Marple Pool and other matters
Marple Lib Dems
News and comments making Marple a better place to live, work and play Learn more
August news from Marple Lib Dems
Some coronavirus information (6th January 2021)
Marple Pool and other matters
August news from Marple Lib Dems
Some coronavirus information (6th January 2021)
Marple and other districts get red soft pads
by Geoff Abell on 8 October, 2020
The council are putting up temporary red pads in district centres to create 20 mph zones, that help social distancing. You councillors need to know your views on this.
Please see Cllr Steve Gribbon’s video below.
Thanks for the many, many replies so far. There is also a special email set up to handle these comments and suggestions:
marpletraffic@gmail.com
Comments on new speed humps:-
They have no effect daytime due to 20mph speed excess not being possible due to congestion.
Evening time they are having an effect by reducing speed of the boy (and older) racers. However watched one high performance car travelling in direction of New Mills slowed down at humps opposite the Navi and then immediately accelerates along Strines Road probably reaching 60 mph adjacent to the Rec.
Also thought the safer streets supposed to do something to encourage cycling, not sure these speed humps do this. As a cyclist that used to commute regularly to Stockport whilst I was working apart from speed the biggest thing that discourages cycling is that car drivers leaving a safe distance when overtaking cyclists. There are a number of approved posters that other authorities use, but never seen anything in SMBC. see link below
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbeta.northumbria.police.uk%2Fadvice-and-info%2Froad-safety-and-vehicles%2Fcycle-safety%2F&psig=AOvVaw2T0raV4BAiPv5LQsdR2fo1&ust=1602574981888000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCKCRo5XHruwCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAP
A totally useless deterrent in my opinion! I’m all for safer roads, but use appropriate and environmentally friendly methods to control speeds without causing damage to the environment (noise and air pollution) and that don’t damage our vehicles. We’re already overrun with Stockport Highway’s speedhump mania on Windlehurst and Hibbert Lane and over two years ago the LibDems campaigned to have these removed/reduced. Not only are they still very much there, we now have even more in Marple centre itself!
When will someone stand up to Stockport’s Highway team and stop them cutting Marple off from the world by turning it into the speedhump capital of Europe?
I was surprised to see this intervention, first in Romily and then Marple. As both areas are usually congested and have lights / crossings, traffic moves slowly so I can’t see the additional need for the humps. slowing traffic further. There are roads in the immediate vicinity of Marple that require more attention by SMBC Road Safety Team. Strines Road is a noted hazard and there is no physical intervention. Why are the Council spending money on roads that are lesser risk re speeding and serious accidents by introducing humps that will increase air pollution ( especially particulate) by drivers braking and slowing down further , This matters in areas where there are many pedestrians who are often elderly. So this resident would be pleased if they were removed. Thank you.
I have to agree with the previous post, certainly not necessary during the day, however don’t know about the speeders at night or what the history of accidents are for Marple center, however I do know the problem of the speeding minority along Strines Road, the last 5/10 years has recorded enough accidents to warrant special urgent attention.
I live on Strines Road near the Sportsman, our entrance is on a bend and without a pavement, for us to cross the road or walk to the bus stop is a nightmare due to speeding traffic and big lorries. I would support any initiative to make our lives safer through the effective control of traffic.
Hi, I’m all for a 20mph speed limit, but would prefer to see the number 20 painted on the road in a circle at intervals. It would also help to have 20mph on surrounding roads, especially Church Lane.
As a motorist and a cyclist, I understand the need for safety through towns, but , as others have said, humps increase pollution locally and are still uncomfortable at low speeds.
I know many people dislike them, but I would prefer speed cameras installed along with 20mph signage.
Having lived here for over 50 years I agree with the 20mph limit but not with the means to enforce it. Speed humps cause more problems than they solve. Speed limit signs, together with road markings, should be the first move. It’s not just the damage to vehicles it’s the potential danger caused by people swerving to avoid them and the pain caused to passengers with spinal problems. And 4x4s, of which there are more than a few in Marple, can just handle them by a head-on ram at speed, which rather defeats the object.
Firstly, why was this consultation not carried out BEFORE the speed bumps were installed? It is disingenuous to be asking for comments after the contractors have installed them. Clearly, the views of the residents were very much an afterthought, but sadly, this is typical of the way the Authority operates.
Speed bumps are a ridiculous concept and a characteristically blunt instrument employed by myopic and obsessive local authorities. The roads through Marple and Romiley are congested to such a degree that I can rarely reach 30mph never mind exceed it. There are rather more pressing issues for Stockport currently and better things to spend OUR money on than devices to restrict traffic flow. The Authority should be making efforts to improve traffic flows, not hinder them.
The speed bumps damage vehicles because suspension components are not designed to cope with the impulse shock loads imposed, and they cause premature wear of the inner walls of tyres, which most people are unaware of. Both these points are matters of fact, not opinion.
The councillors should be aware that is illegal to use ‘traffic calming’ structures to reduce a speed limit. There is due process for changing a speed limit. The Highway Authority know this, and the councillors should force the Authority to follow it, if that is the objective.
