Park to Lords Lane, surley using this would be the better option, there is also plenty of land there which could be made into a really nice area with a public footpath already in place? on Twitter Share Area D2 Daisy Road, the Quiet route to woodhouse, Why would you want to use this route when there already is a public footpath that connects the top of Stratton Park to Lords Lane, surley using this would be the better option, there is also plenty of land there which could be made into a really nice area with a public footpath already in place? on Linkedin Email Area D2 Daisy Road, the Quiet route to woodhouse, Why would you want to use this route when there already is a public footpath that connects the top of Stratton Park to Lords Lane, surley using this would be the better option, there is also plenty of land there which could be made into a really nice area with a public footpath already in place? link

    Area D2 Daisy Road, the Quiet route to woodhouse, Why would you want to use this route when there already is a public footpath that connects the top of Stratton Park to Lords Lane, surley using this would be the better option, there is also plenty of land there which could be made into a really nice area with a public footpath already in place?

    local Chap asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your feedback.

    The proposals for the A641 have been developed to deliver a more efficient transport network; prioritise walking, wheeling (e.g. bike, wheelchairs, prams), cycling and public transport; make sure communities are better connected; improve safety and create better quality places to support Calderdale Council's priorities whilst also contributing to Calderdale’s response to the Climate Emergency.

    The proposed quiet roads identified throughout the scheme designs will not be open as a through route for vehicles. As part of the A641 scheme it is proposed that quiet roads are routes for people walking, wheeling (wheelchairs, scooters, pushchairs and mobility aids) and cycling only, opening up these routes for people that don't wish to use the proposed new facilities to travel on the A641 highway, and encouraging those less confident and families to use more active modes of travel by providing high quality facilities to do so.

    Since the time of the engagement in December the project team have been looking at potential options to improve the current designs in response to some of the feedback we have received from members of the public. Further options for alternative routes are being considered and any individual land owners impacted will be contacted once these designs have been further developed. There will also be further public consultation at the next stage of design where proposed design changes will be shared.
  • Share Changes on Fartown junction will creat chaos, amount of traffic passes from this junction require better flow,but when you will put restrictions on turning it will bring more stress, road rage,chaos,even longer blockage of traffic which will not be environmental friendly. on Facebook Share Changes on Fartown junction will creat chaos, amount of traffic passes from this junction require better flow,but when you will put restrictions on turning it will bring more stress, road rage,chaos,even longer blockage of traffic which will not be environmental friendly. on Twitter Share Changes on Fartown junction will creat chaos, amount of traffic passes from this junction require better flow,but when you will put restrictions on turning it will bring more stress, road rage,chaos,even longer blockage of traffic which will not be environmental friendly. on Linkedin Email Changes on Fartown junction will creat chaos, amount of traffic passes from this junction require better flow,but when you will put restrictions on turning it will bring more stress, road rage,chaos,even longer blockage of traffic which will not be environmental friendly. link

    Changes on Fartown junction will creat chaos, amount of traffic passes from this junction require better flow,but when you will put restrictions on turning it will bring more stress, road rage,chaos,even longer blockage of traffic which will not be environmental friendly.

    UFQ777 asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to feed back to us your concerns about the A641 Improvement Scheme.

    The proposal to remove the left turn into Spaines Road was included as part of the A641 scheme due to the low traffic numbers making the movement, figures which traffic surveys have identified.  Removing this left turn allows for the carriageway width to be reduced. This will improve the crossing facilities for pedestrians as the crossing distance is much shorter. Less than 30 vehicles per hour were observed to turn left in to Spaines Road in both peak hours. These low numbers of vehicles will re-distribute across a number of alternative routes with the main one being up Halifax Old Road.

