Calderdale Corridor Improvement Programmes: Engagement on proposed designs

The CCIPs

Calderdale Council and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority are developing a series of improvements to the road network along the A58 / A672 from Junction 22 of the M62 to King Cross in Halifax and the A646 / A6033 from Todmorden to Skircoat Moor.


These Corridor Improvement Programmes (CIPs) aim to provide better connections across West Yorkshire to stimulate economic growth and job creation, and support housing developments throughout the region. They should improve traffic flow, aiming to deliver an 8% reduction in journey times for all traffic and a 12% reduction in journey times for buses. They would aim to reduce accidents throughout the schemes by 10% by 2022, particularly involving pedestrians and cyclists.


The two programmes cover well used routes through Calderdale which can be congested during peak times, suffer from pockets of poor air quality and limit the potential for economic growth because of variable journey times. The schemes also encourage active travel by improving facilities for walkers and cyclists

To help you understand the schemes, a series of plans and designs can be found using the 'documents, plans and proposals' section of this page.

Engagement

Between 13 August and 27 September 2018, an initial period of engagement took place where the public and other interested parties were asked for their comments on the Calderdale CIPs proposals. Following this, your feedback was analysed and the plans were developed further. You can click on the see some of the changes we've made by viewing our 'You Said, We Did' document by clicking:


Between the 2 January and the 14 February a second period of engagement took place on the updated plans. This gave you, as road users or local residents, another opportunity to tell us what you thought before we submit our Final Business Case.

This engagement has now closed and your feedback is being analysed. More information will be displayed here when available.

The CCIPs

Calderdale Council and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority are developing a series of improvements to the road network along the A58 / A672 from Junction 22 of the M62 to King Cross in Halifax and the A646 / A6033 from Todmorden to Skircoat Moor.


These Corridor Improvement Programmes (CIPs) aim to provide better connections across West Yorkshire to stimulate economic growth and job creation, and support housing developments throughout the region. They should improve traffic flow, aiming to deliver an 8% reduction in journey times for all traffic and a 12% reduction in journey times for buses. They would aim to reduce accidents throughout the schemes by 10% by 2022, particularly involving pedestrians and cyclists.


The two programmes cover well used routes through Calderdale which can be congested during peak times, suffer from pockets of poor air quality and limit the potential for economic growth because of variable journey times. The schemes also encourage active travel by improving facilities for walkers and cyclists

To help you understand the schemes, a series of plans and designs can be found using the 'documents, plans and proposals' section of this page.

Engagement

Between 13 August and 27 September 2018, an initial period of engagement took place where the public and other interested parties were asked for their comments on the Calderdale CIPs proposals. Following this, your feedback was analysed and the plans were developed further. You can click on the see some of the changes we've made by viewing our 'You Said, We Did' document by clicking:


Between the 2 January and the 14 February a second period of engagement took place on the updated plans. This gave you, as road users or local residents, another opportunity to tell us what you thought before we submit our Final Business Case.

This engagement has now closed and your feedback is being analysed. More information will be displayed here when available.

CLOSED: This Q&A is no longer open for new questions. Any outstanding queries will receive answers as soon as possible. If you wish to contact the CCIP project team please email yourvoice@westyorks-ca.gov.uk

  • I'm not sure how you can improve the air ,when the traffic has increased through sowerby bridge, Surely more heavy traffic more fumes in the air we are breathing,

    Geoff asked about 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. As you correctly point out, research shows that creating additional highway capacity for cars and other vehicles induces demand. For this reason, Calderdale MBC is focusing on sustainable transport provision over providing for the car. This is why we are not building any new roads but focusing on reallocation of the road space for active modes (includes public transport). Please see www.calderdale.gov.uk/v2/residents/transport-and-streets/transport-improvements-and-initiatives/transport-strategy for more information. The exception to this is the A629 programme the approval of which pre-dates this strategy.

    The fund criteria and scheme appraisal process as set out by the treasury require us to improve journey time reliability for all modes. Our focus has been on improving this for buses - with all vehicles benefiting. This naturally benefits other vehicles. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing as we have very polluted areas in the Borough and this can be improved by reducing stop-start movement.

    CMBC has declared a climate change emergency and we are doing our level best to work within these funding constraints and deliver for active modes. This criteria is being reviewed and we hope to be able to prioritise sustainable modes more easily in the future.

    Hope this helps explain the decision-making in a complex context where we could otherwise have a very long discussion.
  • Why do you continually attempt to increase traffic flow in order to improve things when all this does is increase the overall volume of traffic? Why not focus on getting people out of vehicles and restrict vehicle access more whilst focusing on cycling, walking and public transport?

    Dave R asked about 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. As you correctly point out, research shows that creating additional highway capacity for cars and other vehicles induces demand. For this reason, Calderdale MBC is focusing on sustainable transport provision over providing for the car. This is why we are not building any new roads but focusing on reallocation of the road space for active modes (includes public transport). Please see www.calderdale.gov.uk/v2/residents/transport-and-streets/transport-improvements-and-initiatives/transport-strategy for more information. The exception to this is the A629 programme the approval of which pre-dates this strategy.

    The fund criteria and scheme appraisal process as set out by the treasury require us to improve journey time reliability for all modes. Our focus has been on improving this for buses - with all vehicles benefiting. This naturally benefits other vehicles. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing as we have very polluted areas in the Borough and this can be improved by reducing stop-start movement.

    CMBC has declared a climate change emergency and we are doing our level best to work within these funding constraints and deliver for active modes. This criteria is being reviewed and we hope to be able to prioritise sustainable modes more easily in the future.

    Hope this helps explain the decision-making in a complex context where we could otherwise have a very long discussion.
  • I understand the funding criteria limit the scope of this project in terms of delivering improved infrastructure for active travel. Given the climate emergency declared surely this level of spending without a focus on boosting the most environmentally beneficial modes of transport is irresponsible. Has induced demand been considered at all? If traffic flow is improved more people will drive, on the other hand if traffic is removed by the facilitation of active travel by providing quality, continuous, segregated infrastructure (Painted bike lanes are not enough!) there will be real and lasting reductions in traffic and the associated air quality and congestion issues.

    ChrisK asked about 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. As you correctly point out, research shows that creating additional highway capacity for cars and other vehicles induces demand. For this reason, Calderdale MBC is focusing on sustainable transport provision over providing for the car. This is why we are not building any new roads but focusing on reallocation of the road space for active modes (includes public transport). Please see www.calderdale.gov.uk/v2/residents/transport-and-streets/transport-improvements-and-initiatives/transport-strategy for more information. The exception to this is the A629 programme the approval of which pre-dates this strategy. 

    The fund criteria and scheme appraisal process as set out by the treasury require us to improve journey time reliability for all modes. Our focus has been on improving this for buses - with all vehicles benefiting. This naturally benefits other vehicles. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing as we have very polluted areas in the Borough and this can be improved by reducing stop-start movement. 

    CMBC has declared a climate change emergency and we are doing our level best to work within these funding constraints and deliver for active modes. This criteria is being reviewed and we hope to be able to prioritise sustainable modes more easily in the future. 

    Hope this helps explain the decision-making in a complex context where we could otherwise have a very long discussion.
  • Re hebden bridge centre plans: How will the children from riverside & Stubbings schools now safely cross the road? Why would you want to introduce big heavy traffic into the town centre where there are lots of pedestrians? Why reduce packing spaces which will impact on the economy of local businesses? What about when there are problems on local motorways & huge lorries use as a diversion.

    Sarah myers asked about 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. The proposals do not involve removing crossings near the schools and seek to improve the pedestrian environment. We are trying to discourage car use by restricting parking in certain areas thereby improving pedestrian sight lines, providing safer cycling provision, reducing delays to buses and improving the air quality. It is unsafe for cars to park on a busy highway. Hebden Bridge is very well connected by public transport and for walking and cycling and we are doubling the size of the rail station car park. The speed limit will remain at 20mph on Market Street and businesses will still be able to load / unload.
  • Hello. Are you still determined to end the roadside parking outside Hebden in the direction of Mytholmroyd, as well as the few designated spaces on the road in the town centre? If so, please register my strong objection. Those parking spaces are essential to local people, when they need to come to town by car because they need to buy something that is too heavy, or unsuitable, for carrying on buses. Just outside the town centre the road is wide enough for a lane of parked cars plus two-way traffic. There is no good reason for interfering with it. There is perhaps more of an argument for the elimination of the on-road parking right in the centre, but as the speed limit is 20 mph, cars have to move slowly anyway, and the parking enables people to do quick local shopping. Haven't local customers and businesses had enough misery with the traffic jams in Mytholmroyd without your making using Hebden difficult as well? You will be driving local people to go to supermarkets and trading malls as the easier option. That will destroy Hebden Bridge's town centre businesses, and there goes the tourism as well. Your plans will perhaps make it easier for people to drive through Hebden Bridge, but that is all they will be doing. Please think again. Keep the on-road parking near the station, offer alternative free one-hour parking near the shops if you're going to remove the spaces currently available - & please don't make it difficult to go up the Keighley Road from the Halifax direction. It's simple & safe to turn to the right at present. Doing it from Hebden will mean either pulling out into a busy road where you can't see properly, or using the current main turning but having to make a hairpin turn. Thank you. I hope this "consultation" means that you will genuinely reconsider if the local population is opposed to these plans.They will affect the quality of everyday life here in a very negative way.

