Roman Lakes

[gazwhite]

The way I understand it - and forgive me if I'm misguided on the subject - I've only skimmed past posts...

If the road is the property of the Roman Lakes, then they need to pay for the upkeep.

If the road is the property of the council and is a bridle way, they should maintain it in line with it's intended use.

If the council own it, and maintain it as a bridle way, but the RL want it maintained in a different way then this should come from their own budget, not the public purse.  The benefits of an improved infrastructure/access point would after all (in theory) enhance their amenity - which obviously brings increased revenue.

From personal experience very clear lines have to be drawn when good causes and private enterprise meet.

Maybe they could work with the council and 'earn' some road improvements - there are many Local Authority divisions that could benefit from the fantastic facilities there - teach school children to fish is one very basic example, not to mention Local History, visits for disabled SMBC service users, the list is not exhaustive.

[Dave]

I remember those notices posted on trees by Lakes Road, two or three years ago, complaining about the state of the road and the supposed failure of SMBC to do anything about it, despite the fact that as it's a bridleway it was never the council's job to maintain it to any higher standard.  I must say, having previously discussed the matter on occasion with people from the Roman Lakes, and knowing that the notices reflected their point of view, I had jumped to the conclusion that they had posted the notices.  I'm amazed to learn that this was not the case, but as true gentlemen, wheels and I must accept Blossom's word for it 

The notices were perfectly harmless, and I can't see how they could possibly have made anyone 'angry'. 

[wheels]

Of course Blossom we only have your word the notices which I can understand made people angry were posted by a 3rd party.

[Blossom]

Right Marple Rambler - In your first post you stated 'Get one thing straight.  If Marple Lakes want to make up the road up to a standard suitable for cars fair enough, if they don't, they deserve to go broke and should close the place down and stop whingeing but they should not expect the ordinary ratepayers of Marple to pay a fortune to feather their nest by providing the funds to build a metalled road along the long private road to their business'.  I asked you for evidence that they had been 'wingeing' and in your second post you stated that 'the evidence was the notices placed on the trees on Lakes Road near to Roman Lakes telling motorists who were dissatisfied with the state of the surface to ring Stockport Council to complain'.

Well, I would like to 'get one thing straight' now.  Although I already knew this I decided to get concrete confirmation that I was right and now I have it.  It was not the Roman Lakes who posted these notices on the trees.  I know the person who posted these notices and it was most definitely not the Roman Lakes, they had no part in posting these notices whatsoever.  Nor do they expect the ordinary ratepayers of Marple to pay a fortune to feather their nest.

As you obviously did not bother to get your facts straight before posting detrimental comments about the Roman Lakes on this forum, will you now have the decency to post an apology to the Roman Lakes on here for them to read.  They are aware of your previous comments.

Whilst you are at it, perhaps you will also apologise for your appalling comments that they deserve to go broke and should close the place down.  There was a very lengthy thread on here about Asda opening on Hibbert Lane and a lot of people were concerned about it affecting other businesses in Marple which may then be forced to close.  Yet you feel that a local business, who's owners do nothing but work hard to provide a service to people, deserve to go broke and should close down.  You are unbelievable.         

         

[Dave]

Blossom makes some good points, and I can appreciate why she obviously feels strongly.  Barnard and his daughter do their best within their limited means to patch up the road, and once or twice a year you'll find them out with a load of gravel filling in potholes, but that is only ever a temporary solution. 

In the longer term maybe the Our Valley group, which has already been successful in attracting some external funding, might be able to secure funds to have the road made up to an adoptable standard by SMBC.  But I realise that not everyone would want that, of course.   

[Blossom]

Marple Rambler - The more I think about your comments about the Roman Lakes, the more angry I am getting.  The Roman Lakes are privately owned, the owners are lovely people who work really hard.  I am sure they, more than anyone, would love the road to have a perfect surface.  To state that they should 'do exactly the same as the developers who have just built the new estate off Cross Lane and  construct a new metalled road to link their business to the existing adopted road network' is talking totally stupid. You cannot compare the financial abilities of the business at the Roman Lakes to the developers of the new estate at Cross Lane.  That is almost like comparing the financial clout of Doodfield Stores to Sainsburys.

You say that you visit the Roman Lakes, well I don't know how you can have the nerve after commenting that they 'deserve to go broke and should close the place down'.  I will be at the Roman Lakes today and will draw their attention to this thread and particularly your comments.  Obviously the members of the Marple Web are only know by their usernames, in some circumstances that is a pity as I would hope if the Roman Lakes knew who you are they would ban you from visiting again due to your nasty comments.  Mind you, by the sound of you you are probably one of the people who just call in to use the toilets the Roman Lakes provide and then spend nothing, thereby making it even harder for them to do anything about the road.     

[wheels]

when Council money and resources for the repair of roads is so scarce we had to sit in traffic jams and wait for months for the repair of Marple Road at Shearwater Road. 

Just to be clear Rambler this work your refer to and which caused us all some delays was nothing whatsoever to do with the Council. Heavy rain had damaged a retaining wall under the road at this point and that was/is the responsibility of United Utilities, a private company, they undertook the work caused the delays and paid for it.

