Cheadle and Gatley Lib Dems are moving
Your Lib Dem team for Cheadle West & Gatley Learn more
by Lib Dem team on 16 March, 2010
A new signed cycle route has opened between Manchester Airport and Stockport town centre, signed as route 558.
The from the south end of Styal Road in Heald Green, the route goes along Brown Lane, up St Anns Road North to the High Grove pub. It then goes along the path by the allotments to Kingsway, up Kingsway (on the dual-use pavement), along Broadway in Cheadle, through Brookfield Park, along Brookfield Road, onto Councillor Lane, then through some residential streets into Stockport.
The finishing touches are still being put to the route (some of the signs are slightly out of position and some additional road markings are still to be added).
This is an excellent route, developed by the Council in consultation with cyclists.
7 Comments
Good news! More cyclist friendly routes are always welcome! Now the question is where to park the bike while out flying! 😉
Good news. Does anyone know of a nice route from near Schools hill to Parrswood/Didsbury without risking life and limb on the A34?
hi Iain
thanks so much for this notice. I have been getting the train from nottingham to stockport and then cycling to manchester airport for months. My route went via Range road, Adwoods Road, Ladybridge road, then straight through Cheadle hume and Heald Green. Total 6.5 miles in only 35mins. It is shorter than the new 558 route, but I did keep getting lost on mine, especially in the rain. Will try it out next week when I come.
cheers
Richard
The official designation of Route 558 is fantastic and is a welcome addition the the area’s cycle network.
I use the section up Kingsway (on the dual-use pavement) every day taking my daughter to and from nursery, which is much safer than using the roads. However, encroaching trees and bushes are starting to make the path a bit narrow making it more and more difficult to pass other users. Any chance the ‘hedge cutters’ could make an appearance?
It’s not good news at all. I rode the route on Saturday, 20mph residential area, zig zagging all over the place, probably taking twice as long as it takes on the main roads.
The main issue was when I attempted to cross the railway footbridge, access is overgrown and almost impossible to pass.
The short access to the bridge is feet high in vegetation, it’s unlit, the metal bridge has no ramp to enable cyclists to cross, in fact, many (esp. children) would find it impossible to continue their journey.
It’s a muggers paradise.
In addition, the signposting of the route is incomplete, I had to make u-turns at several points.
The route should have never have been taken via the railway crossing.
It would be interesting to know which ‘cyclists’ were consulted, clearly ones that have never used this route.
The route needs a major re-think, obviously no cyclists are using it, the over grown bridge access is evidence of that.
Hi Andy,
Having checked the route on a map, it’s certainly slower than the direct main road route (as these quieter routes always will be) but it seems reasonably direct to me.
The railway bridge is a pain – and frustrating for the planning people too. As I understand it, we need Network Rail to improve the bridge; and as an alternative the route suggests a small diversion to avoid it.
If you can let me have specific locations where the signage is unclear, I’ll pass them on.
These routes are designed to benefit less confident or leisure cyclists, so they deliberately follow residential and quieter roads wherever possible.
Hi Ian,
Thanks for the quick response.
The rail bridge cannot be negotiated safely, either physically or in the terms of security, Network Rail have recently been instructed to cut billions from their budget, this bridge will not see any improvement.
The overgrown vegetation is a clear indication that bridge isn’t even being used by local residents.
I believe the priority for local councils should be to make the main routes safer for cyclists, unfortunately it seems that councils are spending a minimum amount of revenue in order to comply with ‘green issues’, in this case a few signs and road markings.
Pushing ‘cycling’ into back streets only marginalises cyclists, giving the impression to the wider public that cycling is not viable and unsafe, though providing routes for youngsters and the inexperienced is to be commended but should not take priority over providing safe direct routes.
An example how I believe councils should be progressing, Cheadle to Gatley (inc. interconnecting road) should have it’s maximum speed limit reduced to 20mph (that limit enforced), it’s a far better option than designing a route (558) that falls down on a pivotal link ie: the rail bridge.
One of the bane’s of my daily commute into Stockport is the councils insistence of constructing pedestrians island at totally inappropriate places causing ‘pinch points’ in the road where cyclists are forced into kerb by motorists that haven’t got a clue.
If you take a look at central London during the commute, you will see a dozen cyclists at each set of traffic lights because they have been provided with the facilities on the main routes, this is how I believe local north west councils should be progressing.
As far as route 558 is concerned I believe the rail bridge must be avoided and the route re-directed, maybe cyclists could be allowed the use of a ‘shared footpath’ at the nearest road bridge.
I’ll have to cycle route 558 again with a note pad to list the missing signs, though an arrow on the road at each junction would be clear guide.
You may find the link below interesting, it’s part of my route into Stockport (it’s also now a designated cycle route, though the speed limits are not enforced ).
You’d be amazed at how many death threats I’ve received from motorists for posting that video, motorists that are using the same roads as the rest of us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cifrkp6R5w
Keep up the good work.
Regards
Andy