Proposed Cycle Track Dan Bank

[Miss Marple]

Oh it will be when the council agrees a deal with the local farmer to purchase some of his land!  It will be sad to see yet another lot of trees chopped down. 

[Taurus]

Dan Bank is not wide enough to add green lane cycle tracks

[sooty2]

Just had an awful thought I do hope the grass verges and trees on the left hand side going up Stockport Road  wont be destroyed in the making of the cycle track.We dont need the mad axe men on the rampage again like the Dan Bank/ seventeen Windows fiasco

[nbt]

And so, as expected, we descend into the usual "I am in a car and so these damned cyclists should just get off the road and out of my way". I shall refrain from further participation in this thread. 

[Victor M]

As a cyclist and a car driver I see far more instances of dangerous driving by car drivers than by cyclists. I have lost count how many times cars have cut across me when turning left, pulled out in front of me, blocked the carriageway forcing me onto the pavement. A nice lady once drew alongside me sounded her horn and wanted me to stop cycling so that she could turn left. I have been deliberately driven at because I slowed a following car down for all of 10 secs and they missed one change of traffic lights. Once I was even shot at from a bus! Try cycling a few times to Stockport and then see if you think there are far more bad cyclists than bad drivers.

[tonyjones]

I admit that I do not have the most recent edition of the Highway Code but if a cyclist is coming up Dan Bank two feet away from the kerb they will almost certainly prevent any cars from getting passed them, which makes sense of providing a cycle lane.
I am all for motorists staying out of cycle lane as long as cyclist stay in them.
Whilst I will not argue about the number of bad drivers on the roads there are a far greater number of good drivers that there are good cyclists. In my view a small percentage of cyclist obey the rules whilst a small percentage of drivers disobey the rules.

[Victor M]

Latest Highway Code advice to cyclists is to travel 2 feet from the kerb, might also help that if there was a cycle lane cars stayed out of it! Unfortunately there are far more worse drivers than cyclists and it might be an idea that all car drivers had to spend 2 hrs cycling on the road as part of their driving test, might make them more aware of cyclists needs!

[tonyjones]

Any cycle track is a good idea. Anything that gets them off the road.
I followed one down Dan Bank this morning who decided to move from the left hand side to the right hand side of the road, without any indication, and another one who was cycling two feet away from the kerb, despite the fact that half the pavement weas painted green.

These pepole on bicycles should be insured as cars are, they should all have passed a cycling test in the same way that drivers have to pass a test, and they should be made to obey the rules in the highway code. That way the roads, and pavements, would be sa lot safer.

[Miss Marple]

Where does the proposed cycle track start and end.  Does anyone know

[nbt]

Sorry NBT but I disagree, the more facilities you put in for cyclists the more you will encourage people to cycle. There has been a remarkable increase (from a low starting point) in the number of cyclists on Stockport roads over the last 5 years. Cyclists pay taxes, just like all other residents of Stockport, they have a right to have some of that money spent on cycling infrastructure.

I agree totally, more facilities for cyclists is a good idea, but my point was that these facilities do need to be well thought out - a safe cycle track up Dan bank is a good idea. However, plonking a little bit of green tarmac down and calling it a cycle lane is not always a good idea - witness the wonderful examples from all over the place at the "cycle facility of the month" website.

[sooty2]

I would consider Dan bank to be the main commuter route from stockport to Marple more than a leisure route. thats why I didnt mention Brabyns or compstall Brow. The way the council are doling out money at the moment they may consider cycle lanes in both those places.If you dont ask,you cant get

[Dave]

I think Miss Marple means she is  all for cycle tracks, but not up Dan Bank. Seems a bit odd to me too.Of all the roads around the area, somebody picks the most difficult bit of road to peddle up. why?

Miss M and sooty seem to be assuming that cycling is a recreational activity, rather than a means of transport.   In reality, of course, it's both, and for those cyclists who are actually going somewhere (as opposed to just peddling around), then Dan Bank is a route which gets them from A to B.  So it's not unreasonable for it to be made safer for them, is it.     

And btw, anyone who thinks Dan Bank is 'the most difficult bit of road to peddle up' needs to try Brabyns Brow. 

[Victor M]

Sorry NBT but I disagree, the more facilities you put in for cyclists the more you will encourage people to cycle. There has been a remarkable increase (from a low starting point) in the number of cyclists on Stockport roads over the last 5 years. Cyclists pay taxes, just like all other residents of Stockport, they have a right to have some of that money spent on cycling infrastructure.

[nbt]

I think Miss Marple means she is  all for cycle tracks, but not up Dan Bank. Seems a bit odd to me too.Of all the roads around the area, somebody picks the most difficult bit of road to peddle up. why?

how else do you get from the bottom of Dan Bank to the top of Dan Bank without either going all the way round through Romiley or Torkington? Cyclist won't just stop riding if you don't put in facilities. And if you put in rubbish facilities, don't be surprised if cyclists don;t use them - a LOT of the "cycle lanes" in Stockport are useless and are there only so the council can say they're doing something for cyclists

[sooty2]

I think Miss Marple means she is  all for cycle tracks, but not up Dan Bank. Seems a bit odd to me too.Of all the roads around the area, somebody picks the most difficult bit of road to peddle up. why?