Wealth Management | S&T Wealth provide portfolio & investment advice

Linked Events

  • Extraordinary Marple Area Committee Meeting: September 02, 2020
  • Marple Area Committee: September 30, 2020
  • Marple Area Committee: November 11, 2020
  • Marple Area Committee: December 16, 2020
  • Marple Area Committee: February 03, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: March 10, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: April 21, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: June 23, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: August 04, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: September 15, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: October 20, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: December 01, 2021
  • Marple Area Committee: January 26, 2022
  • Marple Area Committee: March 09, 2022
  • Marple Area Committee: April 06, 2022

Author Topic: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]  (Read 44155 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Condate

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #105 on: January 25, 2022, 03:17:49 PM »
It's all in the 88-page Atkins Report, GM, but it takes some reading, and I don't envy our hard-working councillors having to digest it in time for tomorrow's meeting......   ::)

Oh dear! How do people come up with this stuff?

Marple is already a very pedestrian friendly place and has been for years. I doesn't need any changes (apart from removing the supposed traffic calming measure of last year). It certainly doesn't need the anti-car nonsense, unless of course the idea is to destroy Marple and turn it into an economic desert.


admin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7821
    • The Marple Website
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #104 on: January 25, 2022, 02:48:30 PM »
And this is the email that WalkRide sent to Marple Councillors on Sunday 23 January, again reproduced with permission:

Email WalkRide Marple to Marple Councillors 23 January 2022

Good evening. The Marple Transport Study is due to be discussed at Marple Area Committee on Wednesday. I think it is unlikely WalkRide Marple will be able to attend, partly because the meeting is in Stockport rather than Marple – but I hope you will be able to take our views into account in your decision.
 
We received a briefing about the much-delayed consultant-officer report (which we, along with the Neighbourhood Forum were excluded from participating in) in late in 2021 and emailed our thoughts to you on 10 January. We still think there are significant issues that need to be clarified before it makes sense for options in the report to be developed. These include that we:
  • Do not think the isolated cycle lane proposed for Stockport Road would bring any benefits, particularly as this results in the need for a gyratory;
  • Do not think that it will be possible to create a gyratory that will make conditions acceptable for either pedestrians or cyclists; and
  • Do not think that the sort of solution envisaged by the Phil Jones study has been considered seriously – indeed it appears to have been dismissed out of hand despite PJA implementing schemes that work through out the UK. This sort of scheme would be cheaper than any of the current options as well.
In particular, at the briefing we asked if officers knew of any gyratory scheme anywhere in the UK that had made conditions acceptable for either pedestrians or cyclists. The fact that officers did not respond suggests that actually, a gyratory as well as increasing the distance traffic travels in the centre of Marple (including pollution, climate change gas emissions and congestion), and encouraging rat-running outside the centre (such as Cross Lane/Buxton Lane) is incompatible with making the centre of Marple a place that people want to shop, live or work in.
 
We would therefore ask that Councillors defer the report (it is two years late anyway, so a couple of months will make little difference) so that officers have time to respond to our questions and any others that are raised by yourselves or at the meeting. We would like to work constructively with the Council, but so far we have not been given the chance.
 
Many thanks for listening to us.

WalkRide Marple

admin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7821
    • The Marple Website
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #103 on: January 25, 2022, 02:39:22 PM »
It's all in the 88-page Atkins Report, GM, but it takes some reading, and I don't envy our hard-working councillors having to digest it in time for tomorrow's meeting......   ::)
Good to have a well considered and informative post @Dave

The WalkRide Marple Group has given me permission to post their comments on this as follows:

WalkRide Marple - comments on Marple Transport Study briefing

WalkRide Marple is a group of local people covering in wider Marple area including Marple Bridge, High Lane, Compstall, Mellor and other communities formed in 2019 to promote the health, environment and economic benefits of walking and riding in all its forms including scooters, cycling and horse riding. We are non-party political.

We were pleased to be briefed on the Marple Transport Study in November 2021. We appreciate the amount of effort that has gone into the study. We have comments on the specific options, but first would like to raise some points of principle. We must be clear on the issues, aims and objectives before choosing how to solve them.

We still have not been allowed to see the Mini Holland grant application for Marple to know what area wide mitigation is proposed that would impact the design of the Marple centre scheme.

