Marple Website Community Calendar
Archive => Archived Boards => Local Issues => Topic started by: CTCREP on January 30, 2019, 10:22:31 AM
-
Now that the Manchester Airport Relief Road has become a reality, and many cyclists are finding it a useful facility, it is time to recognise that the Middlewood Way should become a useful link between Marple and all points heading toward the Airport and beyond.
In the past the usual excuse for not catering for cyclists and other wheeled vehicle users was that the Council have to cater for horses.
Well, now they have found a horse friendly surface to upgrade several sections of bridleway in the Strines Mellor area, it is time they provided the same surface on the Middlewood Way to enable cyclists to access the MARR. Any hope of that happening Councillors?
-
I guess Windlehurst has been made so utterly useless for even the motorists, cyclists don't stand a chance. The "mitigation measures" are working a treat! I actually drove back from high lane to Marple via hazel grove last weekend to avoid the rollercoaster. Ridiculous! Cummon councillors, what's the plan for removing the crazy traffic measures from Windlehurst and Hibbert Lane?
-
What is really needed is (at the least) an on road marked cycle lane from Jackson’s Dairy to High Lane. This would link the A555 cycle way to Middlewood Way and High Lane. The Roadspace is there to do this without inconveniencing drivers and it would start to provide a safe corridor. Obvioulsy a shared space path would be better, but that would involve much more cost.
I’m surprised that a cycle lane from High Lane to the A555 down the A6 was not included in the A555 mitigation package as it’s a clear ‘missing link’. At the moments many cyclists a day are having to dice with HGVs on that corridor, when a bit of paint would help make everyone safer.
Last year I had the idea of taking the kids down the Middlewood Way to busy High Lane Park. Great idea until we got to the A6. The we had to squeeze along a bramble infested pavement to get to High Lane, virtually impossible to push a bike along. So much for encouraging local journeys by other means than the car....
-
Actually, the last thing I want to see as a cyclist is a bit of paint masquerading as a committment to cycling. A bit if paint seems to make people think it's fine to drive past you 6" from your elbow. I'd rather have properly planned and built cycle infrastructure, which is why the proposed painted cycle up the A6 was remove - don't do a half arsed job and say "that's it", do the job properly
-
Well as a cyclist who uses the route pretty much daily I'll take anything that helps. I'd love a segregated lane in each direction, but I suspect that this is both impractical and too expensive.
-
The A6 through High Lane is marked on the Beelines / Bee Network map as a busy road segregated cycling route, meaning it should technically get the same kind of treatment as Oxford Road in Manchester with kerb-protected cycleways. (No I don’t actually know how they’d make this fit at certain pinch points either!)
On the original post, the Middlewood Way surface is pretty good for me now. Still a bit gravelly and we’ll see how it fares for mud after a few years of rain and horse muck piling up, but can’t complain. The surface used at Windybottom Farm Strines is I think called “flexipave”. It is excellent, but I also imagine the cost must be extortionate for a path the width and length of Middlewood?
On the A555 link: would you believe it, a link between Middlewood and the A555 WAS in fact included in mitigation. Widening the pavement down past Threaphurst Lane to make a shared pavement for cycling to link with the crossing to the old A6. It was designed, approved and funded. And then they decided not to build it.
The only answer I’ve been able to get out of the council was that it “didn’t cater to equestrians” and instead they’re “looking at other options”. Silence since then.
Now maybe it’s just me, but if you’ve got the money for an essential cycle facility there, shouldn’t you just build it, so that people don’t have to dice with the A6 traffic (or be put off using their bikes altogether), and THEN think about how to plan a nice-to-have fantasy horse path?
I implore anyone reading this to write to local councillors and SMBC demanding this tiny but essential scheme be implemented as planned. It’s going to be a long time till the Beelines come...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnAiye2X0AAhB4l?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnAiyeyX4AUVU84?format=jpg&name=900x900)
-
I have cycled to Bramhall along the Middlewood Way/A6/A555 quite a few times since the opening of the A555 usually returning in the daylight just after five. I ascend to the A6 on the far side of the A6 tunnel. No cycle lane is needed for the descent because the gradient means that you are cycling nearly as fast as the traffic anyway so you are only cycling downhill for a very short period of time. Coming back I cycle up the pavement at not much more than 5mph, I don't think that I have seen a pedestrian yet. I am going too slowly to have a collision with a pedestrian and if I did see someone I would stop to let him/her pass or cycle past him on the road. Strictly speaking I shouldn't be on the pavement but I am acting in everyone's best interest staying off the busy road while I ascend slowly. A cycle lane is not necessary if you ascend slowly and cautiously on the pavement.
