Rushup edge resurfacing

Just received DCC’s email re the Cabinet Reshuffle – Councillor Dean Collins will be contacted shortly. Thanks for the heads up MartynS.

I stand corrected

Pook, it was definitely a repeat of the questions. The slightly different wording is repeated.

It looks like the repeating questions is a glitch we can do nothing about, perhaps due to the device you do the survey on. I’ve checked the survey preview and taken the survey myself and have no repeating questions.

I’ve checked the results collected so far and there is no duplication of question there, so whatever the problem it’s not affecting the final analysis.

I’ve had the repeating questions glitch on my PC = Win7, chrome browser. Going back a page then forward sorted it. edit – in my case it was questions 7, 8 and 9 I think – the question about enjoyment of the sunken track then *use* of the sunken track, then use of the paths above the sunken track

same here

Great job otherwise!

AS above, use/enjoyment of the track questions repeated, but when I went back to check and then forward again, the sequence was correct. Firefox and Windows…

I’d imagine the results are already painting a pretty clear picture.

There is a little bit of a conflict regarding use of the resurfaced path in some respects in the survey questioning. The work will certainly discourage me to use the bridleway and if I’m to do the Hope/Hollins Cross/Rushup/Jacobs loop I will be massively “encouraged” to use the illegal top path. SO I can answer “extremely discouraged” to the bridleway usage and “extremely encouraged2 to the illegal path usage.

Since Chapel Gate was resurfaced I’ve never used it. Rushup is harder to cut out of loop planning so it’s certainly more likely to result in illegal usage.

From a walkers perspective and hike including Rushup is going to be quite a long one so the rock steps where a non issue as the walk would only be taken on by the fitter/more active/more able walker. Also as a walker there is more of a view from the illegal path, IMO it is that which encourages walkers to use it rather than the rocky nature of the path.

Why is that a conflict Jambalaya?

I’m very less likely to use the route now it’s been resurfaced, but on the rare occasions I will, I’ll most deffinately use the side trail. So, less legitimate use than before and more illegitimate use.

Is the area on the bank above the sunken road ‘illegal’ as such or just something formed from shared use by all? Is it marked as a footpath?

I’ve completed the survey.

Technically it’s trespass.

Which is a civil issue, not a criminal one. However, if the works would cause an issue for the landowner, they may well have grounds to object as well.

Thinking of who does or doesn’t object, has anyone contacted any groups representing disabled access? DCC are claiming one of their drivers is access for all but is there a body representing disabled user interests and how do they feel about trails being leveled, allegedly in their name. I think we might be pleasantly surprised by the response.

@Onzadog – I would suspect that the dramatic cuts to support services for the disabled as part of DCC’s £157m reduction in costs will figure a little higher on the priority list of most than would access to a high moorland trail.

The upper illegal track has been there for the 16 years or so I’ve been enjoying the outdoors in that area. As mentioned before, the sunken track has barely changed if at all in those 16 years.
I too will start to use the illegal higher track if these works continue and the track is flattened.

@Roger, that’s my point. I’d wager that disabled access groups are probably realistic enough to see that there’s no benefit to rushup edge being levelled in their name. If they came on side with us it would be a massive coup and blow one of dcc’s main arguments clean out of the water.

Can we not use the legal / ilegal argument in the context of the side path. The landowner may have taken issue with DCC but it could just as easy be another DCC red herring.

One of the others is the diversity argument – last time I looked equal ops covered much more than physical ability.

Some reading from IPROW on rights of way widths:
http://www.iprow.co.uk/gpg/index.php/Widths

Survey done.

As a member of one of the local MR teams, whilst privately individual members might be ‘up in arms’about this trail destruction, unless it impacts upon teams ability to operate, then individual teams, and our regional body will be unlikely to pass comment. If trail works stopped a team deploying a land rover up the track then yes they would complain. Teams generally do not criticise anybody requiring our services publicly; we all started off in the outdoors with minimal kit, and skills. Some off us take massive risks when we go out to play too. So whether trail ‘improvements’ (surely an oxymoron) increase speed and accidents,who knows? (Obviously there is a clearly established correlation between speed/mechanism of injury and severity of injury.) That correlation, not withstanding, regional statistics would have to be gathered before and after, and even then it would be very tricky to directly state how much the state of the trail played a part in the incident.

13 years of MR serice I can think of less than a handful of bike related incidents on this bit of trail.

this is the very reason for the development of our network of trail centres. Inappropriate speed on poorly surfaced forest trails around CYB lead to several injuries as people quite simply lost control and crashed when they were unable to brake safely. This lead to the development of tighter, twister trails with a less even surface where the speed of riders could be controlled and limited while still provoding a challenge. I realise that the council does not want to create a trail centre (and nor should they) but in creating a smooth, wide track they are leaving themselves wide open to claims of negligence should (god forbid) any serious injuries occur

actually it may be a little late for that, wasn’t there a biker helicoptered off the (newly-resurfaced) Stanage Causeway recently after he hit a new waterbar? Hope he’s ok

Survey issues: I am going to contact the survey monkey admin about this. I know why the problem has happened but don’t want to fix it if I run the risk of upsetting the survey and it doesn’t change the overall results . Over 600 replies so far.

