Marple Website Community Calendar
Archive => Archived Boards => Local Issues => Topic started by: corium on August 21, 2014, 10:41:57 AM
-
There is a map by local authorities for traffic deaths for 1999- 2010 available here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15975720
In some ways no surprises except, and this sounds terrible, none for Stockport road in Marple & Station Road in Marple which must mean aware pedestrians, good driving or something given the number of students going to & from Marple Hall & commuters going to & from the stations.
-
No surprises that the deaths that did occur were on the windiest roads with sections of poor visibility; Strines and Windlehurst Lane.
-
No surprises that the deaths that did occur were on the windiest roads with sections of poor visibility; Strines and Windlehurst Lane.
You'd think that people would be more careful in dangerous conditions. A neighbour of ours many years ago was crippled for life when he came to grief on Slip Corner near Strines.
I'm surprised there aren't more deaths on Glossop Road. I was tailgated and horn-blasted the other night for being so stupid as to drive at 39 mph in the 40 mph limit. The perpetrator subsequently overtook me on a seriously blind bend narrowly missing a van coming in the opposite direction! I didn't know that the 40 sign meant I had to go faster than 40mph rather than slower. That road is dangerous yet people exceed the speed limit and overtake in stupid and dangerous places.
And don't get me started on cyclists! The people who cycle as their form of transport from A to B are generally fine. Good road sense ie sensible use of the road, courteousness, signals when necessary and plenty of warning to other road users when they are about to do something, hi-viz clothing, and apparent knowledge of the Highway Code.
Is it just me or has anyone noticed that the flashier the bike and the fancier the apparel, the stupider and less courteous the cyclist? No hi-viz clothing (and several wear black and ride black bicycles), wavering about all over the road, riding two or three apart and bunching up in groups and causing an obstruction, no checking behind or signals when they are about to pull out immediately under a car's wheels, deliberately holding up cars when passing them would enable us to get out of their way, and, believe it or not, I have had cyclist actually racing my car when I was overtaking!!!! Sunday mornings before the Tour de France were nightmare-ish
Don't these men (and they are almost exclusively men - women cyclists are much more sensible) drive cars? Don't answer that. It would be even more worrying. It's time there was a cycling test for cyclists to ride on the road and a road fund licence for cyclists.
I've been driving for nearly 50 years and the standard of driving today amazes me and not in a good way.
-
You'd think that people would be more careful in dangerous conditions. A neighbour of ours many years ago was crippled for life when he came to grief on Slip Corner near Strines.
I'm surprised there aren't more deaths on Glossop Road. I was tailgated and horn-blasted the other night for being so stupid as to drive at 39 mph in the 40 mph limit. The perpetrator subsequently overtook me on a seriously blind bend narrowly missing a van coming in the opposite direction! I didn't know that the 40 sign meant I had to go faster than 40mph rather than slower. That road is dangerous yet people exceed the speed limit and overtake in stupid and dangerous places.
And don't get me started on cyclists! The people who cycle as their form of transport from A to B are generally fine. Good road sense ie sensible use of the road, courteousness, signals when necessary and plenty of warning to other road users when they are about to do something, hi-viz clothing, and apparent knowledge of the Highway Code.
Is it just me or has anyone noticed that the flashier the bike and the fancier the apparel, the stupider and less courteous the cyclist? No hi-viz clothing (and several wear black and ride black bicycles), wavering about all over the road, riding two or three apart and bunching up in groups and causing an obstruction, no checking behind or signals when they are about to pull out immediately under a car's wheels, deliberately holding up cars when passing them would enable us to get out of their way, and, believe it or not, I have had cyclist actually racing my car when I was overtaking!!!! Sunday mornings before the Tour de France were nightmare-ish
Don't these men (and they are almost exclusively men - women cyclists are much more sensible) drive cars? Don't answer that. It would be even more worrying. It's time there was a cycling test for cyclists to ride on the road and a road fund licence for cyclists.
I've been driving for nearly 50 years and the standard of driving today amazes me and not in a good way.
Don't get me wrong, proportionally there are at least as many idiot cyclists as there are idiot drivers.
However, I do find it amusing that in the space of three paragraphs you go from blasting impatient idiots who tailgate you for getting in their way, to blasting cyclists for getting in your way.
I'm a cyclist and a driver, so I can see both sides of it.
The whole high-viz thing is very over rated. It helps, to a degree, just after sunrise and just before sunset, but it makes little difference during daylight or at night. The most effective method of being seen is decent lights. However, I do despair at the Ninja cyclists who seem to go out of their way to be invisible on the road - black clothes, black bikes, no light, etc.