    There will be further opportunities to feed back on the A641 improvement scheme proposals as part of the statutory consultation taking place later in the project. 
    Advertisement of this consultation will be released via Calderdale Council Social Media & Calderdale Next Chapter website: calderdalenextchapter.co.uk, there will be a press release and advertisements in the local paper, on posters along A641 and surrounding areas as well as other advertisement methods.
  • Share Hi, I would like some clarity on the "quiet road" highlighted as part of D2. I am a resident of Crossley Street with young children who at the moment are safe to play in my front garden away from traffic due to the fact it is a dead end. The section of Crossley St outside our property is actually owned by ourselves and is highlighted on our deeds as part of our land. I also find it appauling that there has not even been a letter drop to notify residents and that there has been an assumption that all residents have social media and or internet access. on Facebook Share Hi, I would like some clarity on the "quiet road" highlighted as part of D2. I am a resident of Crossley Street with young children who at the moment are safe to play in my front garden away from traffic due to the fact it is a dead end. The section of Crossley St outside our property is actually owned by ourselves and is highlighted on our deeds as part of our land. I also find it appauling that there has not even been a letter drop to notify residents and that there has been an assumption that all residents have social media and or internet access. on Twitter Share Hi, I would like some clarity on the "quiet road" highlighted as part of D2. I am a resident of Crossley Street with young children who at the moment are safe to play in my front garden away from traffic due to the fact it is a dead end. The section of Crossley St outside our property is actually owned by ourselves and is highlighted on our deeds as part of our land. I also find it appauling that there has not even been a letter drop to notify residents and that there has been an assumption that all residents have social media and or internet access. on Linkedin Email Hi, I would like some clarity on the "quiet road" highlighted as part of D2. I am a resident of Crossley Street with young children who at the moment are safe to play in my front garden away from traffic due to the fact it is a dead end. The section of Crossley St outside our property is actually owned by ourselves and is highlighted on our deeds as part of our land. I also find it appauling that there has not even been a letter drop to notify residents and that there has been an assumption that all residents have social media and or internet access. link

    Hi, I would like some clarity on the "quiet road" highlighted as part of D2. I am a resident of Crossley Street with young children who at the moment are safe to play in my front garden away from traffic due to the fact it is a dead end. The section of Crossley St outside our property is actually owned by ourselves and is highlighted on our deeds as part of our land. I also find it appauling that there has not even been a letter drop to notify residents and that there has been an assumption that all residents have social media and or internet access.

    Bradley Midgley asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your feedback. We can confirm that there was a leaflet drop on 30th November 2022 to provide information to all those within the vicinity of the A641 improvement scheme proposals. We can also confirm that Lords Lane, Crossley Street and Stratton Close were all included within the drop area. We have spoken to the team members who delivered within this particular area, and they have confirmed that all properties were included, as if the proposals are taken forward, they would directly impact these areas. However, it is apparent that you did not receive the leaflet, so please accept our apologies for this.

    With regard to your comment about land ownership, the feedback from public engagement activities such as this one is being considered before we can identify a preferred detailed design for the scheme. As design options have not yet been confirmed, we have not directly contacted all landowners who may be affected. However, it is the intention of the project team to contact landowners who may be affected once a more detailed design has been developed and prior to the submission of any planning applications that may be required to discuss implications, concerns and opportunities. 

    Finally, we note your concerns about the presence of vehicles outside your property. If the proposed quiet road between Lords Lane and Stratton Close is taken forward, we can assure you that it is not intended to operate as a public through route for motor vehicles. What we are proposing is that it would operate as a public through route for people walking, wheeling (wheelchairs, scooters, pushchairs, and mobility aids) and cycling. The intention is to provide an alternative route for these road users to have direct access to Brighouse and to encourage those who are less confident and families to use more active modes of travel.

  • Share Will you answer my last question? Thank you, West Yorkshire Authority, which works under the direction of directly elected Councillors, MP's, and Mayors for asnwering my other question about the DFT ownership of the Huddersfield Car Park Development consultation. I was asking about if Local Businesses will be given priority tether in the event of any public money being handed out to contractors in order to complete the construction and instalation of the site, instead of large PFI companies? Local workers should be given priority, alongside SME construction firms based in Yorkshire. Regards, The Youngest Parish Councillor in West Yorkshire. on Facebook Share Will you answer my last question? Thank you, West Yorkshire Authority, which works under the direction of directly elected Councillors, MP's, and Mayors for asnwering my other question about the DFT ownership of the Huddersfield Car Park Development consultation. I was asking about if Local Businesses will be given priority tether in the event of any public money being handed out to contractors in order to complete the construction and instalation of the site, instead of large PFI companies? Local workers should be given priority, alongside SME construction firms based in Yorkshire. Regards, The Youngest Parish Councillor in West Yorkshire. on Twitter Share Will you answer my last question? Thank you, West Yorkshire Authority, which works under the direction of directly elected Councillors, MP's, and Mayors for asnwering my other question about the DFT ownership of the Huddersfield Car Park Development consultation. I was asking about if Local Businesses will be given priority tether in the event of any public money being handed out to contractors in order to complete the construction and instalation of the site, instead of large PFI companies? Local workers should be given priority, alongside SME construction firms based in Yorkshire. Regards, The Youngest Parish Councillor in West Yorkshire. on Linkedin Email Will you answer my last question? Thank you, West Yorkshire Authority, which works under the direction of directly elected Councillors, MP's, and Mayors for asnwering my other question about the DFT ownership of the Huddersfield Car Park Development consultation. I was asking about if Local Businesses will be given priority tether in the event of any public money being handed out to contractors in order to complete the construction and instalation of the site, instead of large PFI companies? Local workers should be given priority, alongside SME construction firms based in Yorkshire. Regards, The Youngest Parish Councillor in West Yorkshire. link

