Rushup edge resurfacing

Thanks for the link Pook. I’ve joined the FB page.

We met (again) with Peak Horsepower on Tuesday. It was a very positive meeting and there’s plenty of news on our website.

http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/62-peak-horsepower-meeting-december-9th

Having seen the video (9 posts up), and looked at the pictures in the PDMTB report they made for DCC – I would say the trail needed no remedial or resurfacing work at all.

If it does need remedial or resurfacing work: I can’t see how covering the whole trail in fist and baby head sized rocks benefits walkers or horse riders – it must make it a lot harder to walk (biped or quadruped).

Is that video of the section of trail that is being done by DCC?

P.S. Thanks to everyone who is doing something about this, whatever it may be.

How about everyone removes one chunk of rock each time they use the trail? The steps will soon be clear? 🙂 [Sorry.]

Apologies for being a bit late to the part and not knowing all the ins and outs. Lots of interesting reading. I’d just like to say that I wish DCC would realise that they work for the people who live in and/or enjoy the countywide of Derbyshire.

It’s worth noting that the big lumps of rock aren’t the finished article. they are the work in progress. There’s a finer gristone layer to go over the top of that. They paused to works hence the part-job.

Thanks Pook.

The smooth trail surfaces in the pics in the “DCC previous” bit of the PDMTB report are VERY DEPRESSING. I only hope that enough walkers DIE OF BOREDOM on them that DCC is forced to reconsider.

You’d have to learn how to bunny hop over them 😉

Pook I admire your optimism but the peak district is being turned into a glorified trail centre. Soon only the footpaths will be gnarr enough for us. What plans do they have for cut gate?

http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2014/12/12/council-agrees-to-look-at-protestors-views-after-rushup-edge-meeting

If there is spare rocks/cash they should fill the ruts on the Roman Road.
Because they are so deep in water all users are by-passing the main track and damaging the surface each side of it.

Regarding unsympathetic dressings: Walkers have commented to me that Edale Road (Coldwell up to the back of Kinder) is hard work to walk on since spud sized stones were scattered.

Hard work is an understatement 🙁

We lost our sticky!

Was there any consultation on that?

Are there any updates as to what is or isn’t happening?

PDMTB, Ride Sheffield, Friends of the Peak and DCC had a site visit last Tuesday. We have subsequently met to discuss the outcome and hope to get something up on the website ASAP. We have until mid-January to reply to their proposals. In the meantime work still continues to build alliances with fellow outdoor enthusiasts so keep on sharing that festive spirit to people you meet on the trials.

Firstly, a huge thanks to all our supporters for the time and effort they have put in over the last year to raise our profile and make us a strong organisation to represent the voices of those who love the Peak District.
On 2 December 2015, Peak District MTB met with Derbyshire County Council (DCC) to discuss the work on Rushup Edge and other works in the Peak District. Ride Sheffield, Keeper of the Peak, the British Mountaineering Council (BMC) and Friends of the Peak (FOTP) District were also in the meeting to discuss the issue at hand. At the time we provided a brief update on the meeting, since then PDMTB has had chance to put together this, a more detailed report. Also included is a report from the site meeting which was requested subsequently to the main meeting with DCC. The site meeting happened on Tuesday 16th December and also included Ride Sheffield and FOTP.  DCC has requested that the user groups provide a formal response to their proposed work on Rushup Edge / Chapel Gate by the 16th of January 2015.  PDMTB will put forward its own response along with other groups. We hope there will be a lot of constructive comments. Until then we believe all work on Rushup Edge is on hold.
It’s a long and detailed report so here’s an ‘Executive Summary’, if you want to read the full report and site visit update, please click the ‘read more’ link.
Exec Summary:
PDMTB’s conclusion:
Following the meeting and site visit PDMTB has concluded the following:
1) Derbyshire County Council’s current plans for Rushup Edge have been barely modified and remain unacceptable to the vast majority of users of the Peak District.
2) Derbyshire County Council has failed to provide adequate justification for the works proposed.
3) Derbyshire County Council has a poor understanding of the needs of this trail as evidenced by their lack of research into user groups and their needs.
4) Derbyshire County Council cannot forecast any increased usage after the work and has not evidenced this after previous work on other routes.,
5) Derbyshire County Council has no consideration of the sustainability, long term environmental and economic impact of the proposed work.
6) Derbyshire County Council is unable determine the cost of the work or commit to any form of maintenance in the future:
“We don’t know how much a project is going to cost until we have finished it”
7) Derbyshire County Council has a history of inadequate consultation and reflection of user groups’ views in similar works.  We are yet to be convinced that they have learnt their lessons.
PDMTB’s proposed response to Derbyshire County Council’s proposals for Rushup Edge:
We demand that DCC:
1) remove all materials that have been placed on the route and return it to its original state.  
2) that all maintenance is as sensitive, minimal and sustainable as possible and we believe that can be achieved in a cost efficient manner.
3) if maintenance is unavoidable, we request the current materials are removed and replace with a planned and designed stone setting approach to reasonably accommodate all amenity users as has been achieved on a nearby route.
4) should the larger steps be removed we request smaller steps remain and that  solid bedrock is left intact and visible  remaining consistent with the nature of the trail.
For the full report follow this link – clickety

Thanks for the update – will read the full report.

Made me chuckle that summary, thanks for the update. Looking like a LAF meeting took place today / tonight too.

DCC are slippery bar stewards! The PDMTB response is good but I just can’t see DCC moving from their position though. The terminator was more inclined to compromise than DCC. Why on earth it has to be roadworthy when vehicles are banned from using it I don’t know?