    Vivienne asked about 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The said section of Burnley Road is generally occupied by 60 to 80 vehicles on a daily basis, and 8 to 12 vehicles overnight. It is understood that a wide range of users park at this location, including commuters, canal residents, workers and visitors to Hebden Bridge. the car park at Hebden Bridge station is due to be increased by over 40 spaces, while the proposed car park at Stubbing Holme Road would have a capacity of over 60 spaces. The project team recognise the importance of facilitating a modal shift towards public and sustainable transport, and have endeavoured to do so within the scope of funding. ; be it in improving the quality of public realm for pedestrians, improving cycling infrastructure, improving access to railway stations and improving journey times and reliability for vehicles including buses. As for the parking spaces on Market Street, these are proposed to be converted to restricted loading bays, which would provide a more balanced solution to the constraints within the area. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes on Commercial Street, and as such the project team will review this proposal in its entirety. While modelling has been carried out to confirm said movements, if the proposals are progressed to detailed design, these will undergo further analysis and testing before any potential implementation. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as they progress to detailed design.
  • Have you asked the Fire Service how they plan to access Birchcliffe with a large fire tender if Commercial Street becomes one way? Is it really considered acceptable to force every large vehicle to carry out reversing manoeuvres outside the entrance to Stubbings Primary School? If commuters will no longer be able to park on Burnley Road they will start parking in Hebden's residential streets which will inevitably lead to the introduction of costly residential parking permits. You see us as a route but we are a community.

    PaulGrundy asked about 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes on Commercial Street, and as such the project team will review this proposal in its entirety. While modelling has been carried out to confirm said movements, if the proposals are progressed to detailed design, these will undergo further analysis and testing before any potential implementation. As for the parking on the said section of Burnley Road; it is generally occupied by 60 to 80 vehicles on a daily basis, and 8 to 12 vehicles overnight. It is understood that a wide range of users park at this location, including commuters, canal residents, workers and visitors to Hebden Bridge. the car park at Hebden Bridge station is due to be increased by over 40 spaces, while the proposed car park at Stubbing Holme Road would have a capacity of over 60 spaces. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as they progress to detailed design.
  • There are many commuters who use the train station at Hebden and often have to resort to parking on Burnley Road as the car parks are full even by 7.30am. If Burnley Road is going to have double-yellow lines near the train station - where is everyone going to park? From what I could see in the plans, there is not sufficient provision for parking. My concern is a lack of parking combined with the already shambolic rail service will drive more people to travel by car - or to push the problem elsewhere. Although parking on Burnley Road is far from ideal, if it's not available, it's going to have an adverse effect on both rail users and visitors to the town.

    asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The said section of Burnley Road is generally occupied by 60 to 80 vehicles on a daily basis, and 8 to 12 vehicles overnight. It is understood that a wide range of users park at this location, including commuters, canal residents, workers and visitors to Hebden Bridge. The car park at Hebden Bridge station is due to be increased by over 40 spaces, while the proposed car park at Stubbing Holme Road would have a capacity of over 60 spaces. The project team recognise the importance of facilitating a modal shift towards public and sustainable transport, and have endeavoured to do so within the scope of funding, be it in improving the quality of public realm for pedestrians, improving cycling infrastructure, improving access to railway stations and improving journey times and reliability for vehicles including buses. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received.
  • Why is a road as big as Wakefield road sowerby bridge,That leads to the m62 and is now quiet because all the heavy traffic is directed to the a58 up to kings cross passed parks and kids walking to school,

    Geoff asked 2 months ago
    The A6026 Wakefield Road is outside the scope of the Corridor scheme which is focused on the A58. Whilst the A6026 is wide in places it narrows significantly through Copley village and onwards to its junction with the A629. It also carries a height restriction due to the railway overbridges. The A58 is a former trunk road and between Sowerby Bridge and King Cross is more suited to taking HGV traffic.
  • What about Triangle,glaring by it,s ommission,there are issues with speed ,road width,local Primary school,parking,signage!

    Phil asked 2 months ago
    With specific reference to Triangle, the Council is aware of a number of issues related to traffic speeds, junction protection and inappropriate parking, crossing facilities and the general highway environment. These require a small in-depth study before any changes are made. Rather than trying to rush through a scheme to the very tight schedule that the Corridor scheme is working to the Council has chosen to include it within its own Local Transport Plan Safer Roads programme for 2020/21.
  • Hello. Your publicity on the Calderdale council fb page says that you “want to close the gaps in walking and cycling network to reduce car use along Calderdale’s A58/ A672 and A646/A6033” Please can you say whether your objective is an absolute reduction in car use (rather than e.g. simply a reduction in increases in traffic)? If so, does your assessment show that the proposed scheme will lead to an absolute reduction. On the point about closing the gaps in walking and cycling network: you will know that the A646 between Hebden and Tod does not have a continuous safe route for pedestrians. In places pedestrians are forced to cross the road without crossings due to footway giving out completely on one side, and in other places the footway has steps which are inaccessible to anyone with a pushchair or wheelchair or difficulty walking. The canal towpath upgrade is very welcome (or will be when it is done – and some information on that would be welcome) but it is also not accessible to all, so the main road route is needed. Please could you confirm how the corridor improvement will address these accessibility and safety problems for pedestrians on the A646. If the scheme does not address this, please can you confirm how it will be addressed? Many thanks

    5parling PEACH asked 2 months ago
    In terms of closing gaps in the walking and cycling network the Corridor schemes are particularly focused on issues along the canal corridor that the current CityConnect scheme has not been able to address, principally through the centre of Sowerby Bridge and in regard to the ‘weirs’ along the Rochdale Canal towpath. The aim is to increase the proportion of people choosing to walk and cycle and contributing to the Calderdale Transport Strategy target of ‘no net growth in car trips by 2026’.

    The scheme aims to improve the pedestrian environment within town and village centres such as Sowerby Bridge, Todmorden and Hebden Bridge, and at specific pinch points such as King Cross junction. However it will not look to provide a continuous walking route along the whole of the road corridor. Any requests for specific crossing points or pedestrian improvements should be directed to Calderdale Highways on 01422 288002 or email highways&engineering@calderdale.gov.uk and they will be assessed through the Council’s Local Transport Plan programme.
  • Please make available the research that has been undertaken prior to the start date for the proposed CIPS to establish the key benefits of the road scheme, namely: economic growth, job creation, decreased pollution, housing scheme support, reduction in journey times and reduction in accidents. Has any research been undertaken to ascertain a beneficial or detrimental effect of the proposed works on economic growth and job creation?

    nick12 asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. We are able to send you the Outline Business Cases for both corridors which was developed at the previous stage of this scheme. This current engagement and the current proposed interventions will feed into the detailed design for the development of the Full Business Case which is still under development. Due to the size of the files, I will need to transfer them to you via a OneDrive folder. Please could you email yourvoice@westyorks-ca.gov.uk to confirm your email address and that you are happy for me to do this?
  • All these dates and times exclude the people who probably need their voice to be heard the most - they are at work during these times

    Ava asked 3 months ago
    I am sorry that the engagement sessions didn’t extend later in the evening. 

    An officer will be happy to answer any specific queries over the telephone at a mutually convenient time or offer you an appointment at Mulcture House to see the drawings if you prefer. 

    The engagement programme was run by a small team and this is one of many projects that we are dealing with. You will appreciate that it is difficult to provide suitable times for everyone and still enable staff to have a good work life balance. 