All speed limits, other than those on restricted roads, should be made by order under Section 84 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Unless an order has been made and the road is signed to the contrary, a 30mph speed limit applies where there is a system of street lighting with lamps placed not more than 200 yards apart. Therefore, a 30mph limit remains on all the local roads with speed bumps. Unless they can be safely driven across a 30mph, the bumps constitute an obstruction of a public highway, which is an offence under Section 137 of the Highways Act 1980. I feel sufficiently strongly about this topic that I shall be taking legal advice on the matter.
From the comments made by some contributors to the Forum and to this consultation, there is a naïve belief that a Highway Authority can simple paint 20mph signs on the carriageway to affect such a limit. Those people need to acquaint themselves with the law.
In the quieter hours, the particular design of bumps now installed could tempt some drivers to take them at speed with the conviction that, at a higher speed, the effect on the suspension would be reduced and their passage smoother. Also, drivers of larger 4×4 SUVs may well see them as a challenge. Hence, the bumps could end up be counterproductive in a way and exactly at the times of day they were expected to be most relevant.
Finally, I take issue with the patently stupid preamble at the beginning of the consultation; ie,
“The council are putting up temporary red pads in district centres to create 20 mph zones, that help social distancing.”
What on earth is the relevance of vehicle speed limits to social distancing? Have we lost all sense of proportion and common sense? The madness is everywhere.
Thank you John for that very full reply. In response to your last point, I was repeating the council’s own words and that of the workers that laid them; that does not mean I necessarily endorse them.
John, a superbly eloquent and insightful response to what you have ably described as the actions of our “myopic and obsessive local authorities”; demonstrating a blatant disregard for due process as they continue to waste OUR money whilst failing on so many levels to deal with wider and more pressing issues. Whether that money comes from central government or is generated locally it is as you rightly state, OURS! The legal angle is interesting; wouldn’t it be ironic if our authorities were found to be breaking the law!
As an addition to how much money this actually cost… please see below an FOI response I have recieved.
Dear FOI Stockport,
can you please provide a full cost breakdown for the: –
…design
…materials
…installation
for the Safe Stockport installations with respect to Marple District Centre General Layout drawing number 7000A2/7012(D7)/MARPLE/01 as approved by “JB” on 10/07/2020.
Costs for Marple District Centre SSSL works can be summed up as:
Design £ 5300
Materials £ 8500
Installation £ 9800
Total £23,600
Signage costs were supply and install so I have split this 50:50 between materials and installation.
Living near asda i watch traffic speedin down hollins road at early hours in the morning just to try and beat the lights, and speed humps dont work they dont slow down. Cameras are the answer .
Hi.
I agree with most of what has been said. I agree that 20 mph limits in the town and village centres together with housing estates and certain problem roads would be a good idea. However, the enforcement with speed humps causes increased pollution, discomfort for vehicle occupants, increased vehicle damage and is ineffective. There is no substitute for actual enforcement using speed traps or systems that turn traffic lights to red if traffic exceeds the limit over the preceding several hundred metres. I would encourage the council to consider these methods.
We agree with the comments submitted to date, criticising the installation of these speed bumps in Marple and Romiley. Our experiences suggest that excessive speeding is not an issue in our town centres, but in the approaches to the centres. As residents on Longhurst Lane, we would reiterate the comments of Strines residents, as we also see excessive speeds in those parts of Longhurst Lane where traffic is not slowed by parked cars. Indeed, the parked cars seem to be the only deterrent to speeding. The planners seem to have very limited imaginations as regards traffic control measures. For example, the speed bumps on Windlehurst, or on Moor Lane in Bramhall, are brutal, and can only be navigated safely at speeds WELL below the legal 30 mph limit.
Can we please encourage the local authority to evaluate other traffic calming measures which are less harmful to cars and the environment? Our own preference would be for the widespread use of positive signage, for example the speed warning signs that we see in many local authorities, that reward adherence to the speed limit with a positive message, or even a smiley face! We have found that people generally respond very well to these reminders, and, together with a few well placed speed cameras, can be a very effective tool. Apart from the obvious selfish idiots, most speeding happens when drivers switch off and become complacent about the dangers of speeding. Timely reminders will be effective with most drivers.
Both my wife and I are visually impaired – neither of us drives, nor parks, on Stockport Rd. We welcome traffic calming measures and have generally found drivers to be fairly considerate for pedestrians crossing this busy road, since we moved here some 13 months ago.
We do, however, have concerns about the use of road bumps, having some located less than 10 meters from our Stockport Rd. property. Traffic taking the bumps at speed seems to “jump” a little, especially the many HGV’s using this busy thoroughfare. Our house is about 120 years old with a tall chimney located on the gable end. We are concerned that the resultant vibrations could cause damage to the structure of our home – the house literally ‘ shakes’ when the bumps are impacted. I wonder where we would stand with regard to insurance claims in the event of essential building repairs being required?
We favour serious consideration of alternative measures.
