Marple Website Community Calendar
Archive => Archived Boards => Local Issues => Topic started by: Snowball on February 05, 2018, 03:03:41 PM
-
Can any of our Councillors (or prospective Councillors) enlighten me as too why a new footpath is being constructed along the wooded side of Otterspool Road. Given that there is already a perfectly serviceable footpath in place on the other side of the road it seems to be an unnecessary waste of limited resources as well as causing huge traffic congestion.
-
Just tagging a few people who may be able to help @Snowball
@CllrGeoffAbell @CllrKennyBlair @TomDowseMarpleSouth @Malcolm Allan @ChrisGleeson @chriswallis labour @yvonnecollier @Steve Gribbon @ColinMac
-
Can any of our Councillors (or prospective Councillors) enlighten me as too why a new footpath is being constructed along the wooded side of Otterspool Road. Given that there is already a perfectly serviceable footpath in place on the other side of the road it seems to be an unnecessary waste of limited resources as well as causing huge traffic congestion.
Hi Snowball
I will happily pass this on for you to find out what is going on, this is not my area (Marple North) so bear with me and I will make sure this is passed to the correct person for a reply.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
-
Might it be a separate cycle path so bikes aren't holding traffic up / subjected to cars passing at high speed
-
Good morning Snowball
I had a chat with a Council official this morning. The plan is to create a 2nd pathway running down to the Toucan crossing on Vale Road, going into Chadkirk Park. The work is estimated to be completed by the end of March.
I hope this information is what you were looking for.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
-
Thanks for your efforts Steve but the Council response doesn't really answer my question. I could work out that it was a footpath they were building but I was puzzled as to why the need, given that there are many other competing demands for scarce resources.
-
Thanks for your efforts Steve but the Council response doesn't really answer my question. I could work out that it was a footpath they were building but I was puzzled as to why the need, given that there are many other competing demands for scarce resources.
That's fair enough Snowball, this is the only information I was given from my questions. If I find anything else out I will be in touch.
Kind regards
Steve
-
A toucan crossing is the term used for a pedestrian and bike crossing. From this i'm assuming that it'll allow the cycle path to run from Chadkirk up to Bredbury and allow a segregated cycle path from Bredbury to the Alan Newton Way.
Andy
-
A toucan crossing is the term used for a pedestrian and bike crossing. From this i'm assuming that it'll allow the cycle path to run from Chadkirk up to Bredbury and allow a segregated cycle path from Bredbury to the Alan Newton Way.
Andy
I think that's a fair point Andy. It may be a good idea when it's up and running, only time will tell of course.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
-
A toucan crossing is the term used for a pedestrian and bike crossing..
Not all toucan allow bikes, but unlike a puffin crossing it detects when people have finished crossing the road, and a toucan crossing doesn’t have a flashing amber phase. Some toucan crossing (when installed correctly) detect cyclists on the cycle path, so the cyclists never have to wait for a green light, hence promoting cycling over car driving.
To see the see for something to be done, try walking from Marple to the pub, there is no way without having to walk in the road, or cross where it is not safe to do so.
-
Not all toucan allow bikes, but unlike a puffin crossing it detects when people have finished crossing the road, and a toucan crossing doesn’t have a flashing amber phase. Some toucan crossing (when installed correctly) detect cyclists on the cycle path, so the cyclists never have to wait for a green light, hence promoting cycling over car driving.
To see the see for something to be done, try walking from Marple to the pub, there is no way without having to walk in the road, or cross where it is not safe to do so.
Well that's taught me something new! I always thought a Toucan crossing was for bikes and pedestrians (hence 'two can' cross). I'm safe with my knowledge of a pegasus crossing though. I think.
Kind regards, and thanks for your input Ringi
Steve Gribbon
-
Looks like it is a cycle way. Details HERE (http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/documents/s122819/Growth%20Fund%202%20Goyt%20Valley%20Improvements%20-%20Otterspool%20Road%20Main%20Report.pdf)
-
Well that's taught me something new! I always thought a Toucan crossing was for bikes and pedestrians (hence 'two can' cross).
