More "Safe Street" proposals in Marple centre

[Howard]

I have taken direct action @Howard, nothing as irresponsible or as selfish as gluing myself to the speed cushions or as childish as posting memes, but reading the regulations, garnering the facts and building a strong case  to the Highways team, both directly and via my local councillors and Area Committee meetings in the naïve hope that my local councillors might support me in this endeavour. My regular posts on FB (thank you for reading them by the way), specifically in relation to the Windlehurst speed cushions consultation perhaps helped contribute to almost 1000 respondents, of which over 85% requested that the “measures be removed in their entirety”. They’re still there, and this was a campaign pledge from Cllr McCallister to get them removed! Persistence it therefore seems is the only remaining weapon in my armoury.

I think "ignored" rather than "read" is a better way of addressing your Facebook posts, but anyway...good luck shouting into the void. I guess everyone needs a hobby...

[jimblob]

How well has that persistence worked out for you so far? You post about it pretty much non-stop on FB as well, which has a wider reach than this forum.

If you feel about it as strongly as you appear to, I believe direct action is the way you should go. Glue yourself to the speed bumps

I have taken direct action @Howard, nothing as irresponsible or as selfish as gluing myself to the speed cushions or as childish as posting memes, but reading the regulations, garnering the facts and building a strong case  to the Highways team, both directly and via my local councillors and Area Committee meetings in the naïve hope that my local councillors might support me in this endeavour. My regular posts on FB (thank you for reading them by the way), specifically in relation to the Windlehurst speed cushions consultation perhaps helped contribute to almost 1000 respondents, of which over 85% requested that the “measures be removed in their entirety”. They’re still there, and this was a campaign pledge from Cllr McCallister to get them removed! Persistence it therefore seems is the only remaining weapon in my armoury.

[Howard]

touché @Howard ,
The only way it seems we might see change on this matter given the general tide of ineptitude on the part of Stockport’s highways team and our local councillors is persistence
If you don't like it or it bores you, find yourself another thread to follow.

How well has that persistence worked out for you so far? You post about it pretty much non-stop on FB as well, which has a wider reach than this forum.

If you feel about it as strongly as you appear to, I believe direct action is the way you should go. Glue yourself to the speed bumps

[jimblob]

touché @Howard ,
The only way it seems we might see change on this matter given the general tide of ineptitude on the part of Stockport’s highways team and our local councillors is persistence
If you don't like it or it bores you, find yourself another thread to follow.

[Howard]

I have to say, @Belly referring to a motorist as a clown for simply trying avoiding a large and potentially vehicle damaging lump in the road when they're likely adhering to the speed limit is a little unfair and somewhat presumptious.

[jimblob]

The potential for the odd clown to drive through marked parking bays in order to try to avoid the need to slow down just a little bit. 

I have to say, @Belly referring to a motorist as a clown for simply trying avoiding a large and potentially vehicle damaging lump in the road when they're likely adhering to the speed limit is a little unfair and somewhat presumptious.

[jimblob]

Is this a good time to note that it is not a requirement on the Council to implement / act on all suggestions set out in an RSA1? Has anyone read the Council's 'Designers Response' to the RSA, where they will have no doubt responded to this point? They defiitely should have.

As you might have guessed, I haven't btw, but it may well be that they ultimately determined that the principle of seeking to limit general traffic speeds to 20mph on the route overided the potential for the odd clown to drive through marked parking bays in order to try to avoid the need to slow down just a little bit. 

The point of an RSA1 is for an independent party to review an initial scheme & highlight any potential issues for the original designer to consider in more detail and respond to when progressing their scheme. There are further stages to go through when designing the works in detail and implementing on the ground.   

@Belly
I have previously requested this information from the highways team and been met with a wall of silence other than two very succint statements.... (it took them 9 months to reply, despite repeated requests).
·       Normal procedures and standards were not always observed
·       A Road Safety Audit was carried out and did not identify the cushions outside of 85 Stockport Road as a hazard

point 1 suggests that it's OK to breach regulations written in law and point 2 is a lie if one cares to read para 8.4.2 of the RSA1.

I don't believe an RSA2 or stage 3 has been carried out as it should have been during the implementation phase and despite many opportunities for a "designers response" the only response provided when questioned has been the two points above. Similarly, the breach of The Highways Regulations (Road Humps) Regulations 1999 has not been explained ... namely cushions within 30m of a pedestrian crossing; again a wall of silence and not even information as to which regulations apply, even when asked! The RSA1 was done without any speed or traffic data so your suggestion that the principle of seeking to limit general traffic speeds to 20mph is without foundation with no evidence to suggest that prior to the measures, speeds exceeded 20mph, similarly, there is no evidence that post implementation, speeds are below or limited to 20mph. It is worth noting however, that the measures were implemented to make social distancing safer as we came out of lockdown and the cushions next to laybys actually reduce safety in this regard as the RSA1 comments allude to in paras 8.4.1, 8.4.2 8.4.3 & 8.4.4. swerving is seen as the risk, NOT speed!