    Will you answer my last question? Thank you, West Yorkshire Authority, which works under the direction of directly elected Councillors, MP's, and Mayors for asnwering my other question about the DFT ownership of the Huddersfield Car Park Development consultation. I was asking about if Local Businesses will be given priority tether in the event of any public money being handed out to contractors in order to complete the construction and instalation of the site, instead of large PFI companies? Local workers should be given priority, alongside SME construction firms based in Yorkshire. Regards, The Youngest Parish Councillor in West Yorkshire.

    NoT_HaroldWilson asked over 2 years ago
    Thank your enquiry.  We apologise for the delay in our reply, we’ve received lots of questions and our team is working hard to respond to them all.

    Protecting the Natural Environment is a key strategic driver for the A641 and new tree planting is proposed along the A641 corridor; We are also resolute that every effort will be made to retain existing trees along the route.  Wildflower and species rich grassland will be introduced where possible to bring biodiversity, sustainability and colour into the scheme.

    In respect to your query about local businesses, the A641 project team are committed to ensuring the scheme directly benefits from local skills and boosts employment and growth.  We will work with local and regional partners, including the district procurement teams, to create suitable opportunities to engage with local trades to inform them about upcoming work so they can prepare in advance to maximise opportunities.  We have contracted to deliver a series of ‘Meet the Buyer’ events for local businesses to stimulate access to local procurement and the A641 project team will shape smaller packages of work, where reasonably practical, to make it more be accessible to smaller local businesses to benefit communities within the local economy.  We thank you for your interest and we welcome any thoughts and ideas you might have to help us achieve our ambition. 

    Calderdale Council also work with their partner Go4Growth who offer opportunities to SMEs and VCSE sector to better develop their skills in bidding for public sector business, and their support and events are provided to businesses free of charge. The support includes 121, masterclasses and workshops.
  • Share Where exactly do you expect people to park their cars in and around Brighouse? You do understand that many residential roads and streets were built in an age when people did not own cars and they therefore do not have driveways on which to park their cars. They need to park on the roads. This obsession with making "relaxing spaces" all in the name of saving the environment is not only impractical but will drive trade away from our lovely town (Brighouse). Why don't you put all this money into improving roads, building car parks and planting trees on green belt instead of building more houses!! on Facebook Share Where exactly do you expect people to park their cars in and around Brighouse? You do understand that many residential roads and streets were built in an age when people did not own cars and they therefore do not have driveways on which to park their cars. They need to park on the roads. This obsession with making "relaxing spaces" all in the name of saving the environment is not only impractical but will drive trade away from our lovely town (Brighouse). Why don't you put all this money into improving roads, building car parks and planting trees on green belt instead of building more houses!! on Twitter Share Where exactly do you expect people to park their cars in and around Brighouse? You do understand that many residential roads and streets were built in an age when people did not own cars and they therefore do not have driveways on which to park their cars. They need to park on the roads. This obsession with making "relaxing spaces" all in the name of saving the environment is not only impractical but will drive trade away from our lovely town (Brighouse). Why don't you put all this money into improving roads, building car parks and planting trees on green belt instead of building more houses!! on Linkedin Email Where exactly do you expect people to park their cars in and around Brighouse? You do understand that many residential roads and streets were built in an age when people did not own cars and they therefore do not have driveways on which to park their cars. They need to park on the roads. This obsession with making "relaxing spaces" all in the name of saving the environment is not only impractical but will drive trade away from our lovely town (Brighouse). Why don't you put all this money into improving roads, building car parks and planting trees on green belt instead of building more houses!! link

    Where exactly do you expect people to park their cars in and around Brighouse? You do understand that many residential roads and streets were built in an age when people did not own cars and they therefore do not have driveways on which to park their cars. They need to park on the roads. This obsession with making "relaxing spaces" all in the name of saving the environment is not only impractical but will drive trade away from our lovely town (Brighouse). Why don't you put all this money into improving roads, building car parks and planting trees on green belt instead of building more houses!!