    All interventions which require Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) will undergo formal consultation as part of the TRO process, and as such residents and stakeholders will be contacted at this stage with detailed proposals as part of the statutory consultation phase. However, we want to give everyone an opportunity to express their views. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if you require more information.
  • Will refuse and other long vehicles vehicles etc be able to make the sharp right then left turns needed to go up birchcliffe from albert street once commercial street has been made one way?

    b.s.h asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes at this location. While modelling has been carried out to confirm said movements, the project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as they progress to detailed design.
  • There is a great deal of focus here on improvements for motor traffic, with only a few mentions of improving access for cycling and encouraging greater bike use for commuting and for recreation. Given the proven environmental advantages during this climate change emergency and the physical and mental benefits of cycling, it would positive to prioritise this in any and all infrastructure changes. What is being done on the ground to improve this?

    Mrelectric asked 2 months ago
    I am in agreement with you on your first point, as indeed is the Council. CMBC declared a Climate Change emergency 12 months ago and have adopted the Calderdale Transport Strategy which prioritizes sustainable travel. However, our current funding criteria requires us to improve journey times for all modes; as set out by Central Government. If we cant achieve this, then we will not secure the funding. This isn’t all bad as we have focused on reliability and are taking this opportunity to improve the technology in our traffic lights, create bus priority and reallocate road space for cyclists. We are not introducing new roads in this programme. There is some road widening to increase junction capacity. The aim here is to reduce idling to improve air quality. In Sowerby bridge for example, we are reducing the carriageway width, widening the pavements and building toucan crossings. I feel that we must do something. The current situation of poor air quality, severance for pedestrians and lack of a coherent cycling network for cyclists cannot continue. I am confident that we have done everything possible, within the criteria, to deliver for sustainable travel. Our regional funding body is now reviewing funding criteria to remove these limitations so that we can deliver the societal benefits that you describe. We are removing parking from large sections of the carriageway with the primary purpose of reallocating space for cyclists. Have you reviewed the drawings for King Cross and Hebden Bridge and the Rochdale road where we are introducing mandatory cycle lanes, shared use and toucan crossings? We have a cycle forum and they have scrutinized all of our plans in detail. Please get back in touch if you would like more information about this group.
  • Re Sowerby Bridge changes around Station road and Holmes Road. Whilst I agree that it makes sense to put double yellow lines on Holmes Road down both sides, it raises the question where will the cars that currently park on this road, park? Currently there are about 25-30 cars that park on this road but there is not this increase in car parking spaces on your current plan to accommodate. There is already insufficient spaces at present to cover those wanting to use the railway station, the leisure centre (council owned-so you should be making it easier for people to use this facility), doctors and Vets. Please can you explain where people are expected to park if you intend on taking these spaces away without replacing them?

    dmc asked 2 months ago
    CMBC declared a Climate Change emergency 12 months ago and have adopted the Calderdale Transport Strategy which prioritizes sustainable travel. We must reduce driving by 50% in the next 5 years to keep on the trajectory to be carbon neutral by 2032. We want to encourage people, who can, to walk, take the bus or cycle to these facilities. Pavement parking is problematic for disabled users and prams, which is a problem on this section of road. We also need the highway to function for the safe movement of vehicles. Parked cars can obscure sight lines and indeed someone was killed on this section of road, possibly linked to drivers needing to drive in the centre of the carriageway. Also, the old council depot has been sold and many cars (estimated about 25) currently parking on Holmes Road will park at the business location when this is developed in time.
  • Your response below to both questions regarding the periods of engagements being poorly advertised are both the same and tick all the boxes as far as you are concerned but actually we believe you missed vital routes of communication to businesses. Perhaps letters sent to businesses in affected streets in Hebden Bridge would have been far more effective at informing interested parties of these engagement periods. We did not hear about the 2018 drop ins and only found out about Monday's drop in at Hebden Bridge Town Hall on Monday 13th very late in the day. Hebden Bridge and Mytholmroyd businesses employ many local people who are residents. Had a simple letter been received the business owner would have been able to make an informed decision about attending and could have passed that information on to staff who then in turn could have passed on the information to other family members and residents. Why was this not seen as a priority? It feels that you have targeted commuters with your methods and not business owners and residents. Communication and connectivity is key within communities and we feel as if we have been left in the dark.

    Hebden Bridge Business Forum asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for engaging on the Corridor Programme. 

    We have limited resources and developed an engagement programme recommended by professionals and agreed by the Councils assistant director and portfolio holder. We must balance the cost and use of taxpayers money to ensure its well spent so took professional advice from government on this process. 

    We leafleted businesses in the upper valley as well as promoting the programme across multiple media channels. 

    Furthermore, all interventions which require Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) will undergo formal consultation as part of the TRO process, and as such residents and stakeholders will be contacted at this stage with detailed proposals as part of the statutory consultation phase. 

    I’m sorry that you are not satisfied with this and we will review our process with a view of improving it in the future.
  • yes i would like to say what interactive group have you introduced for better growth and also more job prospects

    adris asghar asked 3 months ago
    I’m not sure I completely understand your question about an interactive group? To quantify economic growth and job creation, the high level objective for the programme, we use the Treasury Green Book appraisal model. Indeed, this is the required process as set out by Government. In this 5 case process we have the ‘Economic Case’. The development of this case, to a robust level requires detailed modelling and is scrutinized by our regional funding body. The headline objective for the economic case is Gross Value Added (GVA) which is a measure of economic growth and job creation. For more information please visit: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book-appraisal-and-evaluation-in-central-governent
  • In the interests of fair engagement, as a Calderdale tax-payer, I absolutely demand that there be consultation which is accessible to the majority of the working populace of the Calder Valley towns - which are so heavily commuter towns. Having public events only until 6pm, on a weekday, is an absolute sham, precluding probably the majority of the articulate populace! Shame on Calderdale Council for doing this. This is the sort of scheme which should have a permanent large public display eg supermarket foyer? and out of work hours acccesibility.

    DianeR asked 3 months ago
    I am sorry that the engagement sessions didn’t extend later in the evening. 

    An officer will be happy to answer any specific queries over the telephone at a mutually convenient time or offer you an appointment at Mulcture House to see the drawings if you prefer. 

    The engagement programme was run by a small team and this is one of many projects that we are dealing with. You will appreciate that it is difficult to provide suitable times for everyone and still enable staff to have a good work life balance. 

    All interventions which require Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) will undergo formal consultation as part of the TRO process, and as such residents and stakeholders will be contacted at this stage with detailed proposals as part of the statutory consultation phase. However, we want to give everyone an opportunity to express their views. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if you require more information.
  • Why has a crossing not been allowed for outside Ripponden J&I school on the A672?

    Sophie Swann asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. Rippondon J&I currently deploys a crossing patrol outside the school between 8.20am to 9.05am and 2.45pm to 3.25pm term time only, beyond which there isn't considered to be a demand for a formal crossing at the said location. The project team will continue to review the proposals in light of the comments received as we progress into detailed design.
  • The plans appear to make Commercial Street Hebden Bridge No Entry from Burnley Road. Is this correct? If so, it's hard to see how this can possibly be safer for residents who will have to approach Birchcliffe Road from the junction of Albert Street and Keighley Road. And how will large vehicles manage the sharp right hand turn up the hill?

    Eileen Cann asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The current proposal do include making Commercial Street no-entry from Burnley Road, with a with to narrowing the junction to provide improved pedestrian crossing on Commercial Street at junction with Burnley Road. Turning movements for a range of HGVs have been assessed using modelling. However, a number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes and the impact on Birchcliffe Road. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design.
  • On the original plans it looked like there was a proposal to change the lanes at King Cross. Has this changed? This was a good proposal as someone that regularly drives along this road. If you were coming from Sowerby Bridge along Rochdale Road, currently if you are going straight on you need to go into the right lane, otherwise you need to cut across after the lights unless you are turning left onto Queens Road. Anyone who doesn't know the road usually go in into the left lane (as this is generally the rule) but then have to try and cut across into the right lane, which when busy causes issues and frustrations. Also if you are turning right to go past the First Station you often cannot get into the filter lane as it is queued back in the right lane by those going straight on. The lights aren't on long enough. So if you aren't in the filter lane when they go green you end up having to wait for whole of the lights to run through which can be quite a long time due to the number of lights there. The proposal seemed to change the lanes so traffic going straight on where to go into the left lane and then the right lane was clear to those turning towards Skirtcoat but allowing traffic to use both lanes when busy so that the queue behind was shorter and helping with congestion. Also stopped people getting in the wrong lane and having to deal with moving across. I'm not sure if there are many accidents because of this but I've seen a lot of people beeping/road rage there.