Steve Gribbon
Highway code rule 80 says
Rule 80
Toucan crossings. These are light-controlled crossings which allow cyclists and pedestrians to share crossing space and cross at the same time. They are push-button operated. Pedestrians and cyclists will see the green signal together. Cyclists are permitted to ride across.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82 (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82)
-
Thank you all
-
Highway code rule 80 says
Rule 80
Toucan crossings. These are light-controlled crossings which allow cyclists and pedestrians to share crossing space and cross at the same time. They are push-button operated. Pedestrians and cyclists will see the green signal together. Cyclists are permitted to ride across.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82 (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82)
But only if cycling is allowed on the "pavement" on both sides of the crossing... (And often it is not.)
-
Seems to me like a waste of money when there is so many roads that are pot holed!
-
At last something useful is being done. Try riding your bike up that hill - a 40 mph road with double white lines in places leaving no room for vehicles to pass cyclists safely. Friends who lived on Overdale Road had taken to riding downhill on the footpath as they were too intimidated by passing traffic until they were warned off by the Police for riding on a footpath, so they then rode into Romiley and down Vale Road rather than use Otterspool Road. Going uphill is even worse as keeping a straight line is more difficult.
Several years ago I took up this issue with Stockport Highways Department and met their representative accompanied by Andrew Stunell, then our MP. At the time the Highways Department's comment was that it was unnecessary because "so far no cyclist has been killed on that road" !! Hopefully this attitude has now ceased.
At much the same time it was suggested at Stockport’s Cycle User Group for cyclists to use Bunkers Hill Rd by providing access at its lower level, by far the best solution, and thus bypassing the dangerous Otterspool Rd but, as has been the case on many occasions, cyclists recommendations were ignored.
-
At last something useful is being done. Try riding your bike up that hill - a 40 mph road with double white lines in places leaving no room for vehicles to pass cyclists safely. Friends who lived on Overdale Road had taken to riding downhill on the footpath as they were too intimidated by passing traffic until they were warned off by the Police for riding on a footpath, so they then rode into Romiley and down Vale Road rather than use Otterspool Road. Going uphill is even worse as keeping a straight line is more difficult.
Several years ago I took up this issue with Stockport Highways Department and met their representative accompanied by Andrew Stunell, then our MP. At the time the Highways Department's comment was that it was unnecessary because "so far no cyclist has been killed on that road" !! Hopefully this attitude has now ceased.
At much the same time it was suggested at Stockport’s Cycle User Group for cyclists to use Bunkers Hill Rd by providing access at its lower level, by far the best solution, and thus bypassing the dangerous Otterspool Rd but, as has been the case on many occasions, cyclists recommendations were ignored.
so how many cyclists do you think will use it compared with people who use the parks and recreation grounds that are being left in decay .
-
so how many cyclists do you think will use it compared with people who use the parks and recreation grounds that are being left in decay .
Irrelevant - as the funding for the scheme has come from a central government highways funding grant.
-
so how many cyclists do you think will use it compared with people who use the parks and recreation grounds that are being left in decay .
Hi Amazon
I think we will agree to disagree on this because I feel that CTCREP has it spot on. I walked down what is the only pavement at present on that stretch of road yesterday to gauge width and path standards etc. At some point it's only a couple of feet wide up to the grass verge, no use for both pedestrians and cyclists together. The road is hazardous for cyclists and this is especially on the climb up, so a cycle route in my view will help both with safety and should look smart too.
At weekend we get a lot of leisure cyclists on the road, this will be of benefit to them also. I like to think of schemes like this to be proactive rather than an accident occurring then a reactive measure taking place. It's correct as many have suggested that potholes need investment and sorting out but looking at the work being carried out down to Chadkirk I think it's being done for the good of our area.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
-
Another section of the same road is desperate for some attention!
The footpath between the Hare and Hounds and the lights at the bottom of Dan Bank is atrocious.
After the big wall the footpath becomes very narrow.
It is so narrow that it even feels unsafe walking along it.
It is constantly wet from water draining off the side and there is often vegetation debris on the path.
The road is also very narrow here. Try riding a bike up to the junction - it’s awful with the constant stream of traffic.
The trees overhanging the road are also in desperate need of some attention. Many of them look like they could go over at any time.