    Simone asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to feed back to us your support and concerns about the A641 Improvement Scheme.

    The proposals for the A641 have been developed to deliver a more efficient transport network; prioritise walking, wheeling (e.g. bike, wheelchairs, prams), cycling and public transport; make sure communities are better connected; improve safety and create better quality places whilst also contributing to Calderdale’s response to the Climate Emergency.

    Current plans for the scheme include proposals that will impact on local parking on the highway along certain stretches of the A641. Several options are being explored for alternative parking arrangements. As plans are developed further the team will engage and consult with all residents and businesses directly impacted by the A641 scheme proposals.

    On-street occupancy surveys have been conducted to determine where people are parking and why; the amount of current parking provided within the study area and the number of parking spaces to be displaced. Following analysis of the occupancy surveys, we will then look at where the parking is proposed to be displaced from and where it could be moved to, to determine the next steps. We will be directly contacting those who will be impacted by the current proposals. 

    In addition to speed limit changes at specific locations, the scheme includes several proposals to improve the safety and experience for people walking and cycling in the area including separated cycling facilities on the A641, new and improved off-road greenway routes for walking and cycling.

    The A641 improvement scheme is targeted specifically at improving the A641 highway as well as making some improvements to connecting roads, there are no plans within the scheme for the development of new car parks. Protecting the Natural Environment is a key strategic driver for the A641. New tree planting is proposed as part of the scheme and every effort will be made to retain existing trees.  Wildflower and species rich grassland will be introduced where possible to bring biodiversity, sustainability and colour into the scheme.
  • Share After reviewing the updated plans for the A641 "improvements", it is apparent that they are driven by an ideological agenda, rather than for the practical benefit of the local population. Previous feedback has clearly been largely ignored and the plans are obviously going to be pushed through no matter what and no matter whether they ultimately just cause misery and chaos for local residents. From just looking at the plans for the area immediately near where I live, there are several glaring mistakes, with existing bus stops being marked in the wrong locations and prominent large buildings being incorrectly labelled. The obvious conclusion is that these plans were most likely designed remotely on computer systems with little actual on site investigation or research. A utopia of green spaces, with a massive reduction in the number of private vehicles and everyone walking, cycling and using public transport instead is just not realistic, although that is clearly the goal of this project, instead of the goal of actually improving the local traffic system. For a start, cycling in this area is not a practical option for many due to very hilly terrain, poor weather and the high risk of bike theft. And what about the elderly and infirm who rely heavily on their cars? Added to this, removing on street parking for hundreds of households on or immediately next to the A641 is just not practical or reasonable. Another decision that clearly was taken without visiting the affected areas in person and properly investigating the issues it would raise. All these issues are compounded by the ongoing plans to add many thousands of new houses in the Brighouse area in the immediate vicinity of the A641, despite the already overstretched infrastructure. All in all, this is almost certainly going to be an absolute mess if a serious rethink is not done and the goals of the project aren't re-evaluated honestly. Is there any chance of anyone taking genuine heed of the issues raised and revising these plans before it is too late? on Facebook Share After reviewing the updated plans for the A641 "improvements", it is apparent that they are driven by an ideological agenda, rather than for the practical benefit of the local population. Previous feedback has clearly been largely ignored and the plans are obviously going to be pushed through no matter what and no matter whether they ultimately just cause misery and chaos for local residents. From just looking at the plans for the area immediately near where I live, there are several glaring mistakes, with existing bus stops being marked in the wrong locations and prominent large buildings being incorrectly labelled. The obvious conclusion is that these plans were most likely designed remotely on computer systems with little actual on site investigation or research. A utopia of green spaces, with a massive reduction in the number of private vehicles and everyone walking, cycling and using public transport instead is just not realistic, although that is clearly the goal of this project, instead of the goal of actually improving the local traffic system. For a start, cycling in this area is not a practical option for many due to very hilly terrain, poor weather and the high risk of bike theft. And what about the elderly and infirm who rely heavily on their cars? Added to this, removing on street parking for hundreds of households on or immediately next to the A641 is just not practical or reasonable. Another decision that clearly was taken without visiting the affected areas in person and properly investigating the issues it would raise. All these issues are compounded by the ongoing plans to add many thousands of new houses in the Brighouse area in the immediate vicinity of the A641, despite the already overstretched infrastructure. All in all, this is almost certainly going to be an absolute mess if a serious rethink is not done and the goals of the project aren't re-evaluated honestly. Is there any chance of anyone taking genuine heed of the