Rushup Edge – Update

Peak District MTB (PDMTB) and Ride Sheffield (RS) members have been instrumental in persuading Derbyshire County Council that they must listen to the mountain bike community. On Friday, we were contacted by DCC offering a meeting on December 2nd along with the the BMC, Friends of the Peak District/CPRE and Keeper of the Peak, co-signatories of last week’s Open Letter. Anxious that the meeting should be conducted in the correct spirit, PDMTB and RS pressed DCC that no work should recommence on Rushup Edge until after the meeting. DCC have demonstrated admirable good faith by agreeing to a cessation of works until December 8th at the earliest.

This excellent result would not have been possible without the hard work of mountain bikers right across the Peak District, Sheffield and beyond. The letters, emails, tweets and phone calls have borne fruit and it is testament to the power of our arguments that we haven’t been ignored.

Email confirmation of the cessation and details of the closure were received at PDMTB HQ today (12 Nov 2014)

Further to our telephone conversation this is a quick note to confirm that works are suspended until 9th December 2014 on the route. The route is currently closed by emergency order for 3 weeks after which a temporary closure will be implemented for a period of up to 3 months to allow works to be completed. If you need any further information please get in contact.
Regards,
Richard Bonner, Assistant Head of Countryside Service, Economy, Transport and Environment Department, Derbyshire County Council

Of course, this isn’t the end of the affair. We have to see Rushup Edge reinstated to its former glory and secure genuine consultation in the future, nothing less. Rest assured, PDMTB, RS, the BMC, Friends of the Peak District/CPRE and Keeper of the Peak will continue to fight your corner.

To help us do that, please complete the survey – http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/50-survey-rushup-edge-consultation

Thanks

Well done to all who were involved directly or indirectly.

Fingers crossed that this is the start of change. Let’s also not get too cynical about this meeting and keep our optimistic heads on.

Survey done keep up the good work

Great news. Just goes to show what reasoned argument and a social media shitstorm can do!

Aye, congrats all round.

Now for the hard part. 😆

is it just me.. but is there not an issue here.. great the work has stopped so the route is preserved as is for the immediate future.. however the route is now closed until dec 9th at the earliest.

these folks are slippy customers be careful what you wish for the trail is now closed and will be for an undefined period

Yes – that’s as may be so. But they can’t close it indefinitely and looking at the longer term the campaign has got mountain bikers a seat at a table they simply didn’t have before.
If DCC are good to their word they’ll listen to the group. If they aren’t, there will be no change from their original plan.

I’m being optimistic. If a temporary closure on Rushup means that DCC consult properly with mountain bikers (and more groups) and we end up with high quality maintenance and repair like we see on the roych that can only be a good thing

I know a few people, including me, are questioning the validity of the notice, particularly its emergency nature.

What I did find interesting when asking about the notice is how the highways section were very keen to distance themselves from this order and explained how it was very much a rights of way issue. The reason I find that interesting is that in the original copy and paste responses from the rights of way section, they came across as being keen to include their works and intentions within the wider highways remit.

In terms of the order being currently in force, to use the official BOAT would be a contravention of the order and could possibly be seen as criminal although I’ve no idea what the penalty would be.

DCC were keen to point out that the track up on the bank was not part of the right of way. Therefore, it connot be covered by this order and to use it would remain a civil issue with the land owner.

However, as there seems to be some movement in a positive direction, I’m sure it would be in everyone’s interests to play nicely for the time being.

Presumably the contractors are now charging for delays
Which hopefully might eat up some of the budget for this and future byway maintenance works

Direct Labour I believe so although they will charge the rights of way department, it’s not real money.

Yep, it was DCC guys up there when I met them 24 pages ago!

@Onzadog – if we can play nice for a bit that would be appreciated, it’s not perfect but Pook has lent me his spare rose tinted spectacles for a couple of weeks so let’s see what happens at the meeting.

Well done to all concerned so far. This shows the benefits of having an organised and vocal group.

I guess that in the past council employees thought that the easiest option was to push works through and deal with the fallout later as it’ll only be minor.

What they now must realise is that the easiest option is to consult and work with the various user groups as the fallout is potentially huge.

Still a long way to go, but this is promising. Perhaps something good is going to come from all of this?

its all very well and good they have postponed it, and going forward its great (hopefully) for future things like this to NOT happen

but the damage is done, how on earth can they reinstate it to what it was before?

it was natural and been like that for ages, even if they put slabs in its not going to be anything like it was before

they’ve ruined it, and the only good thing about all the uproar is hopefully the future of other paths will be considered before demolishing naturally beautiful pieces of the peak district

🙁

still makes me mad

While unlikely, it’s not impossible for them to take the aggregate away and leave it as it was.

Well done everyone, keep up the great work. I’m far from local but have ridden in the area a few times and, I’ve done the questionnaire and have been following.

Fingers crossed you can get them to back track and get it back to what it was. Not sure if anyone else has suggested it but perhaps the offer of a working part to help clean up their mess to help save them some money would help. Although I’m hundreds of miles away I’d be tempted to lend a hand if I could make it.

Good call, I’d be up for a working party and know a few others who would as well.

I doubt they would go for something like that
Health and safety innit