Some of the other things you mention though are very situational dependant.
Weaving in the lane may indicate that they are not a very good or confident cyclist, but it is more likely they are avoiding the booby traps left for them by the highways department of the local council. Boobytraps that as drivers we moan about because they damage our tyres, tracking and suspension, but which have, on occasion destroyed bikes, caused broken bones, and in a few unfortunately cases, cost lives.
On a narrow road, it's safer for the cyclists to take what is called the primary position (ie the centre of the lane), as it forces any vehicle that wants to overtake them, to do it in a safer manner, by forcing them to wait until there is no oncoming traffic, as they have to cross the centre line. Impatient or unthinking motorists will often try to "squeeze" past an oncoming car and a cyclist in their lane, which is dangerous for the cyclist.
By the way, the highway code states that cyclists should be treated as any other vehicle, and be given the same amount of room when you pass them. You wouldn't intentionally pass a motor vehicle, only giving it 3 inches of room, you shouldn't do that to a cyclist either.
Also, with a group of cyclists, on a narrow road, it is easier for the motorist (and safer for the cyclists) to pass a bunch of cyclists riding 2 or 3 abreast, than it is to pass a lone line of cyclists riding single file.
Many people get frustrated when they get held up by slow moving traffic, I do as well. But it is an odd phenomenon that causes some people to get irrationally irate at being held up by a cyclist, but to merely get a bit miffed at a tractor or similar slow moving motor vehicle.
Some sort of cycling license wouldn't actually be a bad idea, but in all honesty the Driving License doesn't noticeably improve driving standards, so I don't know how effective it would be.
And as for a Road Fund License for cyclists. Again, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea, but why only cyclists? Why not make all road users pay a road fund license?
-
.........but in all honesty the Driving License doesn't noticeably improve driving standards, so I don't know how effective it would be.
Imagine if you will no driving license, no test required - instead, when you are 17 you can simply jump into a car and start driving. Now that would be carnage!
-
Cycling on public roads is one of those things that should be safe.
Unfortunately this is not true but you will never convince cyclists of this. I have known several cyclists in my life and nearly all of them have had at least one serious accident but every single one of them got back on their bike as soon as they were able. Cyclists are rational, intelligent people on most subjects, except one - cycling. When it comes to that subject they are all crazy!
I am thankful that my children showed no interest at all in cycling and if they had done then they simply would not have been allowed to have a bicycle. I have never actually had a collision with a cyclist whilst driving and I don't want one, but I have had a few close calls. I don't know if these were my fault or the cyclist's fault or a bit of both to me it doesn't really matter.
The thought of my grandchildren riding a bicycle on a public road fills me with all kinds of anxieties.
I would seriously consider banning cyclists from public roads, for their own safety.
-
Excellent, balanced and rational post Marpleexile.
Personally I think one of the best ways to avoid these problems of unsuitable roads is to provide AND maintain suitable alternative off-road routes. Just two examples: We have Middlewood Way which is an excellent cut-through to the A6 and large parts of Cheshire, but the Stockport section is an embarrassment of mud and overgrown vegetation. Mnwhile heading south, the Peak Forest Canal is perfect to avoid Strines Rd and the A6, but the towpath is too often a narrow and uneven wasted opportunity.
I do wish there was the same amount of anger written online about our councils and other bodies lack of focus and ambition (or available money!) to build suitable cycling routes, as there is written to simply criticise cyclists doing their best with what is a pretty crap lot.
Maybe also worth pointing out that we have a pretty ancient road network around here, which while built with light traffic such as bikes in mind was never built for such a volume of motor traffic, nor such wide and aggressive 'SUV' type vehicles as many pointlessly insist on driving these days.
-
I can see Henrietta's point, though maybe she over-eggs the pudding a bit! But the way occasional groups of weekend cyclists form a 'peloton' and block one carriageway of a road, with no thought to allowing other traffic to pass safely, is blatantly selfish and anti-social, and also potentially dangerous.
Marpleexile writes it is an odd phenomenon that causes some people to get irrationally irate at being held up by a cyclist, but to merely get a bit miffed at a tractor or similar slow moving motor vehicle.
....but tractor drivers are normally (a) going for a short distance, often just a few hundred yards, and (b) often very considerate, ready to pull over to allow other vehicles to pass, unlike the 'peloton'.
rsh writes: the Peak Forest Canal is perfect to avoid Strines Rd and the A6, but the towpath is too often a narrow and uneven wasted opportunity.
