Marple Glass and Glazing

Author Topic: Roman Lakes  (Read 19773 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

My login is Henrietta

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #49 on: May 01, 2014, 04:58:56 PM »
If it was it doesn't sound as though it was an expensive repair. And anyway, if the public wish to use the RL as a place of recreation then why shouldn't the public contribute? There aren't many privately owned places that the public can enjoy free of charge within walking distance of the centre of Marple and last time I was there the RL was "free to roam". We aren't even obliged to buy a cup of tea.
Went down there this afternoon on the way home. The repairs are very basic (but welcome) and short term I think. Motorway surface it ain't being mainly coarse gravel. You certainly won't be roaring down there at 80mph as it's still a bit uneven but heaps better than it was.

It had been raining so I was almost alone and it was lovely and quiet. To my surprise, it being a weekday, the café was open and I sat and watched a variety of ducks, coots, barnacle geese and a very aloof peacock who looked down his nose at me in a very superior manner. Not extensive parking but the walk down there is very pleasant now the surface is a bit better and you could easily cycle down.

My login is Henrietta

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #48 on: May 01, 2014, 10:07:46 AM »
Good news!

I hope no private land has been repaired at cost to the public?
If it was it doesn't sound as though it was an expensive repair. And anyway, if the public wish to use the RL as a place of recreation then why shouldn't the public contribute? There aren't many privately owned places that the public can enjoy free of charge within walking distance of the centre of Marple and last time I was there the RL was "free to roam". We aren't even obliged to buy a cup of tea.

gazwhite

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #47 on: May 01, 2014, 09:26:43 AM »
Good news!

I hope no private land has been repaired at cost to the public?

Dave

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #46 on: April 30, 2014, 10:07:38 AM »
Contributors to this thread may be interested to learn that the road to the Roman Lakes benefited from some serious pothole-filling earlier this week.   :)

Dave

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #45 on: March 22, 2014, 07:20:02 AM »
Presumably lottery funding is out of the question if there are issues behind the land ownership?

The 'Our Valley' group have been successful in securing small grants (a few hundred pounds at the most) from several trusts and foundation, such as the Woodland Trust, for various small projects: planting, signage, making the Jubilee Gateway etc. 

I think Melancholy is right to assume that lottery funding would probably not be available for upgrading Lakes Road, but that would not be because of any 'issues' over land ownership.  The ownership of the land either side of the road is clear and well-known: the lakes and their immediate surrounds are owned by the Roman Lakes, and the grazing land is owned by Old Hall Farm. 

Melancholyflower

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #44 on: March 21, 2014, 10:19:41 PM »
Well, thanks to the contributors for the practical issues behind the access road. I think we've comfortably established that the road is in a very poor state of repair, and the reasons why it remains so.

Presumably lottery funding is out of the question if there are issues behind the land ownership?

Otherwise perhaps the valley friends can be the focus point for things to start happening. Who knows, we might even see the road repaired before they finish those ridiculous roadworks on Strines Road.

Howard

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #43 on: March 21, 2014, 04:48:47 PM »
Am I the only one who is fed up with the nastiness and backbiting which is going on in this forum?

This forum is a paragon of tact, discretion and pleasantness compared to the vast majority of the Internet. Just have a quick look on the comments for almost any YouTube video as an example.

simonesaffron

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #42 on: March 21, 2014, 04:43:47 PM »
Am I the only one who is fed up with the nastiness and backbiting which is going on in this forum?  
I've been finding it rather entertaining. Much more interesting than the shortcomings of the CO-OP.

rsh

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #41 on: March 21, 2014, 01:47:42 AM »
The area is one of Stockport's greatest assets and an upgrading of the road could lead to many more cars, possible housing development and ultimately the destruction of the beauty and peace of the area.

Well I didn't read the whole post, but the last sentence made me laugh... Fill in some potholes and we'll suddenly have Mill Green 2 built down there? :D

Blossom

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #40 on: March 21, 2014, 12:25:45 AM »
I am sure you would not feel this way if the comments made about the Roman Lakes had been made about you.  I am sure you would defend yourself.

Edited to add:  All I want is an apology for the Roman Lakes from marplerambler.  At the end of the day they are a local business who work really hard.  They should be supported, not be told they deserve to go broke and should close the place down over things they have not done or said. 

Blossom

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #39 on: March 20, 2014, 10:50:22 PM »
Am I the only one who is fed up with the nastiness and backbiting which is going on in this forum?  I don't get down to the Roman Lakes as often as I would like, but it is very nice down there and I wish them well.  I agree the road is awful, but the vindictiveness recently shown is most distasteful.  Nuff said - I will shut up now!

