Update! Derbyshire County Council – halts ‘repairs’ at Pin Dale!

Thanks Hannah (and everyone who’s got involved!) – I’m glad to see that a bit of pressure from us all has achieved something, of sorts. I still think we’re a long way from getting DCC to act differently, but let’s keep it up.

I had the same email, which conveniently failed to mention anything of Cave Dale, which is more of a worry for me. I’ve responded, asking if there may be a different approach. We’ll see..

The speed of response and furious backpedalling is an indicator of how obvious a **** up this is, and the scale of consequences the authority is attempting to avoid.

Robert Largan, MP for High Peak has taken time out from lying low and pretending that Boris Johnson doesn’t really have anything to do with him to post this on FB:
<div class=”kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q”>
<div dir=”auto”>Lots of Hope Valley residents have been contacting me about maintenance work on Pindale bridleway above Hope and Castleton.</div>
</div>
<div class=”cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q”>
<div dir=”auto”>Despite assurances given to local access groups by the Council, the materials being used for the work are not in keeping with the area (see below).</div>
</div>
<div class=”cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q”>
<div dir=”auto”>The local trail used for walking, running, and mountain biking forms part of the Peak District’s protected landscapes.</div>
</div>
<div class=”cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q”>
<div dir=”auto”>I contacted Derbyshire County Council, urging them to halt all further works on the ground to prevent further damage to the paths whilst this is investigated.</div>
</div>
<div class=”cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q”>
<div dir=”auto”>They have now agreed to halt the works and resurface the bridleway with locally sourced limestone.</div>
</div>
<div class=”cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q”>
<div dir=”auto”>Thanks to everyone who flagged this with me!</div>
</div>
<div dir=”auto”></div>
<div dir=”auto”>https://www.facebook.com/RobertLargan4HighPeak/posts/1366861500434351</div>

Edit: that went well 🙁

I’ll try again – Robert Largan, the MP for the High Peak, posted this on FB.

Lots of Hope Valley residents have been contacting me about maintenance work on Pindale bridleway above Hope and Castleton.
Despite assurances given to local access groups by the Council, the materials being used for the work are not in keeping with the area (see below).
The local trail used for walking, running, and mountain biking forms part of the Peak District’s protected landscapes.
I contacted Derbyshire County Council, urging them to halt all further works on the ground to prevent further damage to the paths whilst this is investigated.
They have now agreed to halt the works and resurface the bridleway with locally sourced limestone.
Thanks to everyone who flagged this with me!

oh dear

The bit about saying Pindale now, Cave Dale next is surely not true?
Cave Dale isn’t the same sort of RoW is it?
Bridleway vs Rupp/Boat?

I haven’t (yet) seen bridleways ruined in quite this same manor.

The bit about saying Pindale now, Cave Dale next is surely not true?
Cave Dale isn’t the same sort of RoW is it?
Bridleway vs Rupp/Boat?

I think MTBers use “Cavedale” to mean this bit here, the actual gorge

However I think “Cavedale” more generically refers to the whole track along the top of that area. The bridleway bit is part of the Limestone Way long distance path so there’s a possibility that it comes under DCC as well rather than individual landowners along the route.

it was considered, with good intentions, that a recycled material would be better to form a good foundation, with a further layer of the locally-sourced limestone on top to complete the job.

Is it just me, or isn’t there some sense in this from a sustainability perspective? Seems a bit precious to get worked up about an unfinished job. Effectively another chunk of a hillside somewhere nearby will need to be blown up, crushed and laid down as a thicker layer of limestone to appease those who saw the job halfway through. Nothing wrong with saving money in the name of sustainability. Maybe I’m missing something. I wouldn’t use Farrow and Ball paint to undercoat my walls, I’d use undercoat with a top layer of F&B (I wouldn’t really, I’m too tight, MsJimmy would tho).

Tar from road planings will most likely leach into the surrounding ground, which makes it an utterly inappropriate surface for an SSSI, regardless or not of whether they dress it with limestone to make it look nice on top. The planings need to be disposed of in a safe way, which presumably costs more.

It’s not a question of aesthetics, if it were, DCC would have just ignored people telling them to stop it, like they normally do.

As an employee of DCC not in Environmental Services I might add I can’t believe my colleagues are making such a such a mess of this.

FYI
I’ve just looked at DCC mapping and Pin Dale is on the Bradwell / Castleton parish boundary and hence ward boundary as well

I wouldn’t use Farrow and Ball paint to undercoat my walls

Doesn’t mean you’d “recycle” used engine oil for the job either.