-
I use the new A555 road daily to get to work and it is absolutely brilliant. With spring approaching I am considering getting the bike out and using the Middlewood Way, braving the A6, and then joining the new road to cycle into work (near the airport).
However, I can see that the cycle route on the new road at this end joins it from what looks like a housing estate. Does anyone have directions for how to get from the A6 to the cycle path on the new road?
-
Does anyone have directions for how to get from the A6 to the cycle path on the new road?
Descending the A6 from High Lane, you should turn onto the OLD A6 at the junction with Norbury Hollow Road. There's a cycle entrance on the lft so you don't have to go to the lights, but in common with most of the cycle paths it's badly laid out so may not be obvious
Go straight across Norbury Hollow Road and continue down the old A6, crossing the new road on the new bridge. Note that it's single lane and still used by buses so be careful.
Just over the bridge, the new cycle path is off to your right, going down to the new road and back under the bridge.
We've ridden our tandem along there a few times and the majority of it is ok, though the junctions are laid out TERRIBLY for cyclists (especially longer bikes like the tandem), and the cycle path does randomly swap to the other side of the new road where it meets Hall Moss Lane - it goes from the northern side over the bridge and then along the southern side via an entrance on Dairy Moss Lane. You can cross back over on the bridge when you get to the old RAF camp.
Signposting is awful so allow extra time for route finding the first time you try it, but once you do so you will see it's going to be great for your commute. Good luck with it.
-
You’ve just beaten me to it NBT. We now use it regularly, but only as far as the junction after the Woodford one. I agree, the signposting is very poor but once you know where you are going you’ll be ok. The Middlewood Way from High Lane to Marple is much better now (even after rain) so, Henry, enjoy your cycling commute.
Lily.
-
No cycle lane is needed for the descent because the gradient means that you are cycling nearly as fast as the traffic anyway so you are only cycling downhill for a very short period of time. Coming back I cycle up the pavement at not much more than 5mph, I don't think that I have seen a pedestrian yet. I am going too slowly to have a collision with a pedestrian and if I did see someone I would stop to let him/her pass or cycle past him on the road. Strictly speaking I shouldn't be on the pavement but I am acting in everyone's best interest staying off the busy road while I ascend slowly. A cycle lane is not necessary if you ascend slowly and cautiously on the pavement.
You’re right, you can easily match traffic speed going downhill, but would everyone feel confident doing that? I doubt it. And the very fact you’re having to break the rules and use the still narrow pavement to get back uphill surely shows exactly why a proper safe cycle link is needed. The exact scheme they designed and funded would have catered exactly for this, widening and legalising the pavement for cycling so anyone of any ability or bravery can make the link. Why our councillors aren’t up in arms at this being dumped is beyond me.
-
I have cycled to Bramhall along the Middlewood Way/A6/A555 quite a few times since the opening of the A555 usually returning in the daylight just after five. I ascend to the A6 on the far side of the A6 tunnel. No cycle lane is needed for the descent because the gradient means that you are cycling nearly as fast as the traffic anyway so you are only cycling downhill for a very short period of time. Coming back I cycle up the pavement at not much more than 5mph, I don't think that I have seen a pedestrian yet. I am going too slowly to have a collision with a pedestrian and if I did see someone I would stop to let him/her pass or cycle past him on the road. Strictly speaking I shouldn't be on the pavement but I am acting in everyone's best interest staying off the busy road while I ascend slowly. A cycle lane is not necessary if you ascend slowly and cautiously on the pavement.
Has the law changed regarding riding bicycles on the pavement? If the law has been changed why weren't horse riders included! (Yes, this is relevant to this and other similar threads as there is a livery stables immediately off the Marple side of Dan Bank. I kept my horse there when I first got him and had to move him because it was so dangerous to ride off the yard.)