Who is responsible for the land at the side of the road? The council or landowner?
Something really needs to be done about it for the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and motorists!
-
But only if cycling is allowed on the "pavement" on both sides of the crossing... (And often it is not.)
Where there’s a toucan crossing, often it is.
Thank heavens for some common sense investment from the council with this off-road climbing lane for cyclists. These could be added to so many more local roads to make it easier to get about by bike without fear of a snarling queue of traffic behind you (or getting side-swiped by people impatiently overtaking). Just look at the difference to Dan Bank and the amount of people now happy to climb that hill - even kids.
Sadly High Lane hasn’t been so lucky - I’ve just learned that a wide shared pavement planned between Middlewood Way and the new SEMMMS scheme (and thus the cycleway along it all the way to the airport) has been quietly cancelled because “it wouldn’t cater for equestrians”. No, I don’t understand that reasoning either.
Instead they’re painting a single cycle lane going uphill into High Lane (except where it meets a traffic island, junction or narrow part of the road, where the lane suddenly disappears and you’re on your own). Paid for by SEMMMS before anyone asks.
-
Another section of the same road is desperate for some attention!
The footpath between the Hare and Hounds and the lights at the bottom of Dan Bank is atrocious.
After the big wall the footpath becomes very narrow.
It is so narrow that it even feels unsafe walking along it.
It is constantly wet from water draining off the side and there is often vegetation debris on the path.
The road is also very narrow here. Try riding a bike up to the junction - it’s awful with the constant stream of traffic.
The trees overhanging the road are also in desperate need of some attention. Many of them look like they could go over at any time.
Who is responsible for the land at the side of the road? The council or landowner?
Something really needs to be done about it for the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and motorists!
Yes! Totally agreed! That’s just an awful piece of road, yet only a fairly short piece where they’d need to rebuild a retaining wall further back. They did it for Dan Bank so I’ve never understood why they didn’t do it here at the same time. Ideally Otterspool/Dooley should have a good wide, shared pavement its entire length to help as many people as possible use it without adding to the backed-up queue of cars!
-
Hi Amazon
I think we will agree to disagree on this because I feel that CTCREP has it spot on. I walked down what is the only pavement at present on that stretch of road yesterday to gauge width and path standards etc. At some point it's only a couple of feet wide up to the grass verge, no use for both pedestrians and cyclists together. The road is hazardous for cyclists and this is especially on the climb up, so a cycle route in my view will help both with safety and should look smart too.
At weekend we get a lot of leisure cyclists on the road, this will be of benefit to them also. I like to think of schemes like this to be proactive rather than an accident occurring then a reactive measure taking place. It's correct as many have suggested that potholes need investment and sorting out but looking at the work being carried out down to Chadkirk I think it's being done for the good of our area.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
Hi Lily
I'm in total agreement with you, I spoke to A Councilor about this the other day and will be visiting the site next week to see what options are available. It's no longer a grass verge and needs attention.
Kind regards
Steve
-
Hi Amazon
I think we will agree to disagree on this because I feel that CTCREP has it spot on. I walked down what is the only pavement at present on that stretch of road yesterday to gauge width and path standards etc. At some point it's only a couple of feet wide up to the grass verge, no use for both pedestrians and cyclists together. The road is hazardous for cyclists and this is especially on the climb up, so a cycle route in my view will help both with safety and should look smart too.
At weekend we get a lot of leisure cyclists on the road, this will be of benefit to them also. I like to think of schemes like this to be proactive rather than an accident occurring then a reactive measure taking place. It's correct as many have suggested that potholes need investment and sorting out but looking at the work being carried out down to Chadkirk I think it's being done for the good of our area.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
Ok point taken
-
Amazon asked "so how many cyclists do you think will use it compared with people who use the parks and recreation grounds that are being left in decay". Well I would like to suggest hundreds. I had friends who lived on Overdale Rd who took to riding into Romiley and down to Chadkirk in order to avoid being intimidated by the traffic on Otterspool Rd - and they were certainly not wimps. I guess there are many others that would think that way. And as for the Parks being left in decay, ask how it is the Council's GreenSpace Manager can find money to upgrade obscure footpaths in Mellor and Houghton Dale while ignoring the Parks.