issues raised and revising these plans before it is too late? on Twitter Share After reviewing the updated plans for the A641 "improvements", it is apparent that they are driven by an ideological agenda, rather than for the practical benefit of the local population. Previous feedback has clearly been largely ignored and the plans are obviously going to be pushed through no matter what and no matter whether they ultimately just cause misery and chaos for local residents. From just looking at the plans for the area immediately near where I live, there are several glaring mistakes, with existing bus stops being marked in the wrong locations and prominent large buildings being incorrectly labelled. The obvious conclusion is that these plans were most likely designed remotely on computer systems with little actual on site investigation or research. A utopia of green spaces, with a massive reduction in the number of private vehicles and everyone walking, cycling and using public transport instead is just not realistic, although that is clearly the goal of this project, instead of the goal of actually improving the local traffic system. For a start, cycling in this area is not a practical option for many due to very hilly terrain, poor weather and the high risk of bike theft. And what about the elderly and infirm who rely heavily on their cars? Added to this, removing on street parking for hundreds of households on or immediately next to the A641 is just not practical or reasonable. Another decision that clearly was taken without visiting the affected areas in person and properly investigating the issues it would raise. All these issues are compounded by the ongoing plans to add many thousands of new houses in the Brighouse area in the immediate vicinity of the A641, despite the already overstretched infrastructure. All in all, this is almost certainly going to be an absolute mess if a serious rethink is not done and the goals of the project aren't re-evaluated honestly. Is there any chance of anyone taking genuine heed of the issues raised and revising these plans before it is too late? on Linkedin Email After reviewing the updated plans for the A641 "improvements", it is apparent that they are driven by an ideological agenda, rather than for the practical benefit of the local population. Previous feedback has clearly been largely ignored and the plans are obviously going to be pushed through no matter what and no matter whether they ultimately just cause misery and chaos for local residents. From just looking at the plans for the area immediately near where I live, there are several glaring mistakes, with existing bus stops being marked in the wrong locations and prominent large buildings being incorrectly labelled. The obvious conclusion is that these plans were most likely designed remotely on computer systems with little actual on site investigation or research. A utopia of green spaces, with a massive reduction in the number of private vehicles and everyone walking, cycling and using public transport instead is just not realistic, although that is clearly the goal of this project, instead of the goal of actually improving the local traffic system. For a start, cycling in this area is not a practical option for many due to very hilly terrain, poor weather and the high risk of bike theft. And what about the elderly and infirm who rely heavily on their cars? Added to this, removing on street parking for hundreds of households on or immediately next to the A641 is just not practical or reasonable. Another decision that clearly was taken without visiting the affected areas in person and properly investigating the issues it would raise. All these issues are compounded by the ongoing plans to add many thousands of new houses in the Brighouse area in the immediate vicinity of the A641, despite the already overstretched infrastructure. All in all, this is almost certainly going to be an absolute mess if a serious rethink is not done and the goals of the project aren't re-evaluated honestly. Is there any chance of anyone taking genuine heed of the issues raised and revising these plans before it is too late? link

    After reviewing the updated plans for the A641 "improvements", it is apparent that they are driven by an ideological agenda, rather than for the practical benefit of the local population. Previous feedback has clearly been largely ignored and the plans are obviously going to be pushed through no matter what and no matter whether they ultimately just cause misery and chaos for local residents. From just looking at the plans for the area immediately near where I live, there are several glaring mistakes, with existing bus stops being marked in the wrong locations and prominent large buildings being incorrectly labelled. The obvious conclusion is that these plans were most likely designed remotely on computer systems with little actual on site investigation or research. A utopia of green spaces, with a massive reduction in the number of private vehicles and everyone walking, cycling and using public transport instead is just not realistic, although that is clearly the goal of this project, instead of the goal of actually improving the local traffic system. For a start, cycling in this area is not a practical option for many due to very hilly terrain, poor weather and the high risk of bike theft. And what about the elderly and infirm who rely heavily on their cars? Added to this, removing on street parking for hundreds of households on or immediately next to the A641 is just not practical or reasonable. Another decision that clearly was taken without visiting the affected areas in person and properly investigating the issues it would raise. All these issues are compounded by the ongoing plans to add many thousands of new houses in the Brighouse area in the immediate vicinity of the A641, despite the already overstretched infrastructure. All in all, this is almost certainly going to be an absolute mess if a serious rethink is not done and the goals of the project aren't re-evaluated honestly. Is there any chance of anyone taking genuine heed of the issues raised and revising these plans before it is too late?

