Chadkirk Park Cycle Route

[rsh]

Thanks Steve. I would suggest we also need a dropped kerb opposite Vale Road - at the moment it is not obvious at all that due to poor implementation, cyclists are supposed to turn LEFT and use the crossing in order to use the cycle route up the hill. This is the view from Vale Road

https://goo.gl/maps/bVKxUjywDzQ2

Absolutely agree with this. The cycle route is tricky to access at present unless you’re coming directly from the crossing or Mill Lane. There’s not even an obvious dropped kerb where you’re meant to join it coming from across the bridge either, unless you use the farm entrance or swerve on at the pedestrian crossing which doesn’t really feel natural. Dan Bank has a logical dropped kerb and an arrow with cycle symbol.

I also still feel it’s a shame the other side of the road (footpath) remains ridiculously narrow (too narrow for a wheelchair or pram surely) and has had “no cycling” signs put up. It would have made far more sense overall to widen the surface on this side too and allow cycling on both. It’s as unpleasant cycling down that hill as up and having to cross over to use the single cycle path is silly.

If the council could also look at making the pavement along Dooley Lane a shared path, widening it by rebuilding the retaining wall near where it meets Dan Bank, we’d suddenly have a quite fantastic and usable little cycle network between Marple and Romiley/Bredbury and beyond.

[CTCREP]

Hello Steve

Please check there is proper access to the path down by the bridge, also that there is proper signage.  I suspect the ew cyclists (at present) using the path uphill are not aware that it is intended as a cyclepath.

[Steve Gribbon]

Thanks Steve. I would suggest we also need a dropped kerb opposite Vale Road - at the moment it is not obvious at all that due to poor implementation, cyclists are supposed to turn LEFT and use the crossing in order to use the cycle route up the hill. This is the view from Vale Road

https://goo.gl/maps/bVKxUjywDzQ2

Thanks NBT

That’s a great suggestion, leave it with me and I will see what can be done, I will have to speak to Neighboring Councillors but there should be no problem as it’s a really good idea.

Kind regards

Steve

[jimblob]

Oh chill out.  nbt has made it quite clear he uses the cycle path.  I have made it quite clear I have used the cycle path.

Put simply DON'T FIND PROBLEMS, FIND SOLUTIONS.

Two cyclist then! Great use of a whole heap of tarmac and £270k that could have filled hundreds of potholes and made miles of roads safer for cyclists and motorists alike. As for creating problems, I think we can safely leave that task to Stockport's highways team!

[nbt]

Thanks Steve. I would suggest we also need a dropped kerb opposite Vale Road - at the moment it is not obvious at all that due to poor implementation, cyclists are supposed to turn LEFT and use the crossing in order to use the cycle route up the hill. This is the view from Vale Road

https://goo.gl/maps/bVKxUjywDzQ2

[Steve Gribbon]

Good evening

I have spoken to the Public Realm officer about this situation, I have asked for the following: Cycles to be painted at both ends of the route on the ground and the same half way along the pathway. I have also asked for some housekeeping in the way of the hedgerow being trimmed to keep users nearer to the new fence.

Our Public Realm officer is excellent, any delay in this is down to me in sending in the request, but this is out of our area so I wanted some neighbourly consultation before the request was made.

I hope this will make things clearer to people using the path, obviously time will tell. In the meantime safe cycling/walking.

Kind regards

Steve

[andrewbowden]

What you're hearing is; if we've spent £270k to build a designated cycle lane, at least have the common courtesy to use it.

Oh chill out.  nbt has made it quite clear he uses the cycle path.  I have made it quite clear I have used the cycle path.  I think we can safely say people are using the cycle path.

This is also not a totalitarian regime.  No one can force anyone to use a cycle path if they don't want to.  Cyclists who don't want to use it - for whatever reason - are not compelled to use it just to not annoy people in cars.  Cyclists have as much legal right to use the road as any driver of a motorised vehicle driver does. 

So perhaps instead ask why people might not be using it.  And as has been said, perhaps the signage could be better.  Or it could have better access from Chadkirk.

Put simply DON'T FIND PROBLEMS, FIND SOLUTIONS.