General principles Firstly, the study has been carried out with too general objectives and has then tried to fit in all the traffic plus assumed ‘required’ features (such as two-way cycle lane on Stockport Road), rather than an analyse the function of various roads, followed by a placemaking exercise to make sure the public realm created meets those needs (including of course the need for servicing, the need for people to move in vehicles, and to park). As a result, the options are heavily engineered (and expensive) and fail to provide the placemaking required to make Marple a good place for people, or for business. Methodology and results are significantly inferior to comparable schemes in Greater London.

Secondly, we are not convinced that a two-way cycle lane on Stockport Road is needed, desirable or feasible for a range of reasons:
  • The most pressing need is to improve conditions for pedestrians and for businesses along Stockport Road. While a cycle lane is desirable, this should not be at the expense of other objectives such as public realm improvements or pedestrian movement.
  • The proposed cycle lane doesn’t link to other cycle routes – the more pressing need for cycle facilities is, for instance a direct route along Stockport Road to Marple Hall School.
  • A cycle route along Stockport Road is not needed if traffic is slow moving, predictable, and courteous. (We do appreciate this road is above the LTN1/20 levels of 3-4,000 vehicles).
  • Generally cycle lanes are not provided in comparable best-practice situations in London (such as Waltham Forest)
  • The cycle lane occupies space that could be used for public realm improvement to the benefit of Marple economy and quality of life.
  • It is not clear if the gyratory option gives Station Road and Hollins Lane two-way cycle lanes – probably not, in which case overall cycling may become less convenient and safe by reducing cycling options overall.
  • The gyratory would make public transport less convenient and would increase car mileage.
  • It may be difficult to build a consensus that a gyratory is right for Marple given their track record of becoming racetracks elsewhere, and the perception that it was ‘only to provide a cycle lane’.
We do not think a gyratory could create decent conditions for people or business in Marple - we do not know of, and so far no-one has suggested a single example in the UK where this had been achieved. We would like to keep an open mind, but think it is unlikely it could work.

Thirdly, the active/low traffic neighbourhood elements of any scheme - essentially reducing through-traffic on residential streets including Church Lane and Cross Lane using modal filters - needs to be a high priority and not forgotten amongst the other discussions. Ensuring cars stick to the main roads is essential in the age of Google Maps which routes vehicles along side streets. There is also more that can be done on this in the 'do-minimum' in the short term.

Fourthly, we think that more consideration needs to be given to people with various mobility difficulties. Creation of an inevitably fast moving gyratory, plus a large amount of extra engineering may make it much more difficult overall for people not in cars to move around.

Fifthly, it is hard to comment in detail until we have sight of the report (and the Mini-Holland bid) – we do not wish to comment on detailed layouts until we get the fundamentals right.
Sixthly, the proposals do not appear to take account of the new Pool/Library and the need for sustainable access.

Lastly, the proposals are engineering-led and permanent. For instance, we think there is an opportunity for off -peak or weekend access restrictions to the town centre section of Stockport Road. This could create an attractive place for walking, cycling, accessing public transport and people socialising, without creating peak hour congestion. It could be done on a trial basis and adjusted as needed. The Council only seems to think in terms of expensive, engineering.

 Initial general queries
  • Option 3 states ‘segregated cycleway Stockport Road, Station Road and Hollins Lane’ – but active travel proposals plan only shows cycle track on Stockport Road?
  • Active travel proposals plan states ‘two-way cycle track memorial park to Bowden Lane’ but not clear on Option 3 plan that it is two-way, or includes Bowden Lane to Texaco and Hollins junction to Memorial Park?
  • Are the cycle tracks for Station Road and Hollins Lane two-way, or just ‘with traffic’ or contraflow? (This is implied by the legend on ‘Option 3: Gyratory Concept’)
  • Which movements are possible now by cycle will not be possible in future?
  • Was the Phil Jones sketch considered by Atkins/SMBC? This was provided several times.
  • Do the gyratory (and other sketch schemes) conform to LTN01/20?
  • Is the speed limit in the gyratory 20mph and how far will this be extended? Is enforcement intended to be solely passive (road layout, tables, etc.,) or active?
  • Is a crossing planned at Marple Station (as well as at canal/Station Road)?
  • Do the overall proposals extend the 20mph area in line with the recent Council resolution?
  • Is the Hollins (area outside Greggs/Costa) extended? This would be an important placemaking initiative to make a Marple town square.
  • One of the key desire line crossing points is Stockport Road between Hollins junction and Library access Road – more people cross here than use the lights. Isn’t included?
  • Assuming the Library/pool are rebuilt in Memorial Park, there will be much more traffic accessing Memorial Park Drive – has this been accounted for in the design?
Detailed comments We do not want to make detailed comments until we can see the main report, however one point we wish to make is that the MACAWs option just feels like an over-engineered extension of the do-minimum option - just a few buildouts and crossings, which won’t be enough to tempt people out of their cars. It doesn't do anything for the significant issues on Church Lane. And it proposes some odd new signalised junctions that may not be justified.