    Local Resident asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to feed back to us your concerns about the A641 Improvement Scheme.

    The proposals for the A641 have been developed to deliver a more efficient transport network; prioritise walking, wheeling (e.g. bike, wheelchairs, prams), cycling and public transport; make sure communities are better connected; improve safety and create better quality places to support Calderdale Council's priorities whilst also contributing to Calderdale’s response to the Climate Emergency. 

    Current plans for the scheme include proposals that will impact on local parking on the highway along certain stretches of the A641. Several options are being explored for alternative parking arrangements. As plans are developed further the team will engage and consult with all residents and businesses directly impacted by the A641 scheme proposals. 

    On-street occupancy surveys will initially be conducted to determine where people are parking and why; the amount of current parking provided within the study area and the number of parking spaces to be displaced. Following analysis of the occupancy surveys, we will then look at where the parking is proposed to be displaced from and where it could be moved to, to determine the next steps. We will be directly contacting those who will be impacted by the current proposals. 

    In addition to speed limit changes at specific locations, the scheme includes several proposals to improve the safety and experience for people walking and cycling in the area including separated cycling facilities on the A641, new and improved off-road greenway routes for walking and cycling.

    As part of the development of the A641 scheme, there has been close engagement with Calderdale Council's Planning Team who are working on the development of proposals contained within the Local Plan, including the growth in Brighouse you refer to. Traffic modelling which has taken place as part of the A641 scheme development has also considered the future impact on the road network and being taken into consideration.
  • Share In area D you mention creating a quiet road between Crossley street and Stratton Close to connect Lords Lane to Woodhouse. I am very concerned about the cyclists as there could easily be collisions when people like myself pull out of our driveways and potentially make contact with a cyclist speeding down the steep hill on Stratton close. I am also concerned that if the path was for both pedestrians and cyclists then this too could have the potential to cause accidents. The bottom of Stratton close is not a wide road and I don’t understand how the suggestion of using it for pedestrians, bikes and cars at the same time would be plausible. Stratton close does not have street lamps at the bottom making visibility even worse at night, exacerbating these problems. on Facebook Share In area D you mention creating a quiet road between Crossley street and Stratton Close to connect Lords Lane to Woodhouse. I am very concerned about the cyclists as there could easily be collisions when people like myself pull out of our driveways and potentially make contact with a cyclist speeding down the steep hill on Stratton close. I am also concerned that if the path was for both pedestrians and cyclists then this too could have the potential to cause accidents. The bottom of Stratton close is not a wide road and I don’t understand how the suggestion of using it for pedestrians, bikes and cars at the same time would be plausible. Stratton close does not have street lamps at the bottom making visibility even worse at night, exacerbating these problems. on Twitter Share In area D you mention creating a quiet road between Crossley street and Stratton Close to connect Lords Lane to Woodhouse. I am very concerned about the cyclists as there could easily be collisions when people like myself pull out of our driveways and potentially make contact with a cyclist speeding down the steep hill on Stratton close. I am also concerned that if the path was for both pedestrians and cyclists then this too could have the potential to cause accidents. The bottom of Stratton close is not a wide road and I don’t understand how the suggestion of using it for pedestrians, bikes and cars at the same time would be plausible. Stratton close does not have street lamps at the bottom making visibility even worse at night, exacerbating these problems. on Linkedin Email In area D you mention creating a quiet road between Crossley street and Stratton Close to connect Lords Lane to Woodhouse. I am very concerned about the cyclists as there could easily be collisions when people like myself pull out of our driveways and potentially make contact with a cyclist speeding down the steep hill on Stratton close. I am also concerned that if the path was for both pedestrians and cyclists then this too could have the potential to cause accidents. The bottom of Stratton close is not a wide road and I don’t understand how the suggestion of using it for pedestrians, bikes and cars at the same time would be plausible. Stratton close does not have street lamps at the bottom making visibility even worse at night, exacerbating these problems. link

    In area D you mention creating a quiet road between Crossley street and Stratton Close to connect Lords Lane to Woodhouse. I am very concerned about the cyclists as there could easily be collisions when people like myself pull out of our driveways and potentially make contact with a cyclist speeding down the steep hill on Stratton close. I am also concerned that if the path was for both pedestrians and cyclists then this too could have the potential to cause accidents. The bottom of Stratton close is not a wide road and I don’t understand how the suggestion of using it for pedestrians, bikes and cars at the same time would be plausible. Stratton close does not have street lamps at the bottom making visibility even worse at night, exacerbating these problems.