I really welcome the 20mph speed limit in Marple, and maybe speed bumps are what we have to put up with for now; at least they are fairly well spaced. I’m only too aware both that the speed bumps used are ‘removable’ ones and that the 20mph notices can also be taken down. By objecting too strongly to the speed bumps now, are we giving the Council an excuse to remove both and, hence, throwing the baby out with the bath-water?
The Marple centre section of Stockport Road, as others have pointed out, isn’t the most obvious place for speed reduction as there is often little chance for vehicles to gain speed between traffic light anyway.
However, 20mph here can be seen as a first step towards similar 20mph restriction in other roads leading to Marple, such as Longhurst Lane, Moorend, Strines Road and Compstall. The former two have section with speeding cars, no pavements and are narrow in places. They are positively dangerous for non-vehicle users and not ideal for encouraging people to walk and cycle more, for their own health and the environment. The 20mph limit in Marple can be seen as a ‘first step’ – let’s be positive about this while still strongly suggesting alternatives to speed bump to reinforce the speed limit signage.
Marple and High Lane has too many speed humps. they damage your vehicle cause more pollution. But hey, look on the bright side garages are making more money on car repairs.
I think these bumps are totally unnecessary in Marple where congestion and existing traffic lights keep speeds down. All they will do is add to air pollution. I would like to see some justification in terms of official traffic measurements on accidents and injuries, pollution levels and speeding convictions in the area.
A complete waste of money. The roads need policing not made undrivable. We are all being punished because of a small group of selfish idiots. Why can we not have police officers designated to short sharp shocks in different areas each week. Passive measures punish the good more than the idiots because the idiots will still drive badly everywhere else.
As a driver of a small car, I find speed humps to be especially dangerous. At low speeds they bounce you all over the road and you find your attention is all on aiming at the correct point in the hump, rather than watching out for real hazards.
Consultation is a strange word – people think if they speak out, someone will take notice. The council have repeatedly ignored the results of consultations and have continued to install humps often against the national guidelines.
It all started with the strange humps on Hibbert lane, particularly Upper Hibbert Lane, so narrow it was single file and traffic crawled.
Other areas are riddled with potholes – surely an area for safety spending in itself – or is it intentional, have we discovered the inverted hump?
I do have sympathy with you, especially in a small car. I was a councillor until 2018 and would like to make a small correction re Windlehurst/Hibbert bumps. The consultation on Windlehurst was done and the majority of residents did request them; however, it was only asked of residents on that particular road. Also, re potholes, I am pleased to see that the Highways Improvement Programme has come to Marple South years after Marple North was done. Church Road and Ecclesbridge Road, for example, are much better for cars and riders. As regards the temp, red humps, please do keep telling your local councillors.
I really cannot understand the mentality of those responsible for this truly ridiculous scheme. Not only is it a waste of money, it really serves no useful purpose at all. If the scheme was really about making Marple safer for pedestrians, then I would support it, but it isn’t.
What is actually needed is greater enforcement of the previously existing 30mph limit, or the safe speed for the circumstances when that is lower. In fact, I see very little in the way of speeding motorists and very little unsafe driving. I walk into Marple for shopping when I don’t need enough to require to load up the car. I always considered it perfectly safe before the new ludicrous measures.
If there is a problem with excessive speed, it isn’t in Marple town centre.
Just get rid of these measures. Please don’t allow measures like this which appear to be there purely so something useful looks at though it is being done and do something actually useful instead.
New Mills has had a 20mph limit in its centre for years without a problem, in fact it makes it feel a much nicer, less traffic-dominated place to be.
The 20mph limit should absolutely be kept through Marple, it is surprising what a positive difference it makes, especially to crossing the road. Hopefully the poorly designed red humps can be replaced with something less jarring that still signifies a “village centre” feel – something like the paving at the entrance to the Memorial Park road should be considered – short raised tables that also allow people to cross the road at more points more easily, would work well. This would signify more priority for pedestrians.
Separately, you should look into “continuous footways” where a pavement crosses a side road. Cars can still drive over it for access, but it signifies pedestrians have priority and means people don’t have to step up and down kerbs. This would work really well for the access road behind Barclays, Trinity Street near Nationwide and Union Road by the pool.
It’s still bizarre that there are NO pedestrian crossing facilities over each arm of the Stockport Road/Hibbert Lane junction!
And of course – no safe cycle routes whatsoever in the centre of Marple. I’m sure there would be space, if the roadspace could be designed more efficiently. So we really need THREE awkward lanes of traffic at the Hibbert Lane lights?
Thanks for your efforts. Please support the 20mph zones, and extend to residential streets too! In fact, I absolutely echo the good comments made here that it’s ludicrous Strines Road continues to be a “Wild West” for driving recklessness. It needs serious intervention asap- and no, not humps! – it would be the perfect place for an “average speed” camera set up with cameras at the start and end of the Stockport section. And please resurface the muddy canal towpath so those of us on foot or bike can avoid being killed in the meantime. This wouldn’t cost much more than the red humps and signs…
Thank you for these considered responses and suggestions. I will make sure our councillor team sees this.