Update on that LAF meeting on the 8th: http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/67-local-access-forum-rushup-edge-chapel-gate-meeting-8th-january

Very interesting to hear all but one group were NOT in favour of flattening the trails.

The only ones who were, were the Disabled Ramblers group. And the ones who DCC are using to support their “argument” / “vision” of the countryside.

Also good to note the social media campaign put a dent in DCC’s sizeable ego.

Surely the disabled gamblers group can see the value in leaving technical trail alone. These will be the focal spot for mountain bikers. Instead, if ever trail is paved then every trail will have high speed users on it which I assume would be detrimental to disabled ramblers.

I still think that the problem is that rights of way are still looked at as a means of people moving around (which they historically were) instead of the leisure facility they have become. I wouldn’t deny disabled users the right to move about freely but I do think it’s wrong to take a leisure facility away from a large group of users to hand it over at great expense to a much smaller group of users. Keep in mind that suitable trails already exist for all. We’re discussing the shifting proportion of trail types.

disabled gamblers

??

My thought was where on Earth are they going to park? The layby on Rushup Edge isn’t exactly capacious. But I see that crop up in the report.

Well done to PDMTB on progress made over the past few months in getting a toe in the door.

It was interesting to have DCC point out to PDMTB that the social media campaign had caused them significant disruption.

In a previous comment I said that I didn’t think posting comments on facebook would make any difference. It is very nice to be proven wrong. Well done to everybody that did post on DCC facebook. I just hope that DCC can find it in themselves to admit that they were wrong to start the work and that the decent thing to do would be to return the trail to its previous state.
Onzadog I agree with your comment regarding disabled access, ruining things for the majority is not the way to go. It is just not practical to make every single trail accessible for disabled people and you have to draw a line somewhere.

I never been to the area but I’m assuming whatever the surface that you wouldn’t be inclined (!) to push a wheel chair up there.

Well I’ve just had a quick look at the Disabled Ramblers website and I’m pretty impressed by the terrain they take on. I was surprised to find very little activity in the Peak though, which might well point to a lack of suitable trails – thought I can think of quite a few which they might tackle without any further resurfacing work.

I’m not at all convinced Rushup Edge is a good choice for such development – it’s not even one of the better viewpoints in the area.

Onzadog I agree with your comment regarding disabled access, ruining things for the majority is not the way to go. It is just not practical to make every single trail accessible for disabled people and you have to draw a line somewhere.

DCC might have had a case if they could have demonstrated that the route was being used or would have had much higher usage from disabled users had they actually done any consulting but they’ve kind of dug their own grave with this one. Hopefully they’ve learnt their lesson.

DCC have conducted no surveys of users on the path. They simply have no idea who or how many people go up there.

ridesheffield local access forum meeting write up[/url]

The link above gives a slightly different perspective than that given by PDMTB. The disabled ramblers group seem hell bent on vandalising the trail to make it accessible to them, while I understand why they want access to the trail I don’t agree that it should be flattened for them.
It is good to see that peak horsepower are supportive of mountain bikers.

Access for all. Ace.

The disabled access is a card I remember being played before. So they are going to make from the road to Mam Nick all passable for the disabled?

When the “campsite descent” was done in Hayfield I remember mention of disabled access. Sure the easy access bits that were cheap to do were done. The narrow sunken bit was left alone though, as it would have cost a load of money to do.

There are a number of FPs that are similar. Fix the easy bits, so it looks like they are being useful. Ignore the bits that are expensive to do.

If you were in an offroad wheelchair round here, you’d get pretty nifty at doing U-Turns as the improved BWs and FPs turn to impassable.

DCC asked Peak District MTB – amongst others such as Ride Sheffield, Peak District Local Access Forum, KoftheP, Ride Sheffield and friends of the Peak District – to submit a formal response to their Rushup Edge plans.

Here it is. Interesting alliance forming

http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/70-rushup-edge-our-official-response-to-derbyshire-county-council

Good stuff dan

Let’s hope that now its gone above Peter White’s head, he might get a forceful sense check from above.

PDMTB, Ride Sheffield and Keeper of the peak all made good responses. I am not so impressed with the LAF response though. Any concessions made to the disabled ramblers could have ramifications for the whole of the Edale loop.

We may yet see DCC use access for as it’s trump card. Stanage Long Causeway was lauded as a great improvement for the use of the Tramper.
These are videos of Stanage & Rushup showing the Tramper in action.
Long Causeway: http://youtu.be/Xe4a08THG6c
Chapel Gate: http://youtu.be/i-HkyQvez9o
The spec mentioned at the LAF was for a surface with no more than a 5″ step every 5′ to enable a Tramper to pass, more than that and it is too bumpy to be comfortable. There is also a declared intent on the DR website to have gates & stiles etc removed to aid access. It’s a veritable minefield of rights, legal issues and specifications and DCC may yet use them to try and thwart us.

We may yet see DCC use access for as it’s trump card. Stanage Long Causeway was lauded as a great improvement for the use of the Tramper.

They are almost certainly lining that one up for use, aren’t they? ‘Inspecting repairs’ in January – you can almost see the email trail between the DRs and DCC Highways Dept.

I wonder how many disabled ramblers on trampers actually use Chapelgate or the Long Causeway?

The Tramper looks totally unsuitable for off road. Is there not an electric quad bike?

I’ve just made the thousandth comment on this thread.

I have nowt to say.