....but canal towpaths are not intended for cyclists, they are intended for horses and pedestrians. And the Peak Forest towpath is a good place to witness another form of anti-social behaviour by cyclists, who sometimes ride much too fast and seem to expect walkers to step aside and flatten themselves into the hedge as they shoot past! ::)
-
rsh writes:
....but canal towpaths are not intended for cyclists, they are intended for horses and pedestrians. And the Peak Forest towpath is a good place to witness another form of anti-social behaviour by cyclists, who sometimes ride much too fast and seem to expect walkers to step aside and flatten themselves into the hedge as they shoot past! ::)
You forgot to mention that whilst most cyclists on the footpath don't seem to have have a bell they assume walkers have a detection system that can detect them coming up silently from behind
-
You forgot to mention that whilst most cyclists on the footpath don't seem to have have a bell they assume walkers have a detection system that can detect them coming up silently from behind
I've never understood why it's recommended that we have a bell on a bicycle. I'm not a regular cyclist but I can shout ten times louder than any bell should I need to warn someone.
-
The canal towpath, certainly from Brabyn's Brown to the aqueduct, is heavily used by people on foot.
Walkers, couples and small groups,
Families out for an afternoon walk, with small children, pushchairs, dogs, and grandparents,
Dogwalkers with dogs running loose.
And then you get these !"£$%$%^% people on bicycles who come along peddling for all they are worth expecting everyone to get out of their way, there are a few who do have some sense of fair play.
I look forward to seeing one end up in the canal !
-
I've never understood why it's recommended that we have a bell on a bicycle. I'm not a regular cyclist but I can shout ten times louder than any bell should I need to warn someone.
True enough, but a bell is more polite than SHOUTING! ;)
-
One can't tar all cyclists with the same brush, just as one can't tar all motorists with the same brush.
As both are human beings, errors will always occur and there are naturally a sizeable percentage of idiots in both camps.
Cyclists are perhaps easier to target because there is no official licence which assesses rider proficiency, whereas all motorists have at some point had to drive safely to get their qualifications. Common sense is the biggest factor however.
In my view the biggest issue of all is the poor state of repair of the roads. As Marpleexile pointed out there are many boobytraps that motorists notice less (because of the good suspension of their vehicles) or not at all, but that cyclists ignore at their peril. I used to cycle from Reddish to Ancoats every day using the A6. Regular obstacles included dangerous potholes, parked cars in cycle lanes, broken glass, nails, sunken grates. That's aside from bad driving and motorists who never noticed you and cut you up.
As a result I can fully understand why cyclists use towpaths rather than roads, though I appreciate they can be dangerous to walkers. They're not altogether friendly to cyclists though - I had a double puncture on the Peak Forest canal last year because the authorities didn't clean up thorns when they prune the undergrowth.
Using a bell is, as Dave says, more polite, but it is also carries a more distinctive frequency to alert people.
-
As a result I can fully understand why cyclists use towpaths rather than roads, though I appreciate they can be dangerous to walkers.
I don't think there's a problem with cyclists on towpaths as long as they slow down for walkers, but unfortunately a significant proportion of them don't. :(
-
Next Thursday is cycle to work day, hopefully there will be lots of people cycling to work for the first time, please as a motorist be extra considerate, give them space when (or in the case of Stockport/Marple Road) if you overtake them and please be aware that if you do overtake a cyclist don't be surprised if within two minutes he's back in your rear view mirror overtaking you. Also do check your left hand mirror before turning left and always signal, at least then I will have some idea of where you are going (especially when turning left)
As with all discussions there are always two sides here are my views on some of the posts.
You forgot to mention that whilst most cyclists on the footpath don't seem to have have a bell they assume walkers have a detection system that can detect them coming up silently from behind
Or the number of people walking on the canal towpath who think it is all right to take up the whole width without giving any thought to those behind them who may be traveling faster than they are.
Personally I think one of the best ways to avoid these problems of unsuitable roads is to provide AND maintain suitable alternative off-road routes. Just two examples: We have Middlewood Way which is an excellent cut-through to the A6 and large parts of Cheshire,
Unfortunately the Middlewood way is an off-road route only suitable for off-road bikes, it isn't designed as a commuter cycle route, and is a useless cut-through to the A6 for anyone cycling to Stockport.
I would seriously consider banning cyclists from public roads, for their own safety.