As an employee of DCC not in Environmental Services I might add I can’t believe my colleagues are making such a such a mess of this.

Having seen the utter shambles that DCC have made of most of the off-road trails / roads in the area whenever they’ve touched them, I can easily believe they’ve made that much of a mess of this.

From Peak District MTB:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/PeakDistrictMTB/permalink/4716604615042922/

Is this still Peter White’s one man vendetta against the countryside, or is someone else in charge of this?

Is it just me, or isn’t there some sense in this from a sustainability perspective? Seems a bit precious to get worked up about an unfinished job. Effectively another chunk of a hillside somewhere nearby will need to be blown up, crushed and laid down as a thicker layer of limestone to appease those who saw the job halfway through. Nothing wrong with saving money in the name of sustainability. Maybe I’m missing something. I wouldn’t use Farrow and Ball paint to undercoat my walls,

The difference is that your undercoat will stay under the F&B coat. The whole surface and foundation of this will move and mix together. The water and traffic will mix it up so it just ends up as a semi grey semi black homogenous agglomeration.

I’m also deeply sceptical as to whether they were actually planning a top coat of grey until theg were busted.

On a tangent, am I right in saying this is the second thread on this?
If so, why didn’t it get closed like all other duplicate threads are? Btw230 has made an excellent point on the other thread which needs following up.

Or we could make this one a sticky 🤣😈

I’m pretty sure Peter White has retired recently.

On a tangent, am I right in saying this is the second thread on this?
If so, why didn’t it get closed like all other duplicate threads are? Btw230 has made an excellent point on the other thread which needs following up.

Well this one is a STW news story cross-posted onto the forum, the other one was a thread started at about the same time.

Tar from road planings will most likely leach into the surrounding ground

Tar being something that has to be tested for during road works/demolition and disposed of correctly. Any road planings in recycled aggregate used these days will be bitumen based.

Exact same problem here in North Wales. Ruined one of the best bits of singletrack in the area.
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/snowdonia-path-upgrades-or-unnecessary-motorways-through-the-hills

As someone who pays a lot of £££ of council tax in Derbyshire that is then repeatedly squandered, the incompetence of DCC is something only rivalled by the current occupant of No10 Downing Street.
They are perpetually hopeless.

I’ll give you a different example. The top of my road, about 500 yards away. On the Southern side of the Peaks. The road surface was mainly OK but with a few local pot holes, and 1 sections where sub-surface cracks were surfacing and actually needed cutting out and re-doing properly.
So what do we get…
1. Some (not all !) Pot holes patch filled.
2. Then sections of the road re-surfaced properly. But only a few sections. And missed out 30 yards between 2 resurfaced sections – the bit that needed it most. It took more effort to do 2 sections than combine it as 1.

Then… literally within 2 weeks of the proper new tarmac being laid… the morons chip-sealed it over. Leaving the road positively dangerous with all the loose chips at a T junction that was at the bottom of 2 fast downhill sections of road. And of course chip sealed over the non-repaired section that actually needed fixing in the 1st place.

They need sacking for that level of incompetence.

Tar being something that has to be tested for during road works/demolition and disposed of correctly. Any road planings in recycled aggregate used these days will be bitumen based.

Apologies. Presumably there would still be the risk of various shitty hydrocarbons leaching out of bitumen-based waste?

The term ‘recycling’ seems to make the choice to dispose of this material sound a lot more benign than it actually is.

Doesn’t mean you’d “recycle” used engine oil for the job either

Fair enough, like the analogy.

Tar being something that has to be tested for during road works/demolition and disposed of correctly. Any road planings in recycled aggregate used these days will be bitumen based.

Apologies. Presumably there would still be the risk of various shitty hydrocarbons leaching out of bitumen-based waste?

The term ‘recycling’ seems to make the choice to dispose of this material sound a lot more benign than it actually is.

I think ‘has to be’ should not be confused with ‘is’, very much in the same way that sewage ‘has to be’ treated before being discharged into rivers / the sea.

Thanks for the link

They need sacking for that level of incompetence

It depends what you’re trying to be competent at. If your end aim is to have perfect long lasting road surfaces, yes it’s incomptence.

On the other hand if the end aim is to provide regular repeat work for the contractors and the food chain of quarries, processing, transport etc they reside within; plus spend all your budget so you get the same again (or more) next year, then you’re being highly competent.

Worth remembering that for us it’s pointless make-work, but for others its their livelihood. It’s not “right” but I can see the logic.