We think the next stage of the study needs to be much more about place-making, urban realm, and pedestrian improvements (probably revisiting the PJA proposals). If a good cycle network can be mapped out that doesn’t involve/require protected cycle lanes on the main road, but perhaps uses a filtered Church Lane for example and good crossings over a street scape/urban realm/pedestrian scheme on the town centre corridors, then this may emerge as the strongest option.

 
End of note.
(Last updated 10/1/22)

jimblob

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #102 on: January 25, 2022, 01:53:20 PM »
It's all in the 88-page Atkins Report, GM, but it takes some reading, and I don't envy our hard-working councillors having to digest it in time for tomorrow's meeting......   ::)

To save you ploughing through it, GM, here's the answer to your question (p7): 'This purpose of this study is to develop options which meet the defined objectives for Marple Town Centre and provide the desired outcomes which will be determined as part of this study.'   

And here are the specific objectives:   


7 Add value to local economy and community including health and wellbeing of residents and visitors.

11 Alignment with local plans and policies. 7 Point Scale  -3 to +3


On the subject of 'local plans and policies, the A6 to M60 relief road scheme, sadly, is dead in the water. Which reminds us that this overdue report is already out of date!


A great summary @Dave and as you quite rightly point out, the plan is already out of date (ref also the plans for a swimmng pool in Memorial Park missing too). All of this is great but for me the standout requirement amongst all the "nice to haves" is number 7. Adding value to the local economy. That only works (as is the case with Poynton), where there is a bypass to remove through traffic but a road system that encourages traffic, visitors and therefore money in! these schemes make Marple a bottleneck (option 2 less so) that will drive away anyone other than those who have no choice other than to have to travel through... HGVs, and folks trying to get somewhere else.
It's not that I'm afraid to die, I just don't want to be there when it happens
--- Woody Allen

Dave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2800
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #101 on: January 25, 2022, 12:57:53 PM »
I can't actually fathom what they are trying to achieve

It's all in the 88-page Atkins Report, GM, but it takes some reading, and I don't envy our hard-working councillors having to digest it in time for tomorrow's meeting......   ::)

To save you ploughing through it, GM, here's the answer to your question (p7): 'This purpose of this study is to develop options which meet the defined objectives for Marple Town Centre and provide the desired outcomes which will be determined as part of this study.'   

And here are the specific objectives:   

1 Improve linkages between the various zones of the town centre, taking into account the perceived barrier effect of Stockport Road and Hibbert Lane, and the potential enhancement of existing walkways and alleys.

2 Identify opportunities to reduce car dominance and promotes safe and attractive cycling and walking including links to the canal towpath and the wider cycling and walking networks.

3 Support the potential for enhanced provision for public transport and the better integration of public transport with other modes.

4 Ensure that shopping areas, community and amenity areas are easily accessible to all, including the linkages between them.