    Lorraine asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The earlier proposals, when detailed, presented additional issues, without providing benefits to the junction as a whole. After reviewing the entire junction, we have decided to proceed with the proposed changes at Skircoat Moor Road. However, the project team will continue review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design.
  • Why am I finding it so difficult to submit my comments? Wouldn't a comments submission form along the lines of this Q&A form not make the consultation process more accesible to everyone?

    zoe1 asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. I am sorry to hear you have experienced difficulties submitting your comments. There are a number of different ways to do this including our interactive map or via email. All emails received will be considered as part of the analysis process. Our email is: yourvoice@westyorks-ca.gov.uk.
  • Whilst generally in agreement with the proposals for Water Hill lane and Blackwall has any thought been given to moderating the speed of traffic in the area as the 20mph limit really isn't functioning! Provision for the safe crossing of Burnley Road at the bottom of Blackwall for those using public transport also needs consideration as this can be potentially dangerous.

    F Wilson asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes at this location. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as they progress to detailed design. Where outside the scope of this scheme, any concerns raised will be relayed to the appropriate department within the Council. Should these proposals be progressed further, before implementation there would be a requirement to undergo formal consultation as part of the Traffic Regulation Order process, at which stage all residents and stakeholders would be contacted for input.
  • Have your plans been modified to accommodate the acknowledgment by government that the Northern Line is a shambles? Many of us don’t want to drive in Calderdale but there is no viable alternative.

    Jen asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. While this scheme is driven by the funding requirements of 8% journey time improvements for all modes with 12% buses, the project team has endevoured to improve pedestrian and cycling provisions where within scope of funding requirements, along with improving access to public transport. The project team will review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • Changing the traffic flow in hebden bridge is a mistake as it removing the parking. The 2 taxi rank spaces should be relocated to parking as these are not sufficiently used. Hebden does not have enough available space for parking to be a tourist economy. Nor have we as residents voted for this.

    Eb asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. We have received a number of comments in relation to the proposal for Hebden Bridge. The taxi bays on Albert Street will be reviewed as part of detailed design proceeding the engagement phase. The project team will review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • Why are you proposing making a one way system of the first part of Back Lane Ripponden,stopping traffic turning up Back Lane to get to Spring Street .This would mean the people that live on Spring St would have to go down Ripponden Old Lane to get to their houses ,this a very narrow steep Rd ,that in winter has water running down it from the hillside so becomes icy .This road is not gritted so becomes treacherous .Has all this been taken into consideration

    S Hoyle asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. We have received a number of comments in relation to Back Lane and Back Fold. The project team will review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • The scheme really needs in to include a by-pass at Sowerby Bridge rather than tweaking small sections of the roads. It will be much better for the environment if a by-pass was built also it will speed up journey times for everyone.

    Tony asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • When are you going to address the problems of car parking, speeding, and road hold ups when large vehicles and buses cannot pass oncoming vehicles due to parked cars on the Keighley road. The problem stretches from Midge Hole Road to Hebden Bridge town centre. The problem is exacerbated due to cars parked on blind bends. Cars are damaged on a regular basis and road rage is increasing

    Helen Gilchrist asked 2 months ago
    The Calderdale Corridor Improvement Programmes only covers the area of the A646 between Todmorden and Skircoat, and therefore Keighley Road (Hebden Bridge) is not within scope of this project. However, we will relay your comments to the appropriate department within Calderdale Council.
  • One of the causes of congestion on the A646, particularly in the morning, is the queue of traffic at the top of Tuel Lane, heading east from Friendly towards Halifax. If there are more than 3 or so cars waiting to turn right down Tuel Lane, then subsequent cars are forced to queue in the way of moving traffic due to the pedestrian crossing that is just west of the Tuel Lane junction. Please could you consider moving the crossing to the east of the top of Tuel Lane or relocating it much further west, in order to allow more cars to queue in the centre of the road when waiting to turn right down Tuel Lane. On occasions this issue can cause tailbacks all the way back to Luddenden Lane that must take a significant amount of time to clear.

    DS asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • Can you give more detail about what is happening to Heptonstall Road we have looked at the maps but are still unclear. Will there now be a safe route to walk down Heptonstall Road on the side of the Fox and Goose? Are parking restrictions going to be added to the bottom of the road? The amount of cars parked at the bottom already cause a bottleneck. Finally will anything be done to stop cars parking completely on the pavements blocking pedestrian access along them? This is a daily occurrence around the Albion Terrace houses (due to the dropped kerbs).

    Matt90410 asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. The proposed interventions at Heptonstall Road junction with the A646 include the improvement of the footway outside the Fox and Goose and at the junction itself. There are no proposals within this scheme to make changes further along Hentopstall Road. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • King Cross Road, the uncontrolled island needs to be removed to create a better Bus Only Lane onto King Cross Road to King Cross Centre. Currently at Peak Times delays up to 5 minutes waiting to join the Bus Only Lane to King Cross. by removing this island better bus journeys can be achieved. This will help the Bus Companies to operate a quicker and efficient bus service. The new plans show that the island beyond the above mentioned island is to be lengthened to improve crossing. It is essential that the uncontrolled island to be removed to speed up journey times and better air quality.

    Tony asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • Removing parking on the main road only makes sense if there is a corresponding parking provision (60 plus vehicles) for rail commuters .What provision is being made? The turning circle for Heptonstall/Colden appears to be outside the plan. But it functions with extreme difficulty at rush hour already. What provision is being made to prevent backup of traffic caused by increased speed of throughput especially from the Todmorden direction.?

    D.F.Smalley asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. There are plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • There's a growing body of research (example: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136192091830628X) which suggests that increasing road capacity generally grants short term improvements in traffic throughputs and journey times, but within a few years this improvement is negated by increased volumes of traffic using the improved roads, because road use becomes more attractive due to shorter journey times, and new business destinations emerge to capitalise on the increased accessibility. These changes result in journey times again deteriorating, with the eventual outcome being simply that more cars are using the expanded roads, producing more pollution. How does this square with the council's commitment to reducing environmental impact in the local area, becoming carbon neutral in the medium term, and improving public health outcomes? Is there any reference in the plans to these issues? Has there been any reconsideration since recent council resolutions around their declared "climate emergency"? To be clear, having read previous responses to other people's questions, I'm not asking about the funding requirements for the scheme, but about the council's justification for pursuing the scheme regardless of funding availability, and how this squares with the council's other stated priorities. Thanks

    AjH asked 2 months ago
    Thank you for your comment on the Corridor programme. You are correct that research shows that creating additional highway capacity for cars and other vehicles induces demand. For this reason, Calderdale MBC is focusing on sustainable transport provision over providing for the car. This is why we are not building any new roads but focusing on reallocation of the road space for active modes (includes public transport). Please click here for more information. The exception to this is the A629 programme the approval of which pre-dates this strategy. 

    The fund criteria and scheme appraisal process as set out by the treasury require us to improve journey time reliability for all modes. Our focus has been on improving this for buses - with all vehicles benefiting. This naturally benefits other vehicles. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing as we have very polluted areas in the Borough and this can be improved by reducing stop-start movement. 

    CMBC has declared a climate change emergency and we are doing our level best to work within these funding constraints and deliver for active modes. This criteria is being reviewed and we hope to be able to prioritise sustainable modes more easily in the future. 

    Hope this helps explain the decision-making in a complex context where we could otherwise have a very long discussion.
  • 1.Are you going to make drivers aware of "They are Pedestrians too" and 2. are you going to give pedestrians priority when crossing roads along these corridors on similar the lines of Shared Space and 3. make Pedestrian Crossings truly "pedestrian friendly" with quick response to button pressing (very frustrating).4. are you going to mount a campaign billboarding the need to warn drivers of their responsibility to pedestrians & cyclists on known difficult and dangerous sections and 5. very large signs when entering townships and villages, similar to the likes of Poynton in Cheshire.. Nb. 2 or 3 years of high impact awareness should bring about permanent attitude changes unless attitudes change it will all be worthless

    Warren asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Details of signage will be developed at the detailed design stage. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • Why have all of the 3 Sowerby Bridge councillors not been informing residents What efforts have they made to inform anyone

    msp731lk asked 3 months ago
    The following response was provided by Mary Farrar, Corporate Lead for Transportation at Calderdale Council: 

    "Thank you for your query regarding the Corridor Programme. I can not speak for the ward councillors. However, I can say that it is not their responsibility to run the engagement programme, but mine and my teams. 

    We have limited resources and developed an engagement programme recommended by professionals and agreed by the Councils assistant director and portfolio holder. We must balance the cost and use of taxpayers money to ensure its well spent, but of course, it is impossible to reach everyone. 

