Lets Tarmac the countryside

Just been sent this by a mate who went up Hartshead Pike yesterday. Vandalism….

Just off the title, I came here to see what Derbyshire County Council were up to now

I wonder who actually wanted or needed that to happen – how does that get funded? And are they happy with the result?

Just off the title, I came here to see what Derbyshire County Council were up to now

…well they’re certainly not tarmacing the roads!! 🙂

https://www.tameside.gov.uk/Countryside/Access-for-People-with-Limited-Mobility-Hartshea

That looks better than my local high street.

I see an issue…
How is the massive step up to the beautifully smooth tarmac going to be navigated?

I see an issue…

It’s not just wheelchair access that requires a smooth surface, some folk, unsteady on their feet, probably appreciate the easier path.

Isn’t there a lot of evidence that walking on uneven ground is very good for you, and prevents people becoming unsteady on their feet as they age?

Isn’t there a lot of evidence that walking on uneven ground is very good for you, and prevents people becoming unsteady on their feet as they age?

Yes, but it doesn’t  help people who physically can’t move on even surfaces much does it.

There’s a substantial body of evidence that tripping over hazards and bashing your head hard can have dire – even fatal – outcomes.

I don’t think anyone would object to improving access for those with mobility issues. Its the fact they’ve just dumped a load of tarmac on it that is the issue.

I suppose it’s inevitable, councils have limited budgets. I do wish someone in the position to make a decision on it would say “no we don’t have enough money to do that properly so let’s wait until we do or find more funding somehow”

It didn’t need to be tarmac though did it. Plenty of smooth surfaces that would have been more natural looking than that. It’s a 1 in 9 slope so if you’re unsteady on your feet thats going to be a tough climb anyway.

Isn’t that photo from Lily Lanes though, not Back Lane where there is parking – Lily Lane isn’t accessible.

is that tarmac or flexipave?

Vandalism….

And

t’s a 1 in 9 slope so if you’re unsteady on your feet thats going to be a tough climb anyway.

Exactly – I’m sorry but feel quite militant about this idea that we have to make everything accessible to everyone. Unfortunately as you get old or have disabilities there’s just some stuff you can’t do. I can no longer play football due to age and knackered knees – who should I blame or ask to change the nature of the game/surface?

Town parks, canal towpaths, some countryside walks have smooth low gradient – absolutely massess of opportunity for accesible exercise. No need to vandalise the countryside and just how the hell did this get past the wildlife officers at the council (the one’s near me are always banging on about the diversity of path margins).

Isn’t that photo from Lily Lanes though, not Back Lane where there is parking – Lily Lane isn’t accessible.

Looks like it yes. Lily lane isn’t accessible by car for the general public but there is a road of sorts up to some stables I think?

I’ll have to tell my other half as she and her mum planted a tree just by there after her dad passed away. Hopefully they haven’t disturbed it!

Photo taken here I reckon.

Just off the title, I came here to see what Derbyshire County Council were up to now

I had exactly the same thought but then I remembered that DCC doesn’t do tarmac; they just dump a whole load of rubble and tarmac planings over the trails.

then I remembered that DCC doesn’t do tarmac; they just dump a whole load of rubble and tarmac planings over the trails.

In their defense, they do the same on the roads. They are at least consistent.

this idea that we have to make everything accessible to everyone.

It’s not everything though, is it? Are they doing every trail in the Peak District?

I must say your compassion and profound insight into the lives of those less fortunate is truly humbling

Tenner says the material on the left hand edge gets washed away in the first big storm, and the tarmac gets progressively undercut from there. Be interesting to see if they have the same commitment/funding to keeping it passable by the intended users. There’s a reason why tarmac isn’t the go-to material for slapping on top of paths like that.

Yes it’s annoying, but molgrips is right, there’s other trails. We are not the sole users of the countryside, we have to fit in with the needs of others.

It’s a separate issue as to whether this was the right path to tarmac, and deal with ongoing maintenance.

How are those with mobility issues going to benefit from this? Looking at the picture they are going to have to cross a substantially rougher surface and then manage the step and gate before they even get to the tarmac.  Presumably the tarmac doesn’t carry on to the next road so they either have to manage with a rougher surface to do a loop or be faced with the step and rougher surface they negotiated to access the tarmac

Be grateful it’s tarmac.