While we are in the area of Otterspool Rd, we should be asking why the Council is delaying upgrading the off-road route into Stockport which commences at Mill Lane. The Council claims this is an "aspirational route" though I am sure that SUSTRANS considered it an essential part of their Connect2 scheme that provided the route from Marple Hall Drive down to Chadkirk and the bridge over the River Goyt. The Council claims it is waiting for funding to provide another bridge in order to take the route into Vernon Park. It is debatable if this is necessary, but why debate something that is never likely to happen. It is just an excuse to do nothing to encourage cycling as a form of commuting, which is the most useful way of reducing pollution and creating a healthier population.
We tend to think of cycling into Stockport, but of course the reverse is also available.That would encourage people from Stockport to visit Marple etc giving extra trade to the businesses and help stop the shops etc closing down. Marple was once a tourist area and should look to promoting that again.
-
ask how it is the Council's GreenSpace Manager can find money to upgrade obscure footpaths in Mellor
As regular users of obscure footpaths in Mellor, my dog and I can assure CTREP that none of them have recently been upgraded. I can think of a few that need it though!
-
Hi Lily
I'm in total agreement with you, I spoke to A Councilor about this the other day and will be visiting the site next week to see what options are available. It's no longer a grass verge and needs attention.
Kind regards
Steve
Hi Steve,
It’s not just the section where there is supposed be a grass verge that should be looked at, but also the very narrow section of footpath up to the traffic lights (and the trees which overhang the road and path).
Thanks Lily
-
Hi Steve,
It’s not just the section where there is supposed be a grass verge that should be looked at, but also the very narrow section of footpath up to the traffic lights (and the trees which overhang the road and path).
Thanks Lily
Thanks Lily
I'm heading over on Thursday, early if I can. I will have a look and take it from there but I appreciate the message and am glad we are in agreement this needs attention.
Kind regards
Steve Gribbon
-
Dave said As regular users of obscure footpaths in Mellor, my dog and I can assure CTREP that none of them have recently been upgraded. I can think of a few that need it though! However if you walk between Roman Lakes and Strines, a section that I must admit really needed looking at just beyond Windybottom farm is now like this (https://www.dropbox.com/s/yf2fk1o4z16kk0g/trackjpg?dl=0) Hopefully a picture will appear, it is of short section of track in part of a long muddy track that no-one would use without at least sturdy shoes if not boots. I may have the area wrong but there is a second up near Mellor Cross. I was told this was due to flood damage, if so then why has part of Etherow Country Park, which has considerably greater use and by ordinary pedestrians, been barriered off for well over a year.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I note the photo hasn't appeared. I tried using a Dropbox file, This is now uploading a desktop file to the Insert Image option
If it doesn't work can Mark give me instructions. Thanks
I've added the photo to your original post below. There was a dot missing in the file name so the board was not recognising the file type. Admin.
-
if you walk between Roman Lakes and Strines, a section that I must admit really needed looking at just beyond Windybottom farm is now like this (https://www.dropbox.com/s/yf2fk1o4z16kk0g/trackjpg?dl=0)
Oh, that footpath (bridleway actually)! Yes, there is work going on there, also the path between the Roman Bridge and Strines Road. But those are not in Mellor, they are in Strines. And they aren't 'obscure' either!
-
The Bridalway to Strines has been resurfaced with monies put by, for flood damage from last year's floods, after new drains were put in by Freinds of your Valley.
-
Hi Lily
I'm in total agreement with you, I spoke to A Councilor about this the other day and will be visiting the site next week to see what options are available. It's no longer a grass verge and needs attention.
Kind regards
Steve
I hate to suggest getting rid of greenery but in reality it might make sense to surface over the grass and just have shared paths on either side. It really is a nasty road in both directions. And then, as Lily says, they should look at the section on Dooley Lane nearing the Dan Bank lights to link all these routes together. Again here there’s a grass verge opposite the Hare & Hounds with only the most useless narrow footpath. No wonder there’s always a massive queue of people in their cars, who’d want to try it any other way?
-
I have yet to find a safe way to walk to the Hare & Hounds from Marple, due to missing footpaths and no safe crossing.