     I hope you found an opportunity to review the plans."
  • 1) Will Commercial Street becoming one way not create considerable congestion at the junction of Albert Street,Keighley Road and Birchcliffe? 2) Are cyclists and pedestrians not a dangerous mix on Bridgegate. I have experienced numerous near misses as a pedestrian with cyclists, a number of whom disregard other users. 3) Could Atkins be informed of the correct spelling of Hebden in Hebden Bridge and manoeuvre.

    Stephen B asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • As someone who rarely spends time in corridors, it appears that the details of the proposed changes passed me by. Now I see what is proposed, I can see that it makes good sense if you consider that traffic flow speeds are the only consideration. However, I don't thihnk that traffic speeds should be a major objective. Hebden Bridge is a small town in a narrow valley, which unfortuately has a main road passing through it. The primary objective ought to be the welfare of local people and businesses, the environment they live in and the financial viability of the area. Not the need to turn the road into a motorway. What consideration has been given to the impact of the proposed changes on the local people and businesses? Why has no consideration been given to slowing trafic flow enough to encourage motorists to go a different way?

    iain asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. While the project proposals are required to align with the programme objectives, the approval of the scheme will require socio-economic assessments. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • What do you intend to put in place regarding lost parking spaces, You are proposing stopping on street parking in and around Hebden bridge in certain places, when parking is already very limited. This will affect traders in an already hard sales climate we have had no let up since boxing day 2015 many businesses are struggling.

    Lynveall asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. There are plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • I have a number of observations and questions regarding the proposed alterations for Sowerby Bridge North. 1. I note that Blackwall Lane will be made one way only (downhill) with separate lanes for right and left terns onto Burnley Road. Currently at peak times turning right onto Burnley Road is difficult and is only possible when cars travelling in both directions along Burnley Road slow down or stop to allow cars in Blackwall Lane to exit right onto Burnley Road. If traffic is allowed to flow more freely along Burnley Road please advise how cars will be able to exit Blackwall Rise and turn right onto Burnley Road. The proposed alteration will cause a significant build up of traffic in Blackwall Lane with the associated detrimental effects on air quality etc. 2. I am a keen cyclist and regularly commute to work in Wetherby. Under the proposed alterations I would not be able to return home up Blackwall Lane but would have to continue along Burnley Road and turn right up Water Hill Lane - a much steeper and more difficult hill to ride up. I understood that the Corridor Improvement Provisions were meant to improve things for cyclists. That is certainly not the case here. Please advise how the proposed alterations are to improve things for cyclists. 3. I note that the pedestrian crossing island between the bottom of Blackwall Lane and Tuel Lane is to be removed. Please advise how pedestrians are to cross Burney Road safely at this point. The proposed alteration will result in a significantly more dangerous crossing of Burnley Road at this point. 4. I note that the pedestrian crossing island further west along Burnley Road together with the hatching is to be removed. Please advise what provision is to be made to enable pedestrians - particularly the elderly and children to be able to cross Burnley Road safely. 5. I note that existing on-street parking on Burnley Road is to be removed. Please advise what alternate provision is to be made for the vehicles which park here at present. 6. I note that Water Hill Lane is to be made one way only (up hill). The road is very steep at the bottom and is not suitable for large/long vehicles including refuse collecting vehicles and gritter lorries. Please advise how such vehicles are to access Water Hill Lane for refuse collection and gritting purposes. The left turn into Water Hill Lane from Burnley Road is very difficult with no visibility round the corner due to the tall building. Before Water Hill Lane was made no-entry from the bottom there were a number of instances where cars turning left up the hill stalled and rolled back into Burnley Road. Please advise what provisions are to be made to prevent such incidents occurring in the future. I conclude that the proposed changes have been poorly thought out, increase the level of danger to both motorists, cyclists and pedestrians and the impact on local residents will be detrimental

    thewhiteley6 asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes at this location. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as they progress to detailed design. Where outside the scope of this scheme, any concerns raised will be relayed to the appropriate department within the Council. Should these proposals be progressed further, before implementation there would be a requirement to undergo formal consultation as part of the Traffic Regulation Order process, at which stage all residents and stakeholders would be contacted for input.
  • Anything to be done about parking in Ripponden at the Elland bank lights, from Lboro and Rishworth, the road can be restricted to one lane and lorries etc regularly get stuck and traffic backs up ....

    etak asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. In 2019, Calderdale Council Highways Department implemented a Traffic Regulation Order to address some of the concerns you have raised. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised. Where outside of scope, any concerns raised will be relayed to the appropriate department within the Council.
  • Your map gives very little detail about the proposals other than a few words of description. There is insufficient information to understand the proposed changes and their exact locations. Is there additional information that I am not able to see on the map? Diagrams of all affected junctions should be available to view if you expect to receive informed feedback. PS The link to your Privacy Policy is not working.

    Alison Grant asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The details of the junction improvements are still under development. All junction improvements, which require Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO), will undergo formal consultation as part of the TRO process, and as such residents and stakeholders will be contacted at this stage with detailed proposals. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council. Please accept our apologies that the link to the privacy policy did not work. I have tested the link on various devices and experienced no problems so can only assume this was a temporary blip.
  • Re Windle Royd Lane: The only description provided is "double yellow lines". More information is required. Is this to both sides of the road? If so, what happens to the designated pedestrian area to the east side of the road? Are the lines to be for the full length of the road? If so, how is parking to be accommodated for the church and the nursery? The lane is currently unsafe for pedestrians and by preventing parking close to the church and nursery, you may be increasing the risk to pedestrians. This isolated policy will not help the fundamental safety issues on Windle Royd Lane.

    R Levery asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The details of the proposed interventions at Windle Royd Lane are still under development. All junction improvements, which require Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO), will undergo formal consultation as part of the TRO process, and as such residents and stakeholders will be contacted at this stage with detailed proposals. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • The proposed CIPs will lead to a net loss of parking spaces in Hebden Bridge. Please describe how this will improve economic growth and job creation for Hebden Bridge and Mytholmroyd? There are opportunities for the development of edge of town parking at Walkley Clogs, Mayroyd Mill and adjacent to the Heptonstall turning circle. Please describe how these opportunities have been considered.

    nick12 asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. There are plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • 2. Economic growth and job creation are cited as two of the key drivers for the proposed road works. If they are not achieved and the opposite effect is experienced, then business owners and their employees will bear the financial burden, and in some cases this burden will force some businesses to close. This is not acceptable. The effect of the works on the local economy should be measured, and if they are found to be damaging to economic growth and job creation then compensation should be made available. It is crucial that a compensation framework is agreed with local business owners, and in place before the works begin. If the proposed roadworks are scheduled to coincide with the flood alleviation works then the Environment Agency and the Local Authority should both have compensation schemes in place that have been agreed with local business owners.

    nick12 asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The delivery phase of the projects, should it proceed, will commence in autumn 2020 and end in spring 2022. All the proposed intervention will be programmed for delivery within this window. The majority of proposed works are minor in construction terms, and as such will cause minimal disruption to the network. The project team will continue to work with stakeholders, including the Environment Agency, to ensure works are coordinated to further minimise impact to the network. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • Are you planning a shared pedestrian and cycle way along Burnley Road from Station Road towards Fallingroyd on the north side of the road? How will this be safe for pedestrians and what will happen to the cycles once they reach the corner where the Rochdale Canal Tunnel goes under the road?

    Eileen Cann asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The shared use design of the footway will cater for both pedestrians and cyclists, and sufficient widths will be provided to ensure safety for both pedestrians and cyclists. At the Rochdale Canal tunnel section, cyclists will have the option to rejoin the carriageway via a dropped curb, or continue along the canal. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design.
  • Hi Having had my attention drawn to these plans late, I would like to add my objection to the plans proposed. Hebden Bridge should be seen as a key destination and not just a through route between larger destinations. As such the removal of a large number of parking spaces between Burnley Road and Mytholmroyd seems like a short sighted move. There is already a large problem with parking in the town, and removal of a number of car parks to allow Markets and charging for onstreet parking (both recently introduced) have made the problem worse. Looking at the plans to double yellow the entire road between Mytholmroyd and Hebden Bridge, it seems this is due to adding a cycle lane on the road. As it is there is room for onstreet parking on one side of the road (as is now) plus 2 lanes of traffic. Therefore causing no problem. Adding a cycle lane is what creates the problem, whilst I accept this is great for safety and the environment, there are 2 existing cycle routes (both the tow path and the cycle route on the other side of the river) covering the same stretch. Removing the parking would also have detrimental impacts to the use of the Train station in Hebden Bridge which has limited parking. Have any surveys been done to understand the impact on the environment through the reduced use of public transport due to this? Finally due to the flooding and subsequent works in Mytholmroyd, local business in both towns has been hit by enough disruption. Visitors to Hebden Bridge have been visibly down over the last few years and when speaking to people it is clear a large number will not visit the town due to the time taken in the roadworks and then lack of parking when they arrive. The focus here should be on completing the roadworks in Mytholmroyd in a sensible timescale and promoting the town. Not causing more disruption and removing parking spaces. The only benefit here seems to be to those who wish to commute through Hebden Bridge and Mytholmroyd and not those who wish to visit!