Standard practice in the South Downs National Park is to dump hundreds of tonnes of builders rubble complete with bits of rebar and glass.

One of the most popular bridleways onto the downs out of Worthing is now totally inaccessible to all. Everyone has to walk on the golf course which goes down well.

It absolutely blows my mind that anyone thinks that is a better solution than a natural rough path.

One problem with this sort of thing is when a single person proposes the idea, sensible people are reluctant to object to it because “think of the disabled/old people”. If you work at the council, it’s just not worth the aggro or getting into trouble for being against disabled people or “equity” or whatever.

It’s not for wheelchair users. It’s for Surons. The riders don’t wear helmets you see and so a loose uneven surface on a steep gradient is a health and safety issue.

My other half went up there with her mum yesterday.

It does go down the other side too apparently, the side you can drive to but, they haven’t done anything to the part of the lane that gets destroyed by 4x4s so whether it improves access is debatable anyway.

It is a no win situation at all levels. If authorities and land owners don’t water down challenges they are accused of failing to aid the less able in some way. If they do, they are accused of environmental damage. Increased access also means damage, no argument possible there.

My take is that any RoW should be maintained to it’s original state and thus purpose. If a small chunk of society doesn’t like it hard luck. Which means that a hundred year old path probably won’t have any surface at all. Great.

But then again isn’t the MTB world guilty of much more?  Trail centres where natural animal paths could be used. Digging be it official or illegal

Presumably the tarmac doesn’t carry on to the next road

Is this the completed state of the project or is there more to come?

There’s two issues here: the principle of providing accessible paths (if that’s why this is an attempt to do); and the competence of execution in this particular instance.

Seems like they have comprehensively failed in the second attempt regardless on your views on the first.

TBH I can’t believe some MTBers are of the opinion that if you’re old or disabled it’s tough shit and you can stay at home. Talk about entitlement.

TBH I can’t believe some MTBers are of the opinion that if you’re old or disabled it’s tough shit and you can stay at home.

Judging by some of the political / NHS / pension threads, there’s a few on here apparently in favour of compulsory euthanasia.

There are a lot of double standards here.
Bridleways are not something that has a fixed state. When I started mtb in the 90s the track up Jacobs Ladder was grassy and easy to ride up. I bet its not like that now. What state would you want maintained in?
As it is now? As it was 30 years ago? As it was when you first rode it? These tracks need some form if maintenance and other people use rights of way other than cyclists.
Near me the improvements to Wythenshawe Park by British Cycling which lots of people seem to like has trashed an area of ancient woodland to produce 100 metres of rather tame singletrack.
Non of you are complaining about this.
Building bike trails at the expense of the natural world really is vandalism.
Making an accessible path is repairs.

Non of you are complaining about this.

Building bike trails at the expense of the natural world really is vandalism

But that’s OUR enjoyment of the countryside Bruce. You can’t touch that, we’re speshul.

Unfortunately as you get old or have disabilities there’s just some stuff you can’t do. I can no longer play football due to age and knackered knees – who should I blame or ask to change the nature of the game/surface?

I’m currently lobbying Nepal District Council for a tarmac footpath to the top of Everest for this very reason.

Non of you are complaining about this.

Were they tarmac?

Near me the improvements to Wythenshawe Park by British Cycling which lots of people seem to like

Source?

Scotroutes.

I can’t believe that you think that we are all equal. Or that we are not entitled to a point of view.

We all start equal. Sperm and egg. After that it’s pot luck and that’s sod law.

@thegeneralist.
Judging by the number of people using the new cycling facilities (although not that many appear to ride the vandalism singletrack).
There were also some positive comments on here on the BC new facilities thread.
Sadly no peer reviewed research.

Hmmm. I live a couple of miles away and haven’t heard anyone e say anything good about it. Apart from the pump track of course. The rest is an utter piece of shit

The pump track looks good the bit in the woods near the pump track appears popular with kids. There were lots of families using it at the weekend.
Most of it doesn’t flow or have enough elevation but the bit in the grassy area has already had modifications.
It’s not great but the carpark was full on Saturday.
I live 15 mins walk away.