Archive > Local Issues
Roman Bridge
nbt:
Yes it is intersting. Surprise surprise, the ramblers assoc. being a bunch of NIMBYs as usual
Dave:
Thanks Mark, that is very interesting.
admin:
COMMITTEE: MARPLE AREA COMMITTEE
DATE: 04 March 2009
JOINT REPORT OF: Service Directors (Legal & Property) and (Transportation & Planning)
CONTACT OFFICERS: PaulParkinson/Ernest Nama
TELEPHONE NUMBER: 0161 474 3213 or
THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL OF STOCKPORT (ROMAN BRIDGE, BRIDLEWAY 160, MARPLE) (REVOCATION) ORDER 2009
Purpose of Report:The purpose of this report is to consider objections to the proposed Order
Recommendation:
To make the Order as advertised.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
The Background papers to this report are contained in the files of the Council Solicitor - Ref: 00010PH..6932. and of the Corporate Director of the Environment and Economy Directorate, Ref:
Agenda Item No.
Date: 04 March 2009
MARPLE AREA COMMITTEE
THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL OF STOCKPORT (ROMAN BRIDGE, BRIDLEWAY 160, MARPLE) (REVOCATION) ORDER 2009
Report of the Service Directors (Legal & Property) and
(Transportation & Planning)
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to consider objections received regarding the above named Order
2. OBJECTIONS
2.1 A total of three objections have been received.
2.2 Mr Peter J Forbes of Strawberry Hill, Marple states that he owns the land on the east bank of the River Goyt through which Footpath 161 passes after it has crossed the Goyt on the footbridge.
2.3 He objects to the revocation of the order, not because he objects to horses and cyclists using the bridge but because removal of the metal bollards on the east bank of the river will inevitably result in motorcyclists using the route.
2.4 Motorcyclists frequently come along past the Lakes heading for Strines and they tend to move fast and be noisy. If a motorcyclist attempts to use the bridge whilst a horse and rider are on or near it a collision between the horse and motorcyclist may well occur and severe physical injuries may be caused. Injuries may also be sustained by walkers and cyclists in the same way.
2.5 It is impossible to police the use of the bridge so it is best not to remove the bollards and to abandon the revocation of the 2003 Order in the safety of legitimate users of the bridge. If some means can be found to allow passage of horses and cyclists whilst making it impossible for motorcyclists to cross then he would have no objection to the revocation of the 2003 Order.
2.6 Mrs A Cheetham lives at Lumn House on the west bank of the River Goyt. She objects to the proposal to open Roman Bridge to use by horses on a number of grounds:
2.7 Public safety of both walkers and horse riders. The bridge has previously been declared as structurally inadequate to support the weight of horses by a survey in 2003. The bridge is very narrow and any attempt by horses and pedestrians to cross at the same time would have serious safety implications. The bridge offers very little protection to riders if thrown from their horses whilst crossing. An unseated rider would certainly fall into the river below no doubt causing serious injury to rider and potentially the horse.
2.8 Modifications to the bridge to overcome these problems would destroy the character and aesthetics of the bridge which she believes is a listed structure whose image is used in many local guides to promote the Marple Area.
2.9 Another concern is that by opening up the bridge to horses riders it will also make it accessible to motorcyclists. Motorcyclists using trail bikes often use the Roman Lakes roads and she is concerned for safety reasons and also for the noise nuisance that opening up the bridge will increase the volume of this traffic which is incompatible with other users.
2.10 Another serious concern is the effect of horse traffic on the condition of the lane from Strines Road to Roman Bridge. It is unadopted and already in a poor condition. She is very concerned that regular use of the lane by horses will cause severe deterioration to the existing road surface. It is a very rough track and the increased traffic may denude the surface to such an extent that cars will no longer be able to travel along it. She has the right of vehicular access to her property and she does not consider it fair or appropriate that she should have to bear the extra cost of maintaining the lane so that it can support the traffic of horses.
2.11 She urges the Council to consider other options for the linkage of Strines Road to the Roman Lakes perhaps by the creation of an alternative and safer crossing which would better accommodate the needs of all parties.
2.12 The Marple and District Rambling Club, which has approximately 400 members, who collectively and individually walk across the Roman Bridge and the paths around it on a regular basis, object to the proposal.
2.13 The bridge is a local landmark which greatly adds to the visual amenity of the area. Any changes to its appearance would be detrimental to this visual amenity and would destroy this delightful bridge which is enjoyed by local people and visitors. It would be a travesty if any alterations or safety features, which have been allowed at the Iron Bridge in Brabyns Park, were allowed to be added to Roman Bridge.
2.14 They would prefer it to retain the prohibition for horses and cyclists on the grounds that:
- the bridge and its approaches are too narrow for horses and pedestrians to pass each other in safety
- the path from Lumn House is waterlogged and muddy and would become impassable were horses to be allowed to use it
- the parapet of the bridge is hardly sufficient to protect a horse rider but any alteration would destroy the amenity of the bridge
2.15 If horse riders and cyclists need to be able to ride from Strines Road to Strawberry Hill by the shortest route then the path must be upgraded and an additional crossing point provided as promised in 2003 when the bridleway prohibition was granted.
3. THE VIEWS OF THE COUNCIL’S SENIOR RIGHTS OF WAY OFFICER
3.1 The Council’s Senior Rights of Way Officer has considered the objections made and has made the following comments:-
3.2 The route in question is a bridleway and pedestrians; equestrians and cyclists have an equal right to use it. It is the responsibility of Stockport MBC to ensure that bridleway surfaces are properly maintained and not the discretion of local residents to determine who uses bridleways to ensure that the surface is not damaged.
3.3 Safety on the bridge has been assessed and a notice will be erected to inform all equestrians and cyclists to dismount before crossing the bridge. Neither equestrians nor cyclists will be allowed to cross the bridge without dismounting. The danger of such group falling over the railings into the stream will be reduced.
3.4 The aesthetic structure of the bridge will not be altered because no structural work will be carried out. Only mounting blocks and warning signs will be constructed in that location
3.5 Warning signs to discourage the use by motorcyclists will be erected and the Council will explore ways of ensuring that such traffic is excluded.
4. RECOMMENDATION
4.1 That the Order be made as advertised.
Background papers
The Background papers to this report are contained in the files of the Council Solicitor File Ref: 00010PH - 6932 and in the files of the Corporate Director of the Environment and Economy Directorate
Anyone wishing to inspect the background papers or to discuss the content of the report should contact Paul Parkinson; telephone 0161 474 3213 or Ernest Nama telephone 474 4850.
Dave:
Does anyone know what the objections were?
Tiggy:
In order to revoke the Traffic Regulation Order to allow horses and cyclists to use the bridge again there was a three week statutory public consultation to which there were three objectors. All the objections raised were dealt with in the report which was accepted and agreed by our six councillors. The bridge will be reopened very soon.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version