More "Safe Street" proposals in Marple centre

[jimblob]

How can I do that when pretty much every thread gets hijacked by it?

slight exaggeration there @andrewbowden; almost up there with the enormous misconception that we need speed mitigation in Marple District Centre because "pretty much every" driver is a speeding motorist.
Avoiding the conversation would therefore mean of course that you'd have to NOT read "pretty much every thread", just think what you'd miss out on!

[Howard]

Why do we need an alternative? Just get rid of the dangerous and pointless nonsense.

I don't speed; I do use Marple a lot as a pedestrian; I don't see the problem with how it was before.

However, I think we've probably been through all this before.

Exactly...

[Condate]

All I'm hearing is "take them away".

I'm not hearing any alternatives?

Why do we need an alternative? Just get rid of the dangerous and pointless nonsense.

I don't speed; I do use Marple a lot as a pedestrian; I don't see the problem with how it was before.

However, I think we've probably been through all this before.

[andrewbowden]

if you don't like it @andrewbowden, stay out of it!

How can I do that when pretty much every thread gets hijacked by it?

[jimblob]

For goodness sake, do we have to have this endless pointless repetitive argument AGAIN?

if you don't like it @andrewbowden, stay out of it!

[andrewbowden]

For goodness sake, do we have to have this endless pointless repetitive argument AGAIN?

[jimblob]

The accident data prior to them being installed shows no pedestrian injuries as a result of speed; the issue of speeding, perceived or otherwise will not be solved with speed cushions because the small minority who speed will not slow down for a speed hump, but they will swerve to try and avoid one... (safety audit observations!). So there is no case to require an alternative. There was no greater danger before the speed cushions were installed, there are now safety risks and an increased danger... three pairs of cushions next to laybys and a pair of speed cushions 18m from a pedestrian crossing (which breaches regulations written in law!).
We are being greenwashed (or safetywashed) into believing we need speed mitigation here!
Longer term, a better road design within Marple is certainly required, but the current temporary measures make any problem worse, not better. So leaving them there or forcing the agenda for an alternative before they are removed is misguided in my opinion.

[nbt]

All I'm hearing is "take them away".

I'm not hearing any alternatives?

[jimblob]

I'm glad you think implementing schemes that break design guidelines, regulations (as written in law), and safety audit recommendations are boring @Howard . Let's hope someone you love is never killed as a pedestrian because they were hit by a moving vehicle!

[jimblob]

@jimblob you are asking for the REMOVAL of safety measures there. Ok , we get you don't like being slowed down and want the speed bumps removed. Fair enough if driving fast is your thing (though I do think you should try that on the motorway or even the race track rather than a local street), but "take them away" is not enough. You need to come up with a constructive alternative.

I don't drive fast, I don't break the speed limit... you're missing the point here @nbt , the "safety measures" to which you refer actually reduce safety because they breach their own design safety audit recomendations AND they break the law. You are not legally allowed to place a speed cushion within 30m of a pedestrian crossing, the cushions outside No85 Stockport Road do exactly that. The highway's own safety audit made 4 seperate recommendations to NOT place speed cushions next to the laybys because this introduced a risk of pedestrian injury... have you read the safety audit @nbt or the highways regulations? Do you know how fast I drive @nbt...No! so can I suggest you take the time to do your research before making accusations and passing unfounded judgements without evidence.

[Howard]

Local SAFETY matters....!
how about the immediate removal of the speed cushions in Marple district centre that are non-compliant with the regulations, ie, the law! The Highways (Road Humps) legislation 1999 and also that disregard the recommendations made in the stage 1 safety audit where it was stated in para 8.4.1 / 8.4.2 / 8.4.3 & 8.4.4...

"there exists the potential for vehicles to swerve into the layby to avoid speed cushions, leading to collisions with pedestrians or risk of loss of control"

If local councillors are going to raise safety issues, maybe they should do something about the safety issues that are staring them in the face and that they have been repeatedly informed about.

[nbt]

@jimblob you are asking for the REMOVAL of safety measures there. Ok , we get you don't like being slowed down and want the speed bumps removed. Fair enough if driving fast is your thing (though I do think you should try that on the motorway or even the race track rather than a local street), but "take them away" is not enough. You need to come up with a constructive alternative.

[jimblob]

Local SAFETY matters....!
how about the immediate removal of the speed cushions in Marple district centre that are non-compliant with the regulations, ie, the law! The Highways (Road Humps) legislation 1999 and also that disregard the recommendations made in the stage 1 safety audit where it was stated in para 8.4.1 / 8.4.2 / 8.4.3 & 8.4.4...

"there exists the potential for vehicles to swerve into the layby to avoid speed cushions, leading to collisions with pedestrians or risk of loss of control"

If local councillors are going to raise safety issues, maybe they should do something about the safety issues that are staring them in the face and that they have been repeatedly informed about.

[Graham]

It is indeed my horseless carriage, although my personal chassis and ancillaries do have a few miles on the clock.

I hope your referring to you car and not some male anatomy related medical condition!.

[GM]

I hope your referring to you car and not some male anatomy related medical condition!.