Pin Dale – DCC strikes again! Cave Dale next?

Here we go again

Words fail me.

Urgh. Thats hideous. God help us if what ever happens to cavedale looks anything like that.

Hmm.might be worth changing the title to include CD.

We understand similar works are about to begin at Cave Dale on the doorstep of the picturesque and popular tourist village of Castleton, which also a SSSI and unique limestone landscape.

I couldn’t really GAS what happens to Pindale, but if they fundamentaly change Cavedale then that would be a catastrophe.

I’m surprised the SSI at Pin Dale includes the quarry. I believe that was up for sale recently. Does this work go on past the quarry, or is it just the track between the road and the quarry? Obviously the surface material and work is shite… just wandering if it’s just the old quarry access road that it’s been dumped on, or of it’s the whole track.

Rode up it on Sunday. Its the top half of the trail down to where it opens out into the quarry itself – the bit between the drystone walls. It’d be an easy spin up on the gravel bike now.

Not only has it been done with non-matching material (as per the STW & PDMTB articles its some form of industrial recycling – obviously full of bricks and brick fragments, quite possibly road planings too), but its also been done badly in that there’s been absolutely no thought for drainage, so one big storm and I reckon most of it will end up in Hope. One has to question if that’s a deliberate thing so the contractors get more work “repairing” it in a year or 2’s time.

I’d love to see the financials behind the tender process and who’s on who’s “christmas card” list…

Genuinely worried about what’s planned for Cavedale, although as its a bridleway, it shouldn’t come under the DCC Highways dept who have utterly f***ed everything they’ve touched so far.

One of the photos looks like it was taken near the top, so the whole track.

Edit. Jon has ridden it so go with what he says!

That just feels like two fingers from DCC.
They pretend to consult with user groups and then just go and do what they damn well please anyway.

An awful, awful job.

Genuinely worried about what’s planned for Cavedale, although as its a bridleway, it shouldn’t come under the DCC Highways dept who have utterly f***ed everything they’ve touched so far.

This is the key thing. Who owns the land? Any works should be driven by the PDNPA and the landowner, DCC should have no interest whatsoever.

The tar from those road planings will leach into the surrounding ground, which is within an SSSI. Disgraceful.

They pretend to consult with user groups and then just go and do what they damn well please anyway.

That was always the case. I remember seeing a quote from Peter White re: the Rushup Edge debacle (which I can’t now find), which was words to the effect of “all consultation does is delay the process. We’ll do what we planned to do from the start”.

Has that been done to discourage the green laners in their 4WDs?

If somebody wanted to be pain in the arse they could ask which end of waste quality protocol that material met or whether a use of waste exemption has been registered for the work

Its the top half of the trail down to where it opens out into the quarry itself

Damn. Why? Not asking you… that’s a question for whoever has done it. Just… why?!?

its some form of industrial recycling – obviously full of bricks and brick fragments, quite possibly road planings too)

Round our way DCC contractors have used similar which includes bits of glass.

Has that been done to discourage the green laners in their 4WDs?

It might discourage them but I could have good go at it in my RWD beemer now.

Disgraceful approach from DCC, incompetence on a grand scale.

Any works should be driven by the PDNPA and the landowner, DCC should have no interest whatsoever

Yonks ago the PDNPA ceded maintenance responsibilities of RUPPS, BOATS etc to the DCC Highways dept, which is where the whole problem comes from.

Theoretically FPs and BWs are not under DCC’s remit. Theoretically…

Shit, thats **** awful! I was actually thinking of buying that quarry when it was up for sale, thought about seeing if I could build a ‘temporary’ tiber framed house in there and have camping pods dotted around it. Could have been fun.

I’ve been meening to do Cavedale for ages and never seemed to get round to it. Better get down there ASAP!!

Daft question but isn’t pindale actually a road? I always assumed it to be when I’ve ridden up it.

That is a terrible mess though and I can’t see they got agreement from Nat England given the SSI etc. That to me looks very much like they got agreement on (a) did (b) – easier to seek forgiveness than permission as it were.

Who enforces planning against the council?

(That said, if it’s from the road down to the quarry is it actually the council’s planned maintenance or rather the new owners of the quarry have done that?)

I really do hope they don’t do anything like that to have dale though as well as being a be and definitely not a road that’s effectively a stream bed so can’t see the above being possible whether DCC wants to or not.

It’s as Byway Open to All Traffic. Which is apt, cos you could get a Fiesta up it now.

temporary’ tiber framed house in there and have camping pods dotted around it. Could have been fun.

The old put the house I a hole so it doesn’t need planning permission trick?

That was tried by an “eccentric” farmer type who ended up shooting the planning officer dead with a revolver, the whole thing is on film.

I’m surprised the SSI at Pin Dale includes the quarry.

Quite a few quarries are sssis.

That material used is almost certainly a “waste” in the legal sense, and it should have certain checks made during its manufacture PLUS there has to be certain legal exemptions registered for its use at that site.

As an ex EA employees (and chartered waste manager) I would be able to help with any challenge to the material used if someone from the local riding group contacts me.

I would have to check in more detail but I’m certain there is something very wrong about what’s happened there.

I would have to check in more detail but I’m certain there is something very wrong about what’s happened there.

DCC’s usual modus operandi is to not give a shit if it’s wrong, go through as many legal channels as possible to argue that the work has been done now anyway and then, when they finally lose, to wait as long as possible before actually rectifying the work, usually leaving it any remedial works as badly done as they can possibly get away with so that they can say “well we did fix it but you complained and now look”.

Then they’ll start form scratch arguing that the trail is not up to standard and needs to be repaired, promising sustainable local materials etc etc and round we go again.