-
The Law hasn’t changed Henrietta, you are not allowed to cycle on the pavements - but of course most parents tell their children to do so. It is logical when riding junior cycles but not when you are able to ride an adult cycle, but nowadays many motorists expect cyclists to ride on the pavement and give those on the road very little space.
The problem we have is with Government. They don’t Govern. They provide Guidelines for catering for cyclists but then leave it to the discretion of the Councils to abide by them or ignore them. Stockport’s arrogant Council frequently ignore the Government’s and cyclists’ advice when considering cycling and chooses to follow its own inexperienced opinions.
The opinion of the Head of Highways, Sue Stevenson, is that “The prior proposal for a shared foot and cycleway adjacent to the A6 is not being pursued due to concerns over the safety of equestrians who cannot legally use such a facility”.
She has every right to do this. She will of course propose some devious route that is safe for horse riders but highly inconvenient for cyclists at a time when we are trying to get more people out of their cars and to cycle to work.
It has been shown time and time again that in an urban environment cycling is the quickest, and certainly least polluting, of any form of transport. I don’t see many people riding to work on their horses nowadays, so why are their needs always given precedence over that of cyclists in this Borough.
Stockport Council should be encouraging all those catering for horses to create new Horse Only tracks within the Borough. If taken up nationwide we could have a whole new Horse Tourist Industry with all those villages, that we are told would lose their livelihood if Fox Hunting were banned, providing refreshment and accommodation for both riders and horses, and horses would rarely be in conflict with the rest of society.
-
I thought I'd posted a reply but it appears that the post was not successful. I agree with the points made by CTCREP that the provision of cycling facilities between the new road and the middlewood way has been severely compromised due to opposition from the equestrian lobby, which is a real shame. Our nation's attitude towards cycling is very very limited by a decision taken in the 1950s to pretend that bicycles are like mechanical horses and thus the two should be lumped together, and kept out of the way of the important motor car.
Having said that, there's a pegasus crossing over the new A6 at the end of Middlewood road, so horses can get from the stables to the quieter road.
-
Has the law changed regarding riding bicycles on the pavement? If the law has been changed why weren't horse riders included! (Yes, this is relevant to this and other similar threads as there is a livery stables immediately off the Marple side of Dan Bank. I kept my horse there when I first got him and had to move him because it was so dangerous to ride off the yard.)
We both know that the law hasn't changed but I know that I act for my own safety, the safety of the endless stream of traffic and that going up the hill I am going so slowly I present no danger to a pedestrian (should I ever see one). I sometimes find it so hard to even cross the A6 I stay on the right hand pavement to ascend and then drop onto the Middlewood Way on the right hand side and use the tunnel beneath the A6. The big difference between a bike and a horse on the pavement of the A6 is that the bike I ride is a pile of old iron with an aging donkey pedaling. A horse constrained by the narrow pavement would be truly terrified by juggernauts thundering past only a few feet away.
-
It looks like if we want an A555 - Middlewood Way link it’s time to get writing to some local councillors.
Stockport Cycling on Twitter: “Tried to raise this topic at the Cycle User Group last night, as it's an obvious extension to their Bramhall Green to A6 Beeline. Reply was 'too expensive, we'd have to buy farmer's field ... must hurry on -
we have to leave the building by 8pm'”
https://twitter.com/skcycling/status/1111213275767816192?s=21
Their attitude to this is unforgivable, really.
-
Pretty typical I'd say. I hope the Council didn't pocke any money for this from Cent Govt and the re-appropriated it.
Looks like they are going to wait for someone to get squished by a truck before the act. Lets hope its not me... :(
-
The earlier shared pavement plan was funded as part of the A6MARR mitigation so I’d love to know what happened to that money. Probably not towards other cycle infrastructure, I’d guess.