    Stratton Close Resident asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to feedback on the A641 improvement scheme engagement.  We really appreciate you bringing this concern to our attention. The design for this particular intervention is for a dual use/shared space (for both cyclists and pedestrians). The recommended widths for shared use routes under the current guidelines are that there must be at a minimum of 3.0 metres for pedestrians and cyclists, with the current proposed design being at a minimum of 4.0 metres. Due to the nature of shared use facilities and mixing people walking and cycling together increasing the likelihood of interactions, cyclists usually travel slower within them.
    Features located within a shared use facility can have the effect of reducing the effective width by cycles ‘shying’ away from physical features due to the risk of handlebars, pedals and stirrups striking vertical features situated alongside the path edge. ‘Shy’ distances are more applicable to people on bikes and horse riders than other path users. This means that cyclists will generally ‘shy’ away from the wall of the property boundary allowing more separation when egressing, therefore, reducing risk of a conflict.
    Where the physical environment allows or encourages faster cycling speeds, property access and egress may be diminished, therefore, we will ensure that the necessary physical separation and calming measures are implemented to reduce risk of conflict between egressing cars/cyclists, and encourage slower cycling speeds.
    Your feedback relating to poor visibility due to lack of street lamps will be shared with the design team for consideration during design development. 
  • Share 1. Why are the opinions of 1.3% of the local population enough to be used to implement such massive changes in the local area? 2.What is the current cycling use In brighouse and what is the expected cycling use after changes have been made in brighouse? 3.What is the current vehicle traffic use in brighouse and what is th expected vehicle traffic use in brighouse going to be in the future, bearing in mind there are plans for thousands of new houses in the local area. 4.What is the current traffic flow rate at Tesco roundabout and what will the expected traffic flow rate be after signals have been introduced at Tesco roundabout? 5. Will you place temporary traffic lights at Tesco roundabout for a period of time to test the impact of signals on the flow of traffic? 6. Can you provide data from Bradford on the impact prioritising cycling over vehicle traffic has had on the use of cycling in Bradford? 7. Please don't ruin our town for a utopian dream of cyclists floating around without a care in the world, saving the environment while thousands of Cars sit idle in traffic around them. Efficiency and the consistent flow of traffic away from the town centre must be a top priority. on Facebook Share 1. Why are the opinions of 1.3% of the local population enough to be used to implement such massive changes in the local area? 2.What is the current cycling use In brighouse and what is the expected cycling use after changes have been made in brighouse? 3.What is the current vehicle traffic use in brighouse and what is th expected vehicle traffic use in brighouse going to be in the future, bearing in mind there are plans for thousands of new houses in the local area. 4.What is the current traffic flow rate at Tesco roundabout and what will the expected traffic flow rate be after signals have been introduced at Tesco roundabout? 5. Will you place temporary traffic lights at Tesco roundabout for a period of time to test the impact of signals on the flow of traffic? 6. Can you provide data from Bradford on the impact prioritising cycling over vehicle traffic has had on the use of cycling in Bradford? 7. Please don't ruin our town for a utopian dream of cyclists floating around without a care in the world, saving the environment while thousands of Cars sit idle in traffic around them. Efficiency and the consistent flow of traffic away from the town centre must be a top priority. on Twitter Share 1. Why are the opinions of 1.3% of the local population enough to be used to implement such massive changes in the local area? 2.What is the current cycling use In brighouse and what is the expected cycling use after changes have been made in brighouse? 3.What is the current vehicle traffic use in brighouse and what is th expected vehicle traffic use in brighouse going to be in the future, bearing in mind there are plans for thousands of new houses in the local area. 4.What is the current traffic flow rate at Tesco roundabout and what will the expected traffic flow rate be after signals have been introduced at Tesco roundabout? 5. Will you place temporary traffic lights at Tesco roundabout for a period of time to test the impact of signals on the flow of traffic? 6. Can you provide data from Bradford on the impact prioritising cycling over vehicle traffic has had on the use of cycling in Bradford? 7. Please don't ruin our town for a utopian dream of cyclists floating around without a care in the world, saving the environment while thousands of Cars sit idle in traffic around them. Efficiency and the consistent flow of traffic away from the town centre must be a top priority. on Linkedin Email 1. Why are the opinions of 1.3% of the local population enough to be used to implement such massive changes in the local area? 2.What is the current cycling use In brighouse and what is the expected cycling use after changes have been made in brighouse? 3.What is the current vehicle traffic use in brighouse and what is th expected vehicle traffic use in brighouse going to be in the future, bearing in mind there are plans for thousands of new houses in the local area. 4.What is the current traffic flow rate at Tesco roundabout and what will the expected traffic flow rate be after signals have been introduced at Tesco roundabout? 5. Will you place temporary traffic lights at Tesco roundabout for a period of time to test the impact of signals on the flow of traffic? 6. Can you provide data from Bradford on the impact prioritising cycling over vehicle traffic has had on the use of cycling in Bradford? 7. Please don't ruin our town for a utopian dream of cyclists floating around without a care in the world, saving the environment while thousands of Cars sit idle in traffic around them. Efficiency and the consistent flow of traffic away from the town centre must be a top priority. link