5 Ensure travel is, and feels, safe and secure for users of all modes.

6 Protect and enhance the natural and built environment, including improving air quality.

7 Add value to local economy and community including health and wellbeing of residents and visitors.

8 Estimated cost to deliver. Four cost brackets: Up to £50k, £50-250k, £250-500k, Over £500k.

9 Deliverability - considering the ease or difficulty of delivering the measure considering issues such as multi-agency delivery partners, technical complexity, land acquisition,  etc.   7 Point Scale  -3 to +3

10 Acceptability - considering if the option is likely to be resisted or welcomed by elected members, stakeholders, or the general public.  7 Point Scale  -3 to +3

11 Alignment with local plans and policies. 7 Point Scale  -3 to +3


On the subject of 'local plans and policies, I noticed in the report a reference to : 'a long-term plan to provide tram-train services to Marple to boost public transport connectivity, and the provision of two new major road schemes (A6 to M60 Relief Road and High Lane-Disley Relief Road), which may draw car trips away from the road network around Marple Town Centre'. but if I remember correctly the A6 to M60 relief road scheme, sadly, is dead in the water. Which reminds us that this overdue report is already out of date!

It will be interesting to find out what the area committee makes of it all tomorrow. Personally I'm reserving judgment until I've read the report again, but my initial reactions is that option 2 has quite a bit going for it. I like the 'shared area' idea for Market Street and Derby Way, assuming that it will be something like Park Lane in Poynton?   In fact, I'd go further and extend it across Stockport Road outside the Hollins, creating a continuous semi-pedestrianised 'shared area' from the Memorial Park though to Church Lane, via Market Street.

As for option 1, that one way 'gyratory' of Station Road, Hollins Lane and Stockport Road is surely bonkers!


GM

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #100 on: January 24, 2022, 08:04:59 PM »
Well Rothers, if Wheels previous responses are anything to go by a 100 years might not be enough.

Rothers

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #99 on: January 24, 2022, 07:46:46 PM »
am i looking at the proposal incorrectly, or if i live near the Ring o Bells, to go towards the Strines i have to turn left onto Stockport Road, then a right, then another right, passed Asda, then a left
If i am correct, then can i ask what qualifications do these people have to think up such stupid proposals.
Why not go the whole hog, ban the car and turn the clock back 100 years...
Or, may be i am just misreading the map....

wheels

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #98 on: January 24, 2022, 05:18:59 PM »
Looks excellent.  At least as a starter.

GM

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #97 on: January 24, 2022, 03:21:38 PM »
Yeah, probably giving them far too much credit.

jimblob

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #96 on: January 24, 2022, 03:13:05 PM »
Maybe Stockport are colluding with the greater Manchester Clean air zone, trying to get everyone out if there cars and into 4x4's to make life atleast bearable with all the humps they want ?
I only wish there was collusion or a plan @GM ... sadly I think it's just a ship of fools
It's not that I'm afraid to die, I just don't want to be there when it happens
--- Woody Allen

GM

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #95 on: January 24, 2022, 02:05:30 PM »
Maybe Stockport are colluding with the greater Manchester Clean air zone, trying to get everyone out if there cars and into 4x4's to make life atleast bearable with all the humps they want ?

jimblob

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #94 on: January 24, 2022, 01:50:06 PM »
So anyone who lives, say, on Winnington Road who wants to get to Stockport will be 'encouraged' to use all the back roads to get to Stockport Road.  Makes perfect sense...
and then they can smother all those roads with speed humps when the residents kick off because motorists are using the roads as rat-runs. Never seen anything in the highways regulations or highway code describing what constitues a rat-run, but is seems to be used all to often as a reason to trash public highways with speed humps.
It's not that I'm afraid to die, I just don't want to be there when it happens
--- Woody Allen

Deniseredmini

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #93 on: January 24, 2022, 01:46:57 PM »
So anyone who lives, say, on Winnington Road who wants to get to Stockport will be 'encouraged' to use all the back roads to get to Stockport Road.  Makes perfect sense...

Condate

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #92 on: January 24, 2022, 11:12:11 AM »
not sure about popcorn, more like a cilice...

please keep Stockport Hghways team's "designers" away from Marple, haven't they done enough already!

Indeed so.

GM

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
Re: Marple Area Committee Meetings [Until 6 April 2022]
« Reply #91 on: January 24, 2022, 10:10:19 AM »
Them trying to justify and explain the scheme might be more like watching paint dry, unless it's the common term for painting a wall with lime ?.

I can't actually fathom what they are trying to achieve, even the widening the footpath in the park seems a bit over the top for a small village such as Marple.

Even then they don't seem to have factored in the possible leisure centre move to the park and the necessary traffic to make it viable.