Government response to 'Ban Surface Dressing roads'

classy *and* true.

Don't you think your local roads are much better now they've been done?

If I did think that, why would I be signing a petition to try to get surface dressing banned?

We ride on the same roads, and I think they are much better now. I've ridden there for the last 25 years and it's definitely an improvement. Having watched various local businesses suffer recently, any major road repair that stops traffic from passing by will have a serious impact on them, one that they cannot afford.

I appreciate that you think I'm being a troll, but my intention is to point out the lack of thought in this petition. No one has been able to answer the simple questions I've asked, and they are exactly the questions that any local council traffic officer would have to think of.

Quote:

Quite fantastically stupid.

Classy.

There is an easy answer to the safety issue; ban cycling on all chipseal repaired roads for a month post repair.

If it's such a safety issue, you'll agree that it makes sense, and it's economically neutral.

See what you can achieve by thinking a problem through?

I really am going now; don't run with scissors...

I'm not quite sure why people here are focussed on the 'smooth journey' (or 'smoooooooooth journey' if you like to be childish). It's a safety issue, not a comfort one. A loose, crumbling surface is less safe than an intact one.

Just because something has been done for years doesn't make it right.

It's cheap, yes- and nasty.

(and you've had the biggest "miss the point" in this thread when you brought hardcore endurance cyclocross into it)

Aaaaaaaaaaaaah!!!!!

You're all missing the point!
Surface dressing has been in use and in development since the 1970s, and is used across Europe and across the UK because it's cheaper and quicker than conventional resurfacing.
If you want a change from this you've got to look at the issue from a sensible, logical, economic and industrial point of view, not from a