Funding of Roads or Swimming Pool (split from main Swimming Pool topic)

[Belly]

Good question.  I am interested as - during better weather - I cycle to Hansen
Hazel Grove leisure centre and have been quite interested in what they are doing with that cycle lane.  Due to the late nights and weather I haven't cycled that way for a few months nor have I driven that way recently.  But I am intrigued to know why all the other cyclists in the area wouldn't want to use what looks like a perfectly good scheme

I'm probably one of those who's views that are referenced, as I suspect that Jimblob has been reading the local Facebook page for the route. I definitely didn't suggest the new route was unsafe or wothout merit. I simply pointed out that as a regular commuter & quick (ish) cycle user, that the bit down the hill into Bramhall isn't really designed for me as a) going downhill on a bike I will easily travel at 25mph / 30mph which isn't appropriate on a cycle lane (it shouldn't be a problem if I stay on the road for that bit as the speed limit is 30mph, so I won't be getting in anyones way, will I?), and b) having been built on only 1 side of the road, its not very convenient for those cycling up the hill from Bramhall and going off towards Hazel Grove, as it requires you to stop and cross the road twice. I'd rather not do that.

What I find interesting is all the wailing about the cycle lane making the road narrower. Yes, technically it has, but only by about a metre or so, which has basically meant that the previous 'dead' part of most of Jacksons Lane bit of the route (the hatched bit in the centre - which was hatched by the way to try give the impression of narrower lanes in order to try to encourage slower driving speeds) has now gone. So it is still one lane in each direction and you still have to cross onto the other side of the road to safely overtake. So nothing has changed! Oh, except we now have a segregated facility for more nervours road users, families and children to ride to Hazel Grove High School or Bramhall Park or Hazel Grove Swimming pool, rather than drive. Wheres the problem in that? Don't we want to try to reduce car journeys and promote healthier lifestyles?   

[GM]

Link to an old article on the Stockport website, so the 6m probably isn't far off as the link is from 2019 which quotes 4.1m.

https://www.stockport.gov.uk/news/stockport-to-benefit-from-bumper-boost-to-the-bee-network-gbp137-million

[jimblob]

Out of interest, where did you get that from? Cost & the cyclists view? I've seen lower costs, but I'm surprised anyone had said too much about the safety of the scheme as its not finished yet.

Cllr Oliver Johnstone - Hazel Grove provided me with the cost info.
In terms of the lane's utilisation; I've seen various posts stating that coming up the hill they'd prefer the road and not to use the cycle lane so as to avoid having to stop and cross over... as to going down hill, cyclists can pretty much match the speed of the cars and having to cross dozens of driveways means there's a strong chance a car reversing out will come out right in front of them.. on the road that's a much lower risk. The road prior to the lanes was wide enough to support a painted cycle lane on both carriageways and was one of the safety roads in Stockport to cycle on. Cars parked, wheelie bins and leaves on the cycle lane are another deterrent.

[andrewbowden]

Out of interest, where did you get that from? Cost & the cyclists view? I've seen lower costs, but I'm surprised anyone had said too much about the safety of the scheme as its not finished yet.

Good question.  I am interested as - during better weather - I cycle to Hansen
Hazel Grove leisure centre and have been quite interested in what they are doing with that cycle lane.  Due to the late nights and weather I haven't cycled that way for a few months nor have I driven that way recently.  But I am intrigued to know why all the other cyclists in the area wouldn't want to use what looks like a perfectly good scheme

[Belly]

£6m on Dean Lane cycle lanes that even cyclists are now saying they wont' use because they felt safer on the road as it was... (money from governemnt courtesy of Chris Boardman)

Out of interest, where did you get that from? Cost & the cyclists view? I've seen lower costs, but I'm surprised anyone had said too much about the safety of the scheme as its not finished yet.

[Condate]

So spend it on stuff we don't need, nor want so we get more money next time to spend it again on stuff we don't need or want. Riduclous!

It is ridiculous, but t'was ever thus.  I used to work for a software company, many year ago, that sold educational software.  We used to love the end of the financial year, as education authorities were desperate to spend their budget and would buy anything to ensure they didn't get the next year's budget cut. Fortunately, we did sell good stuff, but it certainly boosted our sales. They changed the rules eventually, but while it lasted it was great (from our point of view that is).

[jimblob]

Well wheels, who's blog did you steal that rant from ?.

wheels isn't my biggest fan... as to interest net (or did you mean internet) bully, I didn't see you at the last area committee meeting @wheels, whilst I might type plenty, it's based on fact and information and I follow up with evidence and action where I can... if you feel bullied @wheels i think you have the problem not me
as to things we applied for budget for that we don't need or want...
£270k on windlehurst traffic "mitigation".... 84% of 1000 respondents say "remove in their entirety"... that money came from SEMMS
£260k on the Otterspool/Dooley Lane cycle path that is covered in leaves and so badly signposted that the cyclists still use the road but pedestrians walk on the "cycle only" path
£27k on Marple SLL traffic speed cushions.... 66% of residents who completed the consultation want them removed... that money came from government
£6m on Dean Lane cycle lanes that even cyclists are now saying they wont' use because they felt safer on the road as it was... (money from governemnt courtesy of Chris Boardman)
£150k (an old one) for the pavement widening at Seventeen Windows... they got their garden landscaped and retaining walls for free.... but the pavement 20 yards farther on is still narrow! Quick maths there but you've half a million towards a new swimming pool just on Marple spend alone, include the Dean Lane malarkey and you've got an olympic pool for Marple! and there'd be less traffic on Dean Lane going to their swimming pool because they'd be able to use Marple's.
@wheels wants to live in the 18th century in a little village called Marple before cars existed and wants for nothing other than can be made by the local cavedwellers

[GM]

Well wheels, who's blog did you steal that rant from ?.

[wheels]

What is it you don't think er need or want as a community. Perhaps we should stop spending on the cemetery or care for the elderly you deem yo be totally unnecessary,  of course we must cut funding ti any cultural life of the town. Let's get rid of town Hall staff they never do exactly what the keyboard bullies demand. We don't need safety measures let let it be every person for themselves on the road and the biggest expenditure of all highways maintenance can certain be cut. Tell us # jimblob exactly what it is we as a society can do without that you you would like to see cut. Tell us the amount to be be saved and that amount as a percentage of total expenditure. Interest net bullies need to be called to account.

[jimblob]

if you don't spend what you're allocated, then your budget is deemed excessive so it will be reduced in the next round of allocations

So spend it on stuff we don't need, nor want so we get more money next time to spend it again on stuff we don't need or want. Riduclous!

[nbt]

by NOT spending it I meant exactly that, let the government keep it.

if you don't spend what you're allocated, then your budget is deemed excessive so it will be reduced in the next round of allocations

[jimblob]

Normally unfortuntely, it does. If you don't come up with a scheme that meets the requirements of the specific cash or grant offer, you don't get given the cash. You can't just shunt central government cash around the Council.
 

by NOT spending it I meant exactly that, let the government keep it.

[Belly]

doesn't mean you HAVE to spend it!

Normally unfortuntely, it does. If you don't come up with a scheme that meets the requirements of the specific cash or grant offer, you don't get given the cash. You can't just shunt central government cash around the Council.
 

[jimblob]

Which you know came directly from central government specifically for such road schemes during the pandemic and couldn't have been spent on anything else.

Anyone got any PPE to sell that could finance the new pool?

doesn't mean you HAVE to spend it!

[GM]

Without researching, I think the temporary humps was from government money, the road scheme probably wasn't.

Think you might have missed the PPE boat, unless a certain TV Dr is advising you wear one when we get a swimming pool?.