OSTEOPATHS claim speed bumps will hurt their patients and their business.

Proposals to curb fast moving vehicles in Valley Road and Stewart Street, Crewe, found plenty of support amongst residents in a public consultation exercise.

Their opinions and those of local councillors have signalled the go-ahead to highway engineers to install measures to slow down drivers. These include raised cushions.

Partners in the Valley Road Osteopathic Surgery were the only objectors, fearing that the proposed measures would exacerbate problems for patients experiencing back pain as they travelled to the surgery.

Some of the 5,000 patients that they treated each year would, they claimed, go elsewhere.

County Highways chiefs admitted that speed cushions and humps might cause problems for people with back pain but claimed that they were the most effective measures of traffic calming.

"Chicanes and other methods will not reduce drivers' speeds to the same extent as the proposed vertical measures and are unlikely to achieve the desired reduction in injury accidents along the route.

"However drivers will reduce their levels of discomfort if they drive around 20mph," said a spokesman.

The borough's Highways and Transportation Joint Committee gave the green light to the speed restrictions designed to cut down accidents and provide a safer route for school children.

The members heard that 191 people had taken part in a survey of public opinion over the proposed measures.

These include 18 sets of speed cushions and two speed tales at recognised crossing points as well as stop, look and listen footway markings at school crossing points.

Also proposed are signing and carriageway markings and build-outs at some of the side road junctions to narrow the road, protect parking and improve visibility for both pedestrians and vehicles emerging from them.

The survey revealed that 76 per cent wanted traffic calming of some description; 68 per cent approved of the proposed scheme or an extension of it.

Nine per cent wanted traffic calming, but not the proposed scheme and 24 per cent wanted no form of traffic calming although some people wanted speed cameras or traffic signals/pelican crossings.

These were ruled out because the roads did not meet the serious accident criteria necessary.