People cycle for two reasons, one as a mode of transport to get to and from work. (It is far quicker to get to Stockport by bike than any other form of transport during the rush hour) all it needs is some motorists to be a bit more considerate As a regular cyclist I see far more inconsiderate motorists than cycles. How many times do you see cars stationary in the designated cycle area at the front of junctions, far more than you see cyclists on pavements. That area is provided to allow cyclists to get to the front of junctions where that are safest and can be seen by all motorists. The second reason is for pleasure and exercise.
And as for a Road Fund License for cyclists. Again, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea, but why only cyclists? Why not make all road users pay a road fund license?
There isn't anything called a road fund license, it is actually a Vehicle Emissions Duty, based on how much pollution the vehicle emits, cyclists don't emit any pollution so therefore don't pay any tax.
-
Or the number of people walking on the canal towpath who think it is all right to take up the whole width without giving any thought to those behind them who may be traveling faster than they are.
Given the normal width of a canal towpath, most people will 'take up the whole width' on their own! I don't know about others, but I normally step aside in good time and allow cyclists to pass, if I know they are there and, crucially, if they approach at a considerate and safe speed. But if someone comes riding towards me like a bat out of hell I remain the the middle of the path until he (and the speed maniacs are invariably male) slows down.
-
Given the normal width of a canal towpath, most people will 'take up the whole width' on their own! I don't know about others, but I normally step aside in good time and allow cyclists to pass, if I know they are there and, crucially, if they approach at a considerate and safe speed. But if someone comes riding towards me like a bat out of hell I remain the the middle of the path until he (and the speed maniacs are invariably male) slows down.
I walk and cycle the Peak Forest all the time (with good use of a bell!) and funnily enough even on a bike myself I have the occasional grievance with other people passing on bikes without slowing down or moving to one side, presuming I'll move up onto the grass (not always a good idea where the towpath suddenly disappears). I can tell how some walkers feel by the very clear and sincere "thank you" you get for using a bell in good time! (You're welcome :D)
About the width/suitability for cycling, that's the point: the towpath IS used by cyclists, they're probably only going to increase, it provides a vital bypass for the horrible roads either side, so the modest amount of money it'd take to make it more suitable (widening, resurfacing to make the most of the towpath's width) would be well-spent and appreciated by all - you wouldn't have to step into a hedge or into the mud just to let someone pass! The towpath beyond New Mills as far as Bugsworth is perfect and puts Marple to shame (apparently improved with funding from the Derbyshire Regional Development Fund).
About the "peloton" - it does depend on the road. If you have two or more cyclists riding as a line, single file along the edge of a narrow road, it probably makes it more difficult and dangerous to pass because they will take that much longer to get past. In that case, it could be better to ride side-by-side and make vehicles behind overtake properly rather than squeezing past.
-
On the matter of surfacing, I support rsh in advocating more funding for improving the towpaths and the Middlewood Way, which is disgraceful in parts. A textbook example is the excellent quality surface of the Fallowfield Loop old railway line.
Whether this will happen is another matter. A lot of horse riders use Middlewood and without being an expert on the subject, I imagine they prefer riding on softer surfaces than Tarmac, say. Same for towpaths presumably.
My perception is also that less horse riders use the New Mills - Bugsworth/Whaley section of the canal than Marple-Romiley.
I do come across discourteous cyclists though and provide feedback wherever necessary!
-
My perception is also that less horse riders use the New Mills - Bugsworth/Whaley section of the canal than Marple-Romiley.
Surprising as it may sound but Horses (apart from those pulling barges) are banned from the canal towpath
-
I can see Henrietta's point, though maybe she over-eggs the pudding a bit! But the way occasional groups of weekend cyclists form a 'peloton' and block one carriageway of a road, with no thought to allowing other traffic to pass safely, is blatantly selfish and anti-social, and also potentially dangerous.
Marpleexile writes
....but tractor drivers are normally (a) going for a short distance, often just a few hundred yards, and (b) often very considerate, ready to pull over to allow other vehicles to pass, unlike the 'peloton'.
rsh writes:
....but canal towpaths are not intended for cyclists, they are intended for horses and pedestrians. And the Peak Forest towpath is a good place to witness another form of anti-social behaviour by cyclists, who sometimes ride much too fast and seem to expect walkers to step aside and flatten themselves into the hedge as they shoot past! ::)
To clarify this, only horses towing narrow boats are allowed on the tow path. Ridden horses are forbidden. (Yes, I think it's odd too, as did the British Waterways man when I queried it many years ago.)