Butser Hill - proposed cyclepath for the missing link

[Graham]

Good news. One of the South Downs National Park staff has been notified, by Hampshire County Council, that the tarmac on the new section of the path will be machine-laid.

[mjr]

Well done! Now let's wait and see if anyone tells the workmen...

[CJ]

The next stretch through the forest will be given a Macadam surface, 2.5 metres wide. That sounds to me like the same treatment as HCC gave the Viaduct cycle path in Winchester, in which case it will be machine-laid and will be a decent surface. (I think it's the same equipment as they use to re-lay single-track lanes, something they've been doing quite a lot of in Hampshire.)

I don't think so. What you're talking about is Tar-macadam, i.e. macadam bound with tar usually abbreviated to tarmac. If they say plain macadam, they probably mean plain macadam, as invented by the eponymous Scottish road builder in about 1820, i.e. sharp gravel, graded to a uniform grit size that binds together when rolled.

Let us hope they do use a machine to roll it, rather than rely upon the wheels of long-suffering bicyclists!

[AndyK]

I don't think so. What you're talking about is Tar-macadam, i.e. macadam bound with tar usually abbreviated to tarmac. If they say plain macadam, they probably mean plain macadam, as invented by the eponymous Scottish road builder in about 1820, i.e. sharp gravel, graded to a uniform grit size that binds together when rolled.

I am no expert, but elsewhere when they just say "macadam" they seem to use it to mean mean asphalt concrete, which is the hard stuff, isn't it? For example see the same council's specification for installing vehicular crossings - compare the text on the page and the text in the linked technical drawing. But hopefully one of the local CTC folk involved in the campaign will be able to enlighten us with the right answer.

[Graham]

This project is still happening, with a bit of a delay . . . . . I don't expect it to be open until 2016 . . .

Queen Elizabeth Country Park to Petersfield cycle route
Updated 15 January 2015

Expected start date
Expected start: April 2015 and expected completion: November 2015.

http://www3.hants.gov.uk/transport-sche ... scheme.htm

Trying to squeeze the path around the corner into the Country Park is proving to be hugely expensive.

[Graham]

Route plan with pictures now available on the Hampshire County Council website. ( 3Mbytes )
http://www3.hants.gov.uk/transport-sche ... scheme.htm

[AndyK]

Yay, looks like tarmac all the way - and with a gravel bridlepath alongside part of it for the horse riders (what's the betting they use the tarmac path anyway?). I look forward to taking Winchester CTC Sunday rides along it next year.
Thanks for the update, Graham.

[Graham]

On no, here we go again . . . . . .

my email to county highways

to implementation@hants.gov.uk
Hello implementation

It is good to see the work getting under way.

Alas, I have an immediate concern about the first section from Bollinge Hill southwards.

From the work so far, it looks like the contractors are going to keep the existing footpath tarmac and just patch it wider.

The existing tarmac is "footpath quality" - lumpy and completely inadequate for a cycle track.

Please tell me that I am wrong about what they appear to be doing.

Best WIshes
Graham

[mjr]

We've got one of those alongside the A1076 Gayton Road in Gaywood, Norfolk. It's unpopular and many people on bikes still use the carriageway. Have Hampshire really got enough income to waste building horrible things? Give them a week and go to the local press - if it's linked to either Archant or Johnson Press, I expect they can find the occasional "why don't they use the cycle track?" / "because it's awful" exchanges in the EDP or Lynn News letters pages.

[Graham]

Maybe I panicked . . . . . . based on long & bitter experience over the years . . . .

Thank you for your email.

Please be assured that works are not yet complete - the footpath is yet to have a 20mm overlay constructed and the levels will be regulated where necessary to provide an even surface. If you would like to discuss this, or any other of the cycle route construction issues further, the supervising engineer on [ phone number ].

Kind Regards,

[CJ]

20mm overlay will not be good enough. Footways get lumpy because their foundations are thin and too weak to resist frost heave, tree root growth etc. and the complaints of pedestrians go unheeded until the lumps are so big as to present a trip hazard!

It'll be okay for a year or two, but soon deteriorate, whereupon complaints of mere discomfort from mere cyclists will count for nothing.

[mjr]

And if they have made the base by widening an existing path, the original and the widening patch may well move independently and crack the overlay. Sounds like they're bodging it Ask to see an example of where they have built a cycleway using this method before?

[Graham]

I have not yet phoned the supervising engineer to "discuss" their construction method for this section of the path.

MJR : Asking for a precedent is a good idea, but even then it is going to be very easy for them to fob me off.

I am not aware of any standard for the surface smoothness of a cycle path, and thus they build it pretty much however they want . . . i.e. least cost.

I cannot work out how to have any effect upon their plans to upgrade this old footpath.

By comparison, in the case of the Hindhead / Devil's Punchbowl I had a minor amount of leverage.
1) Enquiry chairman, Philip Arnold, promised to lay the new cycle path to a high standard ( machine laid ) if I withdrew my formal objection ( to ripping up the entire width of the old main road and not leaving a narrow strip as a cycle path ).
2) The new cycle path was effectively from scratch - from new foundations upwards.

[mjr]

If you're not satisfied by the engineer, I'd get in touch with the CTC group whose member posted above and any other interested cycle groups you can. Ask them to write to the local newspapers, phone local and the MP, expressing concern about HCC appearing to waste a million of DfT grant and developer contributions building yet more crap. Point at past crap they've built like http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/w ... er2012.htm and http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/w ... er2012.htm if they're still not fixed and I expect you know more similar examples. Say that no-one is happy with this sort of rubbish, whether they use car, bus, bike or feet... and so on. Rabble-rousing or community organising...

[flat tyre]

Well the first section is "completed", i.e. the bit along the B2070 into Petersfield. Heading south just after the first roundabout the new path uses the existing railway bridge and guess what, the road carriageway has been left at its original width so within 100yds of the start of the new cyclepath there is a "cyclist dismount" sign as the space left for the cycle track is ridiculously narrow. The section after this isn't much better and is now covered with a thick carpet of leaves. It's therefore safer to stick on the road..what a waste of money!