[Belly]

Is this a good time to note that it is not a requirement on the Council to implement / act on all suggestions set out in an RSA1? Has anyone read the Council's 'Designers Response' to the RSA, where they will have no doubt responded to this point? They defiitely should have.

As you might have guessed, I haven't btw, but it may well be that they ultimately determined that the principle of seeking to limit general traffic speeds to 20mph on the route overided the potential for the odd clown to drive through marked parking bays in order to try to avoid the need to slow down just a little bit. 

The point of an RSA1 is for an independent party to review an initial scheme & highlight any potential issues for the original designer to consider in more detail and respond to when progressing their scheme. There are further stages to go through when designing the works in detail and implementing on the ground.     

[admin]

Would you care to comment on my observatiobns @Steve Gribbon , the fact that the speed measures are in breach of regulations and also that the stage 1 safety audit recommendations were ignored. I do feel that "not being a fan" is a little understated when compared to these measures breaching regulations and safety audit recommendations. I appreciate you might not want to pass on those comments on this forum but you're welcome to reply to my earlier emails and voicemail left for you on this matter... you have my number I believe?

A couple of posts from this thread have been moved to the trivia section as they have added no value to this conversion.

You would be much more likely (but not guaranteed) to get a response from Cllr @Steve Gribbon if you posted using you own real name rather than an anonymous alias. It's easy to change in your profile.

[jimblob]

There was a public consultation a couple of months ago as to whether to keep or remove these bumps and 20mph speed limit. Does anybody know what the result was.

I asked but was refused the result... I think the council like to "analyse" the results first and spin things in their favour. The consultation however overlooks the fact that the measures breach regulations and safety audit recommendations and it's this the council are being VERY canny about admitting to. It seems the consultation is being used as a cover-up and a reason for them hopefully to be removed rather than the council removing them anyway and having to admit that they f***d up.

[Stephen]

There was a public consultation a couple of months ago as to whether to keep or remove these bumps and 20mph speed limit. Does anybody know what the result was.

[jimblob]

Why dont you put yourself forward when there is a vacancy for councill officer im sure you could you think do a Better job .

do you mean a council officer or a local councillor?
Assuming you actually meant the latter, it's because @amazon, I have absolutly no desire to be a local councillor. That of course does not preclude me, as a tax-paying resident of Marple to ask those elected councillors, who have chosen to take on the role about matters of public concern and to repeat those requests directly and on community forums if I feel I am being ignored. The role of a local councillor is to represent their ward or division and the people who live in it and provide a bridge between the community and the council and the officers it employs to carry out public services, hopefully, competently and safely.

[amazon]

Would you care to comment on my observatiobns @Steve Gribbon , the fact that the speed measures are in breach of regulations and also that the stage 1 safety audit recommendations were ignored. I do feel that "not being a fan" is a little understated when compared to these measures breaching regulations and safety audit recommendations. I appreciate you might not want to pass on those comments on this forum but you're welcome to reply to my earlier emails and voicemail left for you on this matter... you have my number I believe?

Why dont you put yourself forward when there is a vacancy for councill officer im sure you could you think do a Better job .

[jimblob]

Good evening

I feel it is worth stating that I have made the bumps on Stockport Road as an agenda item at the next Marple Area Committee meeting. Like many I am not a fan of them and do not feel the reason for their installation (improve social distancing) warranted them being in position for so long. I do however feel that the 20mph signage should remain.

Kind regards and stay safe

Steve

Would you care to comment on my observatiobns @Steve Gribbon , the fact that the speed measures are in breach of regulations and also that the stage 1 safety audit recommendations were ignored. I do feel that "not being a fan" is a little understated when compared to these measures breaching regulations and safety audit recommendations. I appreciate you might not want to pass on those comments on this forum but you're welcome to reply to my earlier emails and voicemail left for you on this matter... you have my number I believe?

[Steve Gribbon]

Good evening

I feel it is worth stating that I have made the bumps on Stockport Road as an agenda item at the next Marple Area Committee meeting. Like many I am not a fan of them and do not feel the reason for their installation (improve social distancing) warranted them being in position for so long. I do however feel that the 20mph signage should remain.

I do believe that my previous emails regarding safety matters are justified. Lighting issues in the park, Police improvements and road/pavement safety in winter are relevant to many in our community and coming from a profession where I have experience that smoke alarms save lives I want to make sure residents are as safe as possible. I hope people use the freephone number and get alarms if they are in need of them.

Kind regards and stay safe

Steve