    1. Why are the opinions of 1.3% of the local population enough to be used to implement such massive changes in the local area? 2.What is the current cycling use In brighouse and what is the expected cycling use after changes have been made in brighouse? 3.What is the current vehicle traffic use in brighouse and what is th expected vehicle traffic use in brighouse going to be in the future, bearing in mind there are plans for thousands of new houses in the local area. 4.What is the current traffic flow rate at Tesco roundabout and what will the expected traffic flow rate be after signals have been introduced at Tesco roundabout? 5. Will you place temporary traffic lights at Tesco roundabout for a period of time to test the impact of signals on the flow of traffic? 6. Can you provide data from Bradford on the impact prioritising cycling over vehicle traffic has had on the use of cycling in Bradford? 7. Please don't ruin our town for a utopian dream of cyclists floating around without a care in the world, saving the environment while thousands of Cars sit idle in traffic around them. Efficiency and the consistent flow of traffic away from the town centre must be a top priority.

    Jason Briggs asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to feedback on the A641 improvement scheme engagement. The A641 project seeks to introduce safe and usable spaces for non-motorised users, encouraging a positive modal shift and reducing congestion. Surveys are to be carried out later this year regarding vehicle and cycling numbers, however, with limited safe facilities for people who choose to walk and cycle, the corridor lacks the appeal for anyone but the most confident road cyclist.  

    Temporary signals are not used to determine impacts of future schemes, instead traffic modelling of all the proposals is being carried out on the affected junctions. This modelling is on-going across the A641 scheme and the results will feed into the next stage of detailed design.  A further public consultation exercise will be held later this year with more detailed designs, which will have been updated to reflect the outcome of modelling and feedback from consultation responses, available for review and comment.

    Advertisement of this future consultation will be released via Calderdale Council Social Media and Calderdale Next Chapter website: calderdalenextchapter.co.uk, there will be a press release and advertisements in the local paper, on posters along A641 and surrounding areas as well as other advertisement methods. A large range of advertisement methods will be used to promote this consultation with the aim of engaging with as many local residents and businesses as possible. Before this consultation takes place, members of the public and businesses who will be directly impacted by the scheme will be contacted by the project team for further discussions.

    As part of the development of the A641 scheme, there has been close engagement with Calderdale Council's Planning Team who are working on the development of proposals contained within the Local Plan, including the growth in Brighouse you refer to. Traffic modelling which has taken place as part of the A641 scheme development has also considered the future impact on the road network and being taken into consideration.
  • Share When were shops and businesses in the town of Brighouse which these plans will affect going to be told about this? Please answer on Facebook Share When were shops and businesses in the town of Brighouse which these plans will affect going to be told about this? Please answer on Twitter Share When were shops and businesses in the town of Brighouse which these plans will affect going to be told about this? Please answer on Linkedin Email When were shops and businesses in the town of Brighouse which these plans will affect going to be told about this? Please answer link

    When were shops and businesses in the town of Brighouse which these plans will affect going to be told about this? Please answer

    Oliver asked over 2 years ago
    Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your feedback.

    Following this public engagement to get feedback on the preferred option (as confirmed through feedback from the previous consultation) which will feed into the detailed design of the scheme we will set about contacting those impacted by the scheme. It is important to get an understanding of what the interventions are following public opinion before contacting residents and businesses. Those affected by the scheme will be contacted in the coming months.