    DavidO asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. There are plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council. While the canal and route 66 cycle path remain an attractive option in daylight and appropriate weather, the existing routes offer little resilience and thus remain a barrier for many cyclists. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised at detailed design.
  • I am a leader of a youth group which runs in St Paul's Methodist Church, Tower Hill. (There are at least 5 youth groups that meet in this building) We currently have parents dropping off their children and picking them up on our meeting nights (Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays). There is currently on street parking which makes it safe and easy for parents, children and leaders of the groups to come and go. Looking at the plans to the proposed corridor there will not be any parking available other than a small council pay and display which is a 5 - 10 minute walk away. Do you plan any provisions for our groups to be able to come and go without the added risks to their road safety, access to the building and spaces for volunteer leaders to be able to continue to park? I can see this may have a big impact on the future of the groups within this building which will be a great shame.

    Dawn asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes at Tower Hill. The project team will review all comments received, both in relation to availability of parking and pedestrian access to the church, and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design.
  • I cant understand the proposal to restrict Commercial St in Hebden Bridge to partially 1 way? The proposal implies that you will not be able to enter from Burnley rd and travel along and straight up Birchcliffe rd. Rather that all traffic going up Birchcliffe Rd will have to do the very sharp left turning. This is not feasible - have you seen the scratches on the wall from where vehicles cannot make the turn ? Having lived up Birchcliffe Rd 14 years the junction with commercial st is often blocked while vehicles do a multipoint turn to allow them selves to fully make the turn. There is some very large farm machinery / snowploughs / axel vehicles / towing with caravans that come up and down they cant make that turn safely. What does need to happen is enforce the 20 mph along commercial st, and put double yellow lines on the bends on Birchcliffe rd between Eiffel st and chapel ave - as a cyclist the poor parking here means having to go right out into the rd on a blind bend with people driving down at 40mph +

    Jocasta Fletcher asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design
  • Please confirm the approximate cost for the works. In addition, how do you propose to carry out the works, Mytholmroyd has had years of traffic delays and now when it is nearing the end you propose this which would also mean years and years of traffic disruption. how long do you envisage the work will last

    sm asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The total available funding for both the A646 and the A58 corridors amounts to circa £11 million. This incorporates the feasibility, development, design and delivery. The delivery phase of the projects, should it proceed, will commence in autumn 2020 and end in spring 2022. All the proposed interventions will be programmed for delivery within this window. The majority of proposed works are minor in construction terms, and as such will cause minimal disruption to the network. The project team will continue to work with stakeholders, including the Environment Agency, to ensure works are coordinated to further minimise impact to the network.
  • How will public transport be improved in the area? How will access, in terms of reduced fares be improved?

    Bambi31 asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. One of the main objectives of this scheme is to reduce delay and enable the bus services to become more reliable thus making them more attractive an option. The Council has no control over the levels of bus fares but we do work with operators through the West Yorkshire Bus Alliance which is looking at Ticketing and Affordability as one of its themes.
  • Why has such little time been allowed for public consultation and why has there been no consideration of the more sensible park and ride approach to parking issues. And, as importantly, there is nothing about how Calderdale will better manage the many many temporary road works (used by utility companies) that contribute significantly to traffic congestion and slowness along the A646 corridor.

    Phil Kelly asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. Following feedback, I am pleased to inform you that the engagement period has been extended until 14 February. There are currently plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • Are there changes to Waterhill Lane ?

    Liz Leadbetter asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. A diagram showing the proposals for Sowerby Bridge North can be found here. Please be aware that we have already received a number of comments in relation to the proposed changes at this location and we will continue to review the proposals in light of the comments received as we progress into detailed design.
  • The main cause of traffic congestion in Ripponden along the Oldham Road, is due to the fact that wherever there is parking on both sides of the road within 300 yards of the traffic lights in the centre of Ripponden, this prevents lorries and large vehicles when approaching from opposite directions, from passing one another between the parked cars. The proposed scheme will do nothing to alleviate this situation which is the main cause of of stationary traffic and the interuption of the free flow of traffic through Ripponden. So why has nothing been done to address this problem.

    Ian asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. In 2019, Calderdale Council Highways Department implemented a Traffic Regulation Order to address some of the concerns you have raised. The project team will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • How do I add comments & image This scheme is unacceptable for residents of Waterhill as it denies access but despite promises of being able to add feedback this is not available in the survey format!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Also please phome number that is actually connected to the scheme

    msp731lk asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. I am sorry to hear that you have been experiencing difficulties submitting your feedback. It is intended that respondents use both the survey and the interactive map to be provide feedback. The survey is designed to obtain data which can be quantified whereas the interactive map allows you to provide more detailed comments. The map can be found at: https://cip-pinpoint.calderdale.gov.uk/

    The Calderdale CIPs are managed jointly by various teams across three different organisations who are each responsible for different aspects of the scheme and therefore we have chosen to provide the phone number for our MetroLine call centre who will be able to take a message and ensure it is passed onto the correct person from the most appropriate team. You can also choose to leave a phone number and request a call back from a relevant officer. MetroLine is staffed between 7am and 8pm Monday to Saturday and 8am to 8pm on Sunday. 

    If you wish to speak to someone, please let me know and I will arrange this.
  • Why is it impossible to actually leave feedback on the interactive map. If the window actually stays open long enough to enter a comment, the 'Submit Feedback' button does not work.

    JTK asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. I am sorry to hear that you have been experiencing difficulties using the interactive map. As I am not encountering such problems myself it is proving difficult to pinpoint the exact issue. However, I have passed your comments onto the relevant officers who will investigate. In the meantime, you are more than welcome to submit feedback via email to yourvoice@westyorks-ca.gov.uk.
  • why doesn't the email contact provided work ?

    msp731lk asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. Please can you confirm which email address you are referring to and in what way it hasn't worked?
  • Why has car parking not been addressed in this scheme ? If there were more parking facilities away from A646 (HB) this would lessen congestion and ease flow

    Gina asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. There are currently plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • What is the route for cyclists coming down Heptonstall Hill, wishing to travel into Hebden Bridge? I cannot see if they are allowed to turn left in order to enter the road while traffic is stopped; cycling down and round the turning circle increases danger due to having to enter the traffic from the turning circle which can come at speed; and then cycling up the hill towards the lights by the Fox & Goose; which is narrow, then being in danger of left turning cars going UP Heptonstall Hill. A filter lane allowing left hand turn (when pedestrian lights are red) would be much safer. Is this provided for please? I can't see from the diagram. All I see is a few 'cycle route' triangle signs which will have no real safety impact for cyclists.

    LME asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The existing traffic signals allow for cyclists to turn left when the lights are green on Heptinstall Road. The current proposals are to facilitate an easier left turn movement when said lights are green. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • Are you going to create parking in hebden bridge. You cannot reduce parking in this area, it WILL be detrimental to our town. We BADLY need more parking

    Trish asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. There are currently plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • The removal of parking between Station Road and the Rochdale Canal Terminal would affect maybe 100 cars, where do you propose these cars will park? The carparks yin Hebden Bridge are already full to the maximum. If these all-day parkers ( which will be either people who work in Hebden Bridge, or commuters using the Hebden Bridge train station), if these all-day parkers are forced to park in the Hebden Bridge town centre carparks this will have a huge negative impact on tourists and shoppers being unable to park in Hebden Bridge. I personally have never felt the parking along this section. of road has caused any traffic delays. The road is quite wide enough for two lanes to pass in addition to a solid line of parked cars. I strongly disagree with this proposal, unless you are going to somehow create a brand new carpark close to the station which would accommodate all of these cars. Can I ask also what you are doing to improve the Northern Rail service in the valley? Surely this is paramount to reducing traffic, pollution and increasing commerce. The frequency of cancelled trains, the recently reduced timetable and the reduction. of trains stopping in Mytholmroyd are all factors that make people drive as the train service is unreliable. In Mytholmroyd they are constructing a new larger carpark, but this is pointless now that Northern Rail of reduced the number of trains stopping in Mytholmroyd. For Mytholmroyd residents to have flexibility on trains it is necessary to travel from Hebden Bridge station. For instance on a Sunday there are no longer any direct trains from Leeds to Manchester Victoria that stop in Mytholmroyd at all.