[marplerambler]

The evidence was the notices placed on the trees on Lakes Road near to Roman Lakes telling motorists who were dissatisfied with the state of the surface to ring Stockport Council to complain. The state of the vehicular access to the Lakes has got absolutely nothing to do with Stockport Council: walkers, horseriders and cyclists have a legal right to use bridleway 118 Marple at Roman Lakes but the route is also at the same time a 'Private Road' ie a private vehicular route which can be used by vehicles gaining access to Roman Lakes (and to other properties and land in the valley).  The landowner makes up his own mind whether he wishes to make the road up to a standard suitable for usage by vehicles and it is not the responsibility of the Stockport ratepayer to renovate the route to a standard appropriate for vehicular access to the business at Roman Lakes

With a name like 'marplerambler' I have a great love for and know the public rights of way in Marple very well and visit or pass the Roman Lakes regularly (on foot). What I do find saddening is that the huge volume of vehicular traffic on this bridleway accessing the business at Roman Lakes tears the track to pieces but Roman Lakes do not seem to bother to maintain the private road to ensure that customers accessing their business have an easy and comfortable drive to the Lakes.

[Blossom]

Could I ask where is your evidence that the Roman Lakes has been 'whingeing'.  I can't find it on this thread.

I am at the Roman Lakes most days.  Very rarely am I the only person there.  Some weekends the place is absolutely heaving so why do 'they deserve to go broke and should close the place down'.  There are obviously a lot of people prepared to travel there either by foot or car.

I take it, by the tone of your thread, that you do not go to the Roman Lakes, which if true I am very pleased about.  I love it there and meet some lovely people there.  I don't want that to be spoilt. 

 

[marplerambler]

Get one thing straight. If Marple Lakes want to make up the road up to a standard suitable for cars fair enough, if they don't, they deserve to go broke and should close the place down and stop whingeing but they should not expect the ordinary ratepayers of Marple to pay a fortune to feather their nest by providing the funds to build a metalled road along the long private road to their business when Council money and resources for the repair of roads is so scarce we had to sit in traffic jams and wait for months for the repair of Marple Road at Shearwater Road. The Council has a legal responsibility to ensure that Marple Road is maintained to a standard appropriate for vehicles: council staff have absolutely no legal remit to sqaunder local authority funds making the private road to the Roman Lakes up to a standard appropriate for vehicles: making this route accessible to vehicles is a decision which is entirely in the hands of Roman lakes and the other owners of properties adjacent to this road. If Roman Lakes want a road suitable for vehicles they do exactly the same as the developers who have just built the new estate off Cross Lane: they construct a new metalled road to link their business to the existing adopted road network and then go through the standard legal procedure of constructing an appropriate surface on what is currently a private road and then proving that the road has been made to a high standard suitable for the HGVs which deliver to the site. Only then can they apply for the Council to change the status of the highway to adopted highway and ask Stockport MBC to assume responsibility for maintaining the surface of the new vehicular highway. 

[My login is Henrietta]

Not sure what action that would be.  AFAIK the only legally enforceable speed limit on a bridleway is the National Speed Limit (60 mph). 

My horse has a pretty nippy turn of speed but I doubt even he could manage 60mph!

[Dave]

No, SMBC confirm that Lakes Road is definitely a bridleway, not a BOAT. That means that vehicles are permitted to use it only for access to land and property which is situated on it.  That includes visitors to the Roman Lakes, but not the off-road motorbikes which hurtle round the tracks in the Goyt Valley, some of which are BOATS, of course. 

[My login is Henrietta]

As I understand it, the road to the Roman Lakes is classified as a bridleway.  Motorised vehicles are only permitted to use it in order to gain access to places situated on it - such as the Roman Lakes, of course.  Trouble is, local Highway Authorities (i.e. councils) are only obliged to maintain bridleways up to the standard necessary for them to be used by horse riders. Hence the dreadful condition of the road. 

After reading this thread I decided to go and do a recce by car down to the Lakes. I agree, it is dreadful. I crawled along avoiding potholes where possible (which wasn't often) at a top speed of 5 miles an hour (didn't know my car could go that slow!). By the time I'd gone down and back I felt quite sick from the lurching about.

As for it being a bridleway, I would be very reluctant to take my horse down there in the state it's in (and he's an ex-hunter and very sure footed). Perhaps riders should lobby the HA to get it back into some sort of order? Having said that, the bridleway deviates from the roadway in a couple of places so the whole length of the road isn't, strictly speaking, a bridleway.

As motor vehicles are permitted on the road it's is more likely to be a BOAT ("Bye-way Open to All Traffic", in other words a  highway over which the public have a right of way for vehicular and all other kinds of traffic but which is used by the public mainly for the purposes for which footpaths and bridleways are used i.e. walking, cycling or horse riding). Under the 1980 Highways Act all BOATs that were formerly RUPPs ("Roads Used as Public Paths") are also now highways maintainable at public expense.

[Cyberman]

Chadkirk is a good comparison. In fact, the lakes might be improved by similarly making a new car park closer to the main access road, solving all these problems AND forcing people to walk a bit.

That's a good idea. In my opinion the problem is the route is not wide enough for a surfaced road with a pavement, and with no pavement pedestrians and young kids on bikes will be at the mercy of the significant proportion of motorists who seem incapable acting considerately to anyone else. It's ok as it is - perhaps with major potholes fixed. You can drive along the road slowly, and if you are under that much time pressure perhaps you should be somewhere else.

[rsh]

Speed bumps, narrowing the roadway? Needless to say that I've never been mown down by someone doing 60 on a bridleway, so it's probably a pointless discussion anyway.

In fact, if anything were to be resurfaced in our area I'd much rather it be the hopeless canal towpaths towards Strines and High Lane. Or would people be worried that encouraging more people to actually use those would spoil them too?