Separately the whole of the A6 within Stockport is on the Bee Network walking and cycling map as a “major busy road route”, so should technically be given proper segregated, safe cycle lanes along each side (like those on Oxford Road, Manchester). I’m having trouble imagining how they’ll do it through parts of High Lane, but there we go, the promise is there. It’d be the best way to ultimately make this link between Middlewood and the A555 too. So maybe we should push for this to be sooner rather than later.
https://mappinggm.org.uk/bee-network/
-
The earlier shared pavement plan was funded as part of the A6MARR mitigation so I’d love to know what happened to that money. Probably not towards other cycle infrastructure, I’d guess.
https://mappinggm.org.uk/bee-network/
I think it was all spent on speed tables on Windlehurst and additionally, and rather counter-intuitively, a CPO on the property at the corner of the A6 and Windlehurst to widen the junction, and make it easier and safer for vehicles (cyclists included) to join Windlehurst before they get faced with the collection of speed measures attempting to dissuade them to use the route.
Kinda like putting a humidifier and a dehumidifier in the same room and leaving them to fight it out for themselves.
Good old Stockport Highways! ::) ::) ::)
-
Weren’t the speed tables put in to manage vehicle speeds in Windlehurst rather than deter traffic. Clue is in the name.
The SEMMS modelling identified the likelihood of significant increases in traffic on Windlehurst (hardly a surprise), hence why the junction was upgraded. As people used to regularly belt along that route at well over 30, yet more traffic whizzing along was hardly going to be desirable.
I’m not a fan of humps, but if people simply refuse to stick to the speed limit in urban areas there aren’t a lot of alternatives.
-
Weren’t the speed tables put in to manage vehicle speeds in Windlehurst rather than deter traffic. Clue is in the name.
The SEMMS modelling identified the likelihood of significant increases in traffic on Windlehurst (hardly a surprise), hence why the junction was upgraded. As people used to regularly belt along that route at well over 30, yet more traffic whizzing along was hardly going to be desirable.
I’m not a fan of humps, but if people simply refuse to stick to the speed limit in urban areas there aren’t a lot of alternatives.
I recently changed my car and i now have to avoid Windlehurst as it is a horrendous experience. I came home from Chapel-en-le-frith last night and came via the Strines to get to the Ridge its that bad.
Alternative is speed camera's, folks will slow down or expand the pavements to narrow the road.
-
Weren’t the speed tables put in to manage vehicle speeds in Windlehurst rather than deter traffic. Clue is in the name.
that was the ruse; but what is the correlation between increased traffic because of SEMMS and people speeding along Windlehurst? In theory the two aren't related. SEMMS's funds for "mitigation" measures (that's mitigation against an inrcrease in traffic... NOT Speeding) were used to install speed measures. That aside, it's impossible to drive at or anywhere near the 30mph limit on Windlehurst because of the measures, unless you can afford a new car every year.
-
I think it was all spent on speed tables on Windlehurst and additionally, and rather counter-intuitively, a CPO on the property at the corner of the A6 and Windlehurst to widen the junction, and make it easier and safer for vehicles (cyclists included) to join Windlehurst before they get faced with the collection of speed measures attempting to dissuade them to use the route.
The redesign of this junction was crazy indeed, and seems to have actually still caused most of the tailbacks through High Lane. Perhaps because of more traffic trying to get to the A555, but once through this junction things always get moving again.
Have to strongly disagree with the suggestion it's better for cyclists though - far from it - as well as demolishing the properties they REMOVED a painted cycle lane there to make a full left-turn lane. Unfortunately the presence of that lane now means anyone trying to cycle straight on up the A6 is sandwiched between the two, unless they're bold enough to cycle in the middle and take the whole straight ahead lane until through the junction, to make sure no-one squeezes past stupidly. I know people now actively avoiding the whole area on bikes and desperately looking for other routes.
The Windlehurst humps too... horrendous. Humps do not need to be this high and severe to get drivers to change their behaviour. They're even awful on a bike - if you cycle down the side your right pedal can then catch on the hump if you're not careful.
-
The Windlehurst humps too... horrendous. Humps do not need to be this high and severe to get drivers to change their behaviour. They're even awful on a bike - if you cycle down the side your right pedal can then catch on the hump if you're not careful.
WOW!, I'm astonished. It's hard to believe a supposedly "designed" speed hump is such that you actually catch your pedal on it. I haven't cycled that route and if in the car, actively avoid the entire road now and take a full detour through Hazel Grove to get back to RoseHill in Marple North. Adding to the Grove's traffic woes no doubt. I guess you could say the mitigation measures worked in my case.