    Phil asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. There are currently plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • Why can't you just put Double Yellow lines between Macpelah & Fallingroyd Bridge. Make the land between Carr Rd. & HB Rail Station into a car park to clear the A646 of parked cars

    David Peter Woodhead asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. There are currently plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additional spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • Regarding the A58 / A672 route - it is quite clear that the bottleneck for traffic is the approach to Sowerby Bridge from Triangle - at the confluence of the A58 with Sowerby St & Station Rd. The queue through Sowerby Bridge can be 0.5miles and more. Without addressing this, everything else though Rishworth and Ripponden etc is 'fluff' - a distraction. The plans for Sowerby Bridge do not include any changes to the supposed 'Relief Road' via Holmes Road which, in itself is a joke, as a) you have to get to Station Rd in order to access it, and b) the rail tunnel and parked cars along the road mean it acts as a single track lane for much of the day anyway. Does the Council have any plans to properly address this bottleneck to improve flow?

    antwak asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The proposed scheme aims to improve the congestion issues from the said location through to Tuel Lane junction, with further improvements proposed at Station Road and Victoria Street. Unfortunately, improving access to Holmes Road is not within the scope of this project. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as we progress into detailed design.
  • Where Commercial Street joins Burnley Road in Hebden Bridge, would it better if the crossing point for crossing Commercial Street were moved up Commercial Street a little? Although traffic will not be permitted to turn into Commercial Street, that doesn't mean that it never will. So pedestrians will still need to look over their shoulders if they are crossing Commercial Street on their way into Hebden Bridge. By moving the station end of this crossing up the road a bit I think it might make it safer. You have a puffin crossing marked in the plans as already existing. This doesn't currently exist but it would deal with my concern if you created one.

    Pete Thomasson asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as we progress into detailed design.
  • At the junction where Commercial Street meets Birchcliffe Road: A lorry is trying to turn up Birchcliffe Road having come from Keighley or come up Albert Street. I know you are making the junction bigger but what about the 3D aspect. Won't the back of the lorry that sticks out behind the rear axle get stuck on the road as the front goes uphill?

    Pete Thomasson asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as we progress into detailed design.
  • Will lorries coming from Albert Street in Hebden Bridge be able to turn right onto the A646 without hitting the new island?

    Pete Thomasson asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. All proposals undergo tracking and road safety assessment. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns as we progress into detailed design.
  • Will the removal of Parking Spaces along Burnley Road by Hebden Bridge station only happen once additional spaces have been created at the station?

    Pete Thomasson asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. Yes - it is intended that the provison of additional spaces at the station will be installed prior to removal of the parking along Burley Road. 
  • Please can you remove the roundabout outside the fire station at King Cross. It doesn't work for traffic going into King Cross when it's busy. Something should be done. Loads of mini roundabouts were replaced in the last 10 years, not sure why this one has remained.

    Nosh asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. The current proposals include the removal of the mini roundabout and closure of Free School Lane at this point. A number of insightful comments have been received in relation to these proposals. The project team will continue to review the proposals in light of the comments received as we progress into detailed design.
  • Will people be able to safely cross Albert Street in Hebden Bridge because there will be more traffic once Commercial Street becomes one way at the bottom?

    Pete Thomasson asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will continue to review the proposals in light of the comments received as we progress into detailed design.
  • Hebden Bridge 1. How do you propose to make up for the massive loss of car parking spaces, for visitors, local people and those using the station? These spaces are on Albert Street, Burnley Road between Station Road, Mayroyd and Falling Royd. 2. Why do we need a cycle lanes on the Burnley Road between Station Road and Falling Royd when we already have a safe and scenic Route 66 running on the other side of the canal and river? 3. How is sending more traffic up Albert Street helping pedestrians when there is no crossing there? 4. The plans mention an already located Puffin crossing on Commercial Street which does not presently exist. Is the intention to put one in and is this really necessary so far up where people probably won't cross? 5. Where are the people presently using the garages and parking in Tanpits meant to go to park? Do not refuse lorries already turn around in that space and find it adequate? 6. Does the Hebden Bridge centre plans mean less parking for visitors and locals, despite the proposals for a car park on the west side of Hebden which can't possibly make up the difference and has already been empty for 4 years?

    Dorothy Ann Simister asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. 1) & 6) There are no plans to reduce parking in central Hebden Bridge (on and around Albert Street and Crown Street). There are plans for the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to provide over 40 additonal spaces at Hebden Bridge Station. As part of the CIP scheme it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that fall outside the scope of this project will be relaid to the relevent department within Calderdale Council. 2) While the canal and route 66 cycle path remain an attractive option in daylight and appropriate weather, the existing routes offer little resilience and thus remain a barrier for many cyclists. 3) & 4) A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposed changes in the centre of Hebden Bridge. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design. 5) The project team has raised the concerns surrounding Tan Pits with the relevent departments within Calderdale Council, and we will continue to review scheme proposals in light of the comments received and endeavour to address any concerns raised.
  • Why are you planning to have a cycle lane on the carriageway along Burnley Road between Hebden Bridge and the Rochdale Canal Tunnel when the Route 66 Cycle Path already provides this facility?

    Pete Thomasson asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. While the canal and route 66 cycle path remain an attractive option in daylight and appropriate weather, the existing routes offer little resilience and thus remain a barrier for many cyclists.
  • Why get rid of parking from opp hebden bridge station to Fallingroyd? I don't see that it causes a problem. Cyclsts will mostly use canal path anyway. . And unless parking at hb station is increased by about 100 places to compensate, these proposals will simply stop commuters using trains, and will push them instead back onto the roads.! I'm all for managing parking and improving cycling options. .. lots of these proposals make sense. But this one seems to.involve yellow lines for the sake of it. I just don't understand. Ps. I'm retired and don't commute so this is not a vested interest, just genuine puzzlement....

    Mark holtom asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. This location is generally occupied by 60 to 80 vehicles on a daily basis, and 8 to 12 vehicles overnight. It is understood that a wide range of users park at this location, including commuters, canal residents, workers and vistors to Hebden Bridge. The car park at Hebden Bridge Station is due to be increased by over 40 spaces, while the proposed car park at Stubbing Holme Road would have a capacity of over 60 spaces. As for the cycling provisons, while the canal and route 66 cycle path remain an attractive option in daylight and appropriate weather, the existing routes offer little resilience and thus remain a barrier for many cyclists.
  • I thought there were plan at luddendenfoot to remove the derelict pub and remodel that junction. Would make a big difference Isn't that part of the plans?

    Mark holtom asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The demolition of the existing building does not provide any viable solution or benefits to the corridor.
  • Are there any proposals to introduce traffic calming on Pye Nest Road. Whilst the sped limit on this section of the scheme is limited to 30mph, the a large number of vehicles exceed the limit by a significant amount in both directions. On the section between Edwards Road and Rochdale Road where there is a long bend, cars have been known to leave the carriage way, cross the pavements and collide with trees and garden walls, and this is on the section that climbs to the junction with Rochdale Road. On the down hill section between Edwards Road and Crestfield Drive there have been similar incidents.

    Garry Stringfellow asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. While traffic calming measures at this location are not within scope of this project, we will continue to reveiw the proposals in light of the comments received. Where we are unable to address any concerns raised we will ensure the comments are relayed to the appropriate department within Calderdale Council.
  • The real improvement we need to implement is reduction in numbers of private vehicles at peak times first, and at all other times next. How do we get people to release their manic grip on their motor cars ? I can accept people who need to transport disabled or seriously ill family members using private cars... but everyone who can't afford private cars manages just fine thankyouverymuch so it is a very close one. Before deregulation West Yorkshire had the best bus system in England. It isn't anywhere near as good now, but there are still plenty of buses and trains and if demand rises so will supply.

    Sam asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The funding for this scheme is conditional on the plans improving journey times. However, the project team recognise the importance of facilitating a modal shift towards public and sustainable transport, and have endeavoured to do so within the scope of funding. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received.
  • Hebden Bridge. Changes to junction Commercial Street / A646 clarification of what is proposed. Removal of parking on A646 Market Street. Clarification of need. Even when cars are parked in existing spaces ther is still room for a car and a bus and to pas. Clarification of need to remove road side parking availability A646 Station Road to Fallingroyd Rochdale Canal Bridge. 6 spaces at Falingroyd will not make up fro loss of road side spaces.