I am sure you would not feel this way if the comments made about the Roman Lakes had been made about you.  I am sure you would defend yourself.

Blossom

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #38 on: March 20, 2014, 10:46:26 PM »
All this might be very interesting, but I don't see your apology for accusing the Roman Lakes of doing something they have not done, or for your saying they deserve to go broke and should close the place down.

marplerambler

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #37 on: March 20, 2014, 10:37:49 PM »
The law relating to adopted highways (roads maintained by the Council or Highways Agency) and public rights of way (public footpaths, bridleways etc) can be very complicated (and my comments here are not comprehensive: they are very general guidelines but not a statement of the law). Very few roads are built on land owned by a local authority or the Highways Agency (examples could be motorways or new bypasses). It is usually the case that if you own a house adjacent to a road maintained by the council your property deeds will show that you own the land to a point about half way across the road and the property opposite will own the opposite side of the road. The complication is that the surface has a legal status of being 'Queens Highway' so your deeds may show that own the land but the reality can be that the a person, a horse, a bicycle, a car or any other mechanically propelled vehicle may have a right of passage along the surface (just who can use the route is determined by highway law). Many people do not realise that it is not the Council who pays for the construction of new roads when new estates are built, it is the developer who foots the bill for the cost of the new roads and this cost is part of and included in total cost of your new house. The developer has to have planning permission to build the new road and most importantly, if the developer wants the council to assume the responsibility  of maintaining the road the developer has to prove that it has been built to specified standards.

Things can be a lot more complicated on rural lanes and it can often be the case that the land on which some of the very old roads are built does not seem have an owner. Before 1835 landowners were required to pay tax to the parish (a tithe) on all land used for agriculture. The complication was that horse and carts were already using tracks known as 'ancient highways' across or at the edge of the fields. The landowner said 'I am not able to use the strip of land used as a road for agricultural purposes and refused to pay tax (the tithe) on it by renouncing ownership. No one else would want this land because it could not be farmed if horse and carts used it as a through route. The tithes were abolished when the whole system of building and funding roads needed to be changed in response to the industrial revolution

Just who owns the land below the surface of the tracks to Roman Lakes I do not know: this could be found out by paying for a legal landsearch. I think that you can be pretty sure that it isn't Stockport Council. During the nineteen hundreds the Council assumed responsibility for the maintenance of many urban roads but a strange twist of fate was that some houseowners who lived in the wealthiest residential roads objected to the council building a surface on what was the private road to their properties because once the road was built by and maintained by the council every car owner irregardless of whether they were accessing premises on route could use it. These are now the very roads with houses which may have three or four cars in the driveway. If the residents now want the road to be maintained with a metalled by the local council they first have to get council approval and then share the costs of building the road between existing residents.

In 1949 the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act gave walkers and horseriders  the legal right to walk on existing footpaths or ride existing bridleways across private property (hence the term Right of Way) if the route had been used continuously used without objection from the landowner for the preceding twenty years The map of public rights of way is a legal document called the 'Definitive Map'. This map shows Lakes Road from its junction with Bottoms Mill Road to have the legal status of a bridleway. The bridge across the River Goyt is a public footpath which them goes up the side of the hill through the wood and across the railway to Strines Road.

Just what the way forward is for the Roman Lakes I really do not know. Vehicular access is difficult because of the width and weight restrictions on Low Lea Road at Marple Bridge. I am a voluntary Footpath Officer for Ramblers Association in another area but I think that I can safely say that Ramblers, Peak and Northern Footpath Society, Stockport East Bridleways Association and the Open spaces Society and many other environmental groups would fight any application to upgrade the route to encourage even more vehicles to drive in the valley. The area is one of Stockport's greatest assets and an upgrading of the road could lead to many more cars, possible housing development and ultimately the destruction of the beauty and peace of the area.




Barbara

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #36 on: March 20, 2014, 10:01:50 PM »
Am I the only one who is fed up with the nastiness and backbiting which is going on in this forum?  I don't get down to the Roman Lakes as often as I would like, but it is very nice down there and I wish them well.  I agree the road is awful, but the vindictiveness recently shown is most distasteful.  Nuff said - I will shut up now!

Blossom

  • Guest
Re: Roman Lakes
« Reply #35 on: March 20, 2014, 09:36:21 PM »
Of course Blossom we only have your word the notices which I can understand made people angry were posted by a 3rd party.

I don't tell lies, I never tell lies.  The Roman Lakes know who posted the notices, even my next door neighbour knows who it was.  It appears to be common knowledge in the area.  I don't think it is a secret in any way, I don't even think the person who did it is bothered about people knowing, I just do not think it is right for me to name them on this forum.  Hopefully you will meet someone soon who knows and then you will know I am telling the complete truth.