[jimblob]

What I'm hearing from you is "bloody cyclists shouldn't get in the way of my important car journey".

What you're hearing is; if we've spent £270k to build a designated cycle lane, at least have the common courtesy to use it. This particular cycle lane is constructed in such a way that motorists on their important car journeys cannot use it, surely that makes it safer and it's use by cyclists something of a no-brainer, (assuming of course that they have one?).

[nbt]

But it's use isn't enforced so cyclists still use the road for a variety of reasons

It's not obvious that it's a cycle lane, and access is not easy especially if you come out of Chadkirk as there is no dropped kerb to access the cycle path. I'd personally use it every time rather than riosking my life with some of the drivers up that hill, if that was a route I needed to use (I don't my route takes me past Chadkirk chapel and under the canal)

Having said that, it's not a MANDATORY cycle lane - and in any case, MANDATORY cycle lanes actually mean that cars are nto permitted to use them, rather than that cyclists MUST use them. The highway code states where there is a designated cycle lane, cyclists should ‘Keep within the lane when practicable… Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills but they can make your journey safer.’ What I'm hearing from you is "bloody cyclists shouldn't get in the way of my important car journey".

[admin]

I'm not sure what the new cycle lane has to do with parking at Rose Hill School. it is quite hard to follow the thread.

I agree @Lys and I've moved posts relating (mostly) to the cycle path to this thread.

[Lys]

I use the new cycle lane every school day to commute to work at Harrytown school and back to do the school crossing at Rose Hill. I have already had the council out to look at drivers parking on it and completely blocking the path.The path is ace for keeping me apart from the speeding wagons coming off the motorway although the spray from there wheels has nearly drowned me a few times.It doesn't get gritted. I have to use the road which is gritted sometimes.I'm not sure what the new cycle lane has to do with parking at Rose Hill School. it is quite hard to follow the thread.

[jimblob]

board funding came from a grant from central government that was specific to that work, so the council couldn't have spent it on anything else.  And with a bit better signage, I'm sure more people would use it. 

doesn't really matter where the money came from, it was from our taxes indirectly or otherwise. My point being, the net result of spending £270k is massively disproportionate to the benefits it's likely to deliver. Adding up all those £270k white elephants however and spending them more wisely could do something far more tangible.

[andrewbowden]

But it's use isn't enforced so cyclists still use the road for a variety of reasons, nor is it clear who should or shouldn't use it, (although signs at either end do show it as shared use). Most significantly in my opinion, it's a folly and a complete waste of £270k when one considers how many people actually benefit from it. It's intention (if you talk to the Greens) is that will have everyone cycling along it and remove any justification for a Hazel Grove/M60 bypass...... 

If I remember correctly, it was stated on this board funding came from a grant from central government that was specific to that work, so the council couldn't have spent it on anything else.  And with a bit better signage, I'm sure more people would use it. 

Ultimately there are big plans for the Bee Network in Greater Manchester with a goal to get more people cycling.  Expect more cycle lanes, not less.

[jimblob]

I have.  Seen a few cyclists on it.  Went on it myself once.  It's a nice ride. 

What it isn't, is obviously clear that it's a cycle lane.  Needs some bikes painted on it.

I've also seen people walking on it.  It is being used.

But it's use isn't enforced so cyclists still use the road for a variety of reasons, nor is it clear who should or shouldn't use it, (although signs at either end do show it as shared use). Most significantly in my opinion, it's a folly and a complete waste of £270k when one considers how many people actually benefit from it. It's intention (if you talk to the Greens) is that will have everyone cycling along it and remove any justification for a Hazel Grove/M60 bypass...... 

I feel we've stepped away from Parking at RoseHill issue and I'm already aware of another thread covering that topic so I'll stop my Thursday rant now

[andrewbowden]

wii agree with you on the cycle lane that ive still not seen any one on ,

I have.  Seen a few cyclists on it.  Went on it myself once.  It's a nice ride. 

What it isn't, is obviously clear that it's a cycle lane.  Needs some bikes painted on it.

I've also seen people walking on it.  It is being used.