    Michael Heyworth asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The current proposal is to make Commercial Street one way at the Burnley Road junction and to improve pedestrian facilities at this junction. In relation to parking, it is proposed to provide additional parking at a site on Stubbing Holme Road to offset lose of parking along the A646 corridor. The interaction of parked vehicles with traffic can seriously affect the reliability of flow, particularly at peak times and in relation to larger vehicles and buses. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevant department within Calderdale Council.
  • On drawing 7of7 for King Cross to Bolton Brow: Can you confirm, is the existing mini roundabout at the junction of Skircoat Moor Road and Free School Lane to be closed? How is access to/from Free School Lane going to be achieved, or is it intended to be closed off? A big congestion issue in this area is vehicles picking up / dropping off children at Crossleys school - it would be worth observing the chaos around here at about 8:15-8:45 in the morning! Perhaps a one way pickup / drop off 'loop' (effectively turning Spring Edge and the top part of Free School Lane into a large roundabout) could help eliminate conflicting vehicle movements?

    Richard Sunderland asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. The currrent proposals include the removal of the mini roundabout and closure of Free School Lane at this point. A number of insightful comments have been received in relation to these plans and the project team will continue to review the proposals in light of the comments received as we progress into detailed design.
  • Calderdale council are intending to build around 5000 new houses in Brighouse. Where are the plans to modernise transport infrastructure for Brighouse? For a start there needs to be a bypass from Hipperholme into Halifax itself, cutting across Shibden Valley and Sunnyvale. Where are the plans for this project? Or what about Bradford Road, the main road between Huddersfield and Bradford... That hasn't been improved for about 150 years. Todmorden and Hebden Bridge have well maintained roads Brighouse roads are full of potholes. How about you fix Brighouse's roads before spending money on well maintained ones?

    Simon asked 3 months ago
    The Calderdale Corridor Improvement Programmes only covers the area of the A58 / A672 from Junction 22 of the M62 to King Cross in Halifax and the A646 / A6033 from Todmorden to Skircoat Moor, and therefore neither Brighouse nor the A641 are within scope of this project. However, we will relay your comments to the appropriate department within Calderdale Council.
  • Have the people who have come up with these alterations actually done site meetings? If the answer is yes I can only presume they either attended when the road junctions was extremely quiet or they turned a blind eye to the all too often near misses especially at the top of Tuel Lane.

    Martin Holt asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. The formulation of the scheme's proposals includes site visits, review of accident data and engagement with Highways and Traffic teams within Calderdale Council. The Project Team will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council. If you would like to provide further details of your concerns you can use our interactive map which can be found at https://cip-pinpoint.calderdale.gov.uk/.
  • 1. What will be the car parking arrangements for St. Paul's Methodist Church? 2. Will this church remain a safe place for youth organisations and toddler groups? 3. What was the thinking behind the original decision to divert the original Tuel Lane, when Tower Hill was created? 4. Are there plans to demolish the Houghton Towers tower block?

    Dr. P. J. Hinton asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your query. A number of comments have been received in relation to St Paul's church, and the impact of Tower Hill proposals. The project team will review all comments received and endeavour to address the concerns in detailed design. It is not within the remit or scope of the CIP scheme to demolish Houghton Towers.
  • We need a road bypass system so will definitely 100% reduce congestion as there will be another road going to either directions, so another new road built above the road we already have, a bypass road is the only option, please save up and gain funds to do this. Thanks

    Mo Q. asked 3 months ago

    Thank you for your comment. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.

  • Can the need for a pedestrian crossing on the A646 White Lee Mytholmroyd be considered. There is no safe way of crossing the road here. There are local business on one side of the road eg vets, hairdressers, sewing shop. It is almost impossible to cross this road at White Lee safely. The road is also used by the secondary school children. I have to try to cross it regularly with someone with a physical disability and it is dangerous

    Ap asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. We will continue to review the scheme proposals in light of the comments received. Any comments that the project is unable to address will be relayed to the relevent department within Calderdale Council.
  • If you are talking about an 8% increase in traffic flow generally that will adversely affect cyclist and pedestrians who are already disadvantaged. Why is speed made so important? Enjoyment of the journey, less stressful, less polluting, less noisy with priority for buses, pedestrians and cyclists. These are far more important unless you are a boy racer or a highways engineer!!

    SP asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comment. The funding for this scheme is conditional on the plans improving journey times. However,  the project team has endeavoured to balance pedestrian and cyclists needs with the scheme objectives. Journey time improvements do not necessarily require greater speeds but rather can also be delivered through consistency of traffic flow, which also helps deliver more reliable bus services. We will continue to review the proposals in light of the comments received. Feedback can be provided on individual areas using our interactive map which can be found at https://cip-pinpoint.calderdale.gov.uk/
  • Hello. Your comments state the A58 improvements are from junction 22 and presumably therefore all the way through Hipperholme Stump Cross and Godley. However when I clicked on the interactive map I can find nothing relating to this side of Halifax. Where are the improvements for these areas where traffic queues are awful most of the day and horrendous at peak times. The traffic junction at Stump Cross is blocked most of the time. Anyone trying to get out at the bottom of the hough is putting their life at risk. The lights only allow about 4 cars through coming down from Northowram. Mainly due to the cars coming along the A58 from Hipperholme failing to stop at the red light and blocking the box so northowram traffic can’t get through. Traffic is always backed up here towards northowram with long delays getting through. This causes drivers to use northowram village as rat runs to get into Halifax and the village roads can’t cope. What is being done about this junction and also Hipperholme. Bearing in mind the amount of housing development that is being proposed in the local plan for these areas, what are the councils plans to cope with this?

    Annharris asked 3 months ago
    The Calderdale Corridor Improvement Programmes only covers the area of the A58 between Junction 22 of the M62 and King Cross, and therefore Hipperholme and Stump Cross are not within scope of this project. However, we will relay your comments to the appropriate department within Calderdale Council.
  • Under what premise has the A58 / A672 improved journeys for cyclists? This is a fast moving road with no separate cycle lane. The paint marked lanes from Rishworth through to Sowerby Bridge are not regulated to keep cars away from bicycles. In fact, vehicles can park across the marked lanes and block the routes, forcing the bikes into a dangerous manoeuvre of having to swerve into traffic.

    AW asked 3 months ago
    Thank you for your comments. As part of this scheme we have endeavoured to improve existing, and where possible provide additional provisons for cyclists both in the shape of cycle lanes on the carriageway and shared use facilities where practicable. We will continue to review the proposals in light of comments received as we progress into detailed design. Feedback can be provided on individual areas using the interactive map at www.cip-pinpoint.calderdale.gov.uk/
  • I live in a council identified poor air zone at Hipperholme- not noticed any improvement and am concerned about my family’s/ neighbours health / wellbeing- what have you done to improve the situation? Nothing as far as I’m aware? 😡

    GuyEd asked 3 months ago
    The Calderdale Corridor Improvement Programmes only covers the area of the A58 between Junction 22 of the M62 and King Cross, and therefore Hipperholme is not within scope of this project. However, we will relay your comments to the appropriate department within Calderdale Council.
  • Why were the previous consultations so poorly advertised in the Hebden Bridge area? We are a community not a corridor.

    DJP asked 3 months ago

    A number of methods were used to advertise this period of engagement including the following:

    • A press release was released to all local media 
    • A message is being displayed on available Real Time Information displays across Halifax City Centre and the two corridors in question
    • A series of social media messages (Twitter and Facebook) are being released by throughout the engagement period 
    • Posters were placed in 216 bus shelters along the corridors and in some local facilities
    • The engagement was advertised on our Your Voice online engagement hub, Calderdale Council’s website, the Calderdale Next Chapter website, the Combined Authority’s website and the consultation and engagement webpage on Metro’s website
    • A series of bespoke emails were sent out to the Combined Authority’s consultation and engagement databases
    • The engagement was included in our MetroMessenger travel newsletter
    • Local councillors were informed ahead of the engagement

  • How are the public aware of this consultation?

    R Levery asked 3 months ago

    A number of methods were used to advertise this period of engagement including the following:

    • A press release was released to all local media 
    • A message is being displayed on available Real Time Information displays across Halifax City Centre and the two corridors in question
    • A series of social media messages (Twitter and Facebook) are being released by throughout the engagement period 
    • Posters were placed in 216 bus shelters along the corridors and in some local facilities
    • The engagement was advertised on our Your Voice online engagement hub, Calderdale Council’s website, the Calderdale Next Chapter website, the Combined Authority’s website and the consultation and engagement webpage on Metro’s website
    • A series of bespoke emails were sent out to the Combined Authority’s consultation and engagement databases
    • The engagement was included in our MetroMessenger travel newsletter
    • Local councillors were informed ahead of the engagement