When they did the Rushup Edge “works” (ie dumping hundreds of tons of baby-head rubble all over it), it turned out it was one guy right at the very top who was quite well-known as very anti-MTB. Took years to rectify that work and only because of very concerted opposition from Peak District MTB and a local horseriding group.

@joshvehas – No, more of a Timber framed structure that didn’t need large permanent foundations might actually get planning permission.

Moot now anyway as I figured it’d be too much hassle, i.e. my wife didn’t think it’d work (she was probably right) so I never went through with it and stuck with my day job that fills me with joy daily…..

I’m looking at this one as a potentially illegal waste operation, due to the nature of what’s been put down there. The fact that its in a SSSI would be very interesting to the EA and bumps up the category of incident with them a great deal. I just need more info.

Pindale should be surfaced to a standard that allows all permitted users to use it. Thems the rules.
Not so sure thats a good idea in many respects but there it is.

Indeed Matt, but if they’re going to say they’ll do one thing and then do something different without being challenged, it sets a worrying precedent

I’m looking at this one as a potentially illegal waste operation, due to the nature of what’s been put down there. The fact that its in a SSSI would be very interesting to the EA and bumps up the category of incident with them a great deal. I just need more info.

They won’t want to touch it, you will get fobbed off

Does give the opportunity for FOIA fun, but nothing will happen

As an ex EA employees (and chartered waste manager)

Ditto.

I’m looking at this one as a potentially illegal waste operation, due to the nature of what’s been put down there. The fact that its in a SSSI would be very interesting to the EA and bumps up the category of incident with them a great deal. I just need more info.

For sure more context and info is needed, but even then, you should already know that the EA, a long-time toothless and apathetic organisation, is a veritably hollowed out husk post austerity. Its a blind alley.

Pindale should be surfaced to a standard that allows all permitted users to use it. Thems the rules.

Thats fine if it is done properly (properly bedded hydraulically bound limestone). If it is done with an unbound material which is likely to change the chemistry of the surrounding soil (which is the basis of why the area is an SSSI) that is an entirely different issue. It is also a different issue when the unbound material used makes the surface worse for the majority of the permitted users.

It seems like DCC are blowing the highways budget on half arsed vanity projects like Bamford Clough and Pin Dale while they ignore the numerous roads in the area closed due to collapses caused largely by a lack of properly carrying out routine maintenance. If I was being cynical I would guess that they are dumping road scrapings from other work to save on land fill tax or proper recycling.

Talking to English Nature in Bakewell and to whoever is responsible for giving the Peak Park Planning Board environmental advise. They might not be directly responsible but at least they will be listened to.

The fact that its in a SSSI would be very interesting to the EA and bumps up the category of incident with them a great deal.

Correct apart from SSSIs are policed by DEFRA advised by English Nature (at least in the area concerned)

Had this back from DCC – some contrition?

Dear ,

Thank you for your email on the work carried out recently at Pin Dale.

Before work started we consulted and agreed with the Peak Park, Natural England and Historic England that a specific locally-sourced limestone would be used on the site.

However, due to site conditions 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.

Following the concerns raised about the recycled material not being appropriate we are now looking at removing it and replacing it fully with locally sourced limestone, as was the original intention. We have halted work on site while we liaise with stakeholders about our proposal to remove the recycled material and will re-start work as soon as this plan has been agreed.

I hope that this will alleviate your concerns.

Kind Regards,

That material used is almost certainly a “waste” in the legal sense, and it should have certain checks made during its manufacture PLUS there has to be certain legal exemptions registered for its use at that site.

As an ex EA employees (and chartered waste manager) I would be able to help with any challenge to the material used if someone from the local riding group contacts me.

I would have to check in more detail but I’m certain there is something very wrong about what’s happened there.

I think this is an excellent suggestion from 230.
DCC have backed off for now with some bullshit excuse but we all know they’ll be at it again.

If there is any legs on getting them prosecuted for illegal dumping then we should try to do this.

@Mowgli just came to post a screenshot of the same message on one of the fb groups (might be you posting).

Basically, they have wasted a tonne of money and material and are going to take it all back off again.

That’s councils for you.

From Peak District MTB:

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

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/peak-district-trail-work-halted-6522755

Quotes in there from Chris Maloney of PDMTB

And here.

That’s me that is.

Correct apart from SSSIs are policed by DEFRA advised by English Nature (at least in the area concerned)

Yes I know that but if something is reported in a sensitive location like a SSSI it increases the impact category so they are more likely to attend and investigate. I reckon it’d go from a cat 3 (low impact and won’t attend) to a cat 2 (medium impact) which they may look into. Especially with the press coverage.

It was a wire bottle brush too, not a hairbrush

That’s me that is.

You made it into Angry People in Local Newspapers on FB, life goal complete.

If you read teh DCC statement on why they stopped the works, it’s very carefully worded so as not to say who decided to alter the spec and use recycled materials, ratehr than teh agreed limestone aggregate.  I think this is one of several potential situations:

1: The contractor went “rougue”, tried to save some cash by down-speccing some materials, and DCC didnt have a tight enough reign on them thus they got on with saving themselves some money, and didnt realises/care about the change.

2: The contractor actually proposed/quoted for teh use of recycled aggregate for teh job. DCC agreed the use of local stone, and the 2 agreements didnt meet in the middle, and a lack of internal joiined up thinking at DCC means the left hand (Consents/Agreements) and the right hand (Project delivery) weren’t working together as well asthey should.

3: Someone (possibly relatively junioir) in the council under budget pressure made an active decision to de-spec the works, to save soem cash on teh basis that “when its covered no-one will know”.

In any of these scenarios, DCC do not come out in a good light, eithe rthrough poor management, deision making or communication.

oes anyone know if the work was being carried out by contractors or in-house labour (Orange vans typically for DCC)?