Windlehurst Road Traffic Calming Measures - Consultation

[jimblob]

Quite simply remove all these pointless, expensive and car damaging schemes, that includes road width reduction, speed humps and any other ridiculous ideas.

If your speeding have the police do what they are paid to enforce or cameras, just because some under endowed idiot speeds you cannot force the rest of the population to sit under draconian traffic calming schemes.

Murder is illegal, but you don't have the whole population using plastic cutlery just in case!.

Hear Hear ! 

[jimblob]

Because we all know what will happen if the speed bumps are removed.  It will be someone moaning about people speeding.  About people using it as a cut through.  And we will be having this tedious discussion in some form for decades.

It's not a cut through, a road is a road, people who drive cars or ride bicycles tend to use them to get to places.

[GM]

Quite simply remove all these pointless, expensive and car damaging schemes, that includes road width reduction, speed humps and any other ridiculous ideas.

If your speeding have the police do what they are paid to enforce or cameras, just because some under endowed idiot speeds you cannot force the rest of the population to sit under draconian traffic calming schemes.

Murder is illegal, but you don't have the whole population using plastic cutlery just in case!.

[jimblob]

Come on then.  What's your solution?  It's all very well moaning and whining.  But what's the answer to all this?

How do we get to traffic utopia?  How do we get to traffic being able to flow?

Frankly I am bored of the repetition of moaning and whining.  If Stockport Highways don't have the answers, then what are they?

Whether we like it or not, we have an economy, a 100 year history of building and town planning along with lifestyle aspirations built on the car. (One only needs to watch every second Tv advert to see that it is to either buy or insure a car). Whilst it is and must be along term goal to move away from our dependency on cars, we cannot restrict or limit that dependency until such time as a viable alternative is in place unless we want to kill our economy completely. The current approach seems to be to restrict car use and make it unpleasant or impossible but without providing any viable alternatives.
The solution therefore is to do nothing to the roads other than that which will improve the flow of traffic. In the meantime, other public transport infrastructures need to be developed that can, over time provide those viable alternatives but without detrement to what which we already have. (Don't restrict heavily used existing highways infrastructure for cycle lanes that wont get used, the business case and value proposition just doesn't stack up!). Viablity of alternatives is that they are cheaper, greener, healthier and more reliable and therefore preferable to the car. Then and only then do you tax or discriminate aginst the motorist.

[andrewbowden]

Erm, they just spent £290m building the airport relief road, which according to the MEN flooded again!.
So I guess we at least have a local swimming hole until its drained.

So how is keeping the Windlehurst humps and creating more similar slowing down traffic schemes across the borough helping to reducRe traffic jams?.

I said to Jimblob and I say it to you.

What's your answer?  Cos all I see is moaning and grumbling. And I all I see in the future is moaning and grumbling.

Because we all know what will happen if the speed bumps are removed.  It will be someone moaning about people speeding.  About people using it as a cut through.  And we will be having this tedious discussion in some form for decades.

So I ask you now.  What is your solution?
How the hell do we stop having this tedious never-ending conversation?  How do you solve it?  Because you both clearly can solve this better than the highways team.  Well you must be able to because you are both so convinced they are wrong.

[GM]

Erm, they just spent £290m building the airport relief road, which according to the MEN flooded again!.
So I guess we at least have a local swimming hole until its drained.

So how is keeping the Windlehurst humps and creating more similar slowing down traffic schemes across the borough helping to reduce traffic jams?.

[andrewbowden]

No, I think your confusing totally separate issues.

Why should we reduce vehicle journeys, we don't just hop in our cars for the enjoyment of driving to work or anywhere else for that matter.

Population is always growing
Ergo number of cars grows with it


We have a choice.  Reduce use of private vehicles.  Or build more roads.

You choose.

[GM]

No, I think your confusing totally separate issues.

Why should we reduce vehicle journeys, we don't just hop in our cars for the enjoyment of driving to work or anywhere else for that matter.

[wheels]

great idea @wheels!
let's make it almost impossible for people to make a living and kill the economy whilst we're at it.

You do understand that the aim must surely be  to have less vehicle journeys per year don't  you. We are all working to the same objective aren't we? We agree on that at least?

[GM]

I'm sure wheels will be perfectly fine with just waitrose and Amazon vans being the sole road users.

[andrewbowden]

great idea @wheels!
let's make it almost impossible for people to make a living and kill the economy whilst we're at it.

Come on then.  What's your solution?  It's all very well moaning and whining.  But what's the answer to all this?

How do we get to traffic utopia?  How do we get to traffic being able to flow?

Frankly I am bored of the repetition of moaning and whining.  If Stockport Highways don't have the answers, then what are they?

[jimblob]

You are correct we have to make all routes equally unattractive,  for motorised vehicles at least

great idea @wheels!
let's make it almost impossible for people to make a living and kill the economy whilst we're at it.

[wheels]

You are correct we have to make all routes equally unattractive,  for motorised vehicles at least and so yes I agree Dan Bank has been crying out for some form of traffic calming measures to reduce speed and volume for many years. 

[GM]

More powerful vehicles!, are you actually thinking that's a reason to install speed humps ?.

And then to suggest it's a way of reducing the number of vehicles using windlehurst seems even more ridiculous!.

So in your opinion we should just funnel all the traffic via Dan bank?, causing even more traffic jams, pollution from sitting waiting to get out of Marple?.

Are you sure your not an employee of the highway team?

[wheels]

They make the road less safe because in a smaller car like our BMax (which is same as a Fiesta so not tiny) you can only go over the humps at between 15 and 20mph without high risk of damage and even at those speeds it is a very unpleasant experience. However, they don't slow larger vehicles down very much at all - you barely notice they are there in our motorhome at 30mph, as it has a much wider wheelbase. So when I drive down there in the BMax we always have larger vehicles coming up too close behind trying to push us along, and on many occasions we have been overtaken by them when slowing down for these particular humps. I've driven the same car over humps and speed cushions in many other areas all around the country and the Windlehurst Road ones are by far the most horrible I've ever experienced even at crawling speed.

OK well that's a reasonable response and an explanation of one small issue. So the question surely must be how do we develop traffic calming which ensures that larger more powerful vehicles have to drive more slowly. I'm not in anyway suggesting that the Windlehurst Road traffic calming is ideal but it has at least got people thinking about their behaviour and whether they need to go that way at all and that can only be a good thing.