Widening of Dan Bank

[Neil Smith]

If only every had a little consideration for others, we wouldn't need any of this, but people seem to be sadly more and more self-centred and insular these days, and vehemently opposed to anything that disrupts them and their preferred way of life

Well said

[nbt]

Yes, it's illegal to ride a bike  on the pavement (note pavement i.e. at the side of the road). However most police officers will use common sense and as long as the cyclist is careful and is riding on the pavement to avoid the dangers of riding in the road, will let it pass. If the road is clear of motorised traffic, then  the cyclist should be on the road of course, and the cyclist should of course have due consideration for pedestrians

however in this case, it will be a shared use path where legislation allows for the use by cyclists.

If only every had a little consideration for others, we wouldn't need any of this, but people seem to be sadly more and more self-centred and insular these days, and vehemently opposed to anything that disrupts them and their preferred way of life

[My login is Henrietta]

I think the cycle track is going to be great, i can ride my horse up and down it, as I have the  same problems with the road as cyclists.  I only hope there is enough room for all the hundreds of thousands of people who the council and people on this site say walk up and down Dan Bank to use the crossing outside Seventeen windows.   

It definitely IS an offence to ride a horse on the pavement - I narrowly escaped being booked for it in Charlesworth. (The apparently 12 year old policeman made me dismount and then lectured me sternly on the issue. It misfired on him afterwards when he had to give a somewhat corpulent and inagile elderly lady a leg-up onto a 16.2hh horse!)

[My login is Henrietta]

Well there is some good news at last !!  There is not going to be a cycle track as such its just a wide pavement which will allow cyclists to ride up and down Dan Bank.  Not so good news for the pedestrians when a bike comes hurling down towards you at crazy miles an hour    I have spoken  to the structural engineer who assures me that all the original stone wall will be cleaned and replaced and they are also planning to put the original steps back after cleaning then.  

but it's illegal to ride a bicycle on the pavement, isn't it?

[admin]

There is now a page about the Dan Bank tree works on the Myers Tree Care web site:

http://www.myerstreecare.co.uk/danbank.html

[Miss Marple]

I think the cycle track is going to be great, i can ride my horse up and down it, as I have the  same problems with the road as cyclists.  I only hope there is enough room for all the hundreds of thousands of people who the council and people on this site say walk up and down Dan Bank to use the crossing outside Seventeen windows.   

[Taurus]

I find cycling down Dan Bank on the road easy. I have only ever pushed my bike up on the pavement. The new cycle track will be excellent for cyclists who are fit enough to cycle up it. I don't think pedestrians need worry about bikes coming towards them as I'd say the majority will continue to cycle down Dan Bank on the road and cyclists coming up Dan Bank will not be going very fast.

I really wish attitudes towards cyclists in this country would change. We have just as much right to be on the road as other vehicles and I'd say the majority of us respect others on the roads and follow the laws, its usually car drivers who behave inappropriately towards cyclists. Stockport council are doing a good job providing better facilities for cyclists and hopefully this will create more and more people cycling.

[nbt]

Going downhill I would expect cyclists to use the road, as it's very easy to keep up with traffic - I certainly do. Going up hill on Dan Bank is awful, it's not a wide road and there's very little space for cars to get past safely. Lack of space doesn;t stop them of course, they just tend to barge past anyway, hence I tend to avoid going up dan bank - I use the old road round the back of the school instead

[Miss Marple]

Well there is some good news at last !!  There is not going to be a cycle track as such its just a wide pavement which will allow cyclists to ride up and down Dan Bank.  Not so good news for the pedestrians when a bike comes hurling down towards you at crazy miles an hour    I have spoken  to the structural engineer who assures me that all the original stone wall will be cleaned and replaced and they are also planning to put the original steps back after cleaning then.  

[Barbara]

Without commenting on the politics of this issue, I have remarked for some time that some of the trees overhanging the road looked dangerous!  They are not ancient woodland, and I haven't forgotten the time one fell down on to the road, luckily missing both the school  and rush hour traffic. 

[admin]

Sorry Beverley Hills, but I thought it best to break out the second part of your post about Dan Bank from the 17 Windows thread as that is more than big enough already. If you have more knowledge of the LGO findings on 17 Windows then please do re-post the details in that topic.

I also received the leaflet today and after scratching my head a few times - it is not very clear and open to misinterpretation - I read into it a different understanding of who is funding what. On the back of the leaflet it says "wholly funded by the Department of Transport". I think this refers to the whole scheme except the improvements to the Dooley/Marple Road/Stockport Road Junction, which is (wholly) funded by SMBC. There is a further clue to this on page 2. I think my interpretation is correct but I'm not 100% sure. It shouldn't be ambiguous at all but it certainly is.

My own view on the trees is that they are not ancient woodland and if they have a 10 year management plan that includes planting new native trees and shrubs then no long-term harm will be done. The wider road and cycle lane will benefit many people. The whole Dan Bank scheme will have been funded and committed before the cuts and (if my interpretation is correct) most of the money is coming from the DoT anyway.

Just so everyone knows what we're talking about if they haven't had a leaflet yet, the final stage of Dan Bank Improvements are due to start on 31 January for 8 weeks until 27 March 2011. Dan Bank will be closed between 7pm and 6am each evening (except Sunday evenings) as it was during the stablisation of the bank. The improvements include resurfacing, new street lighting, road widening to create a shared footway/cycleway and improvement to the Dooley Lane junction.

See here for more details: www.stockport.gov.uk/danbank  and here http://www.u-to-us.com/danbank/default.asp?pageid=4&groupid=4

And here's a Podcast: http://www.u-to-us.com/danbank/admin/uploads/podcast_audio_2011.mp3

[beverley hills]

I have just received the latest newsletter about the planned 'improvements' to the Dan Bank / Dooley Lane junction. It has prompted me to update myself with the comments made about Seventeen Windows. I feel compelled to write about the results of the complaints made to The Local Government Ombudsmen and in particular the Council Complaints Officer. To reject a complaint made about a Councils inappropriate spending of public funds on the basis that the Council approved the spend is a nonsense. It in effect means that the Council are not responsible to anyone and can spend as and when they like on whatever scheme they wish with no comeback whatsoever.

The second point I want to raise, is the planned Dooley Lane scheme.

Are we going to allow the Council to decimate the woodland by the removal of many substantial trees in order to carry out this so called junction improvement. Obviously some people will be in favour, but I am sure the vast majority will be against this wholesale destruction. The trees on the south side,  regrettably had to be removed in order to secure the banking, there was no choice. The planned removal of trees on the north side is not necessary. I personally would prefer to wait in the traffic queues rather than have the woodland entry to Marple compromised. Who has decided that this scheme is necessary, is it our local Councillors, or is it the numpties in the Council who always think they know what's better for us.This scheme would no doubt improve traffic flow. but is the price really worth paying. Finally, this scheme is funded wholly by the Council. I thought that the country was seriously in debt, cuts to local Councils totalling millions, clearly the message hasn't reached Stockport. How can they spend so much money at a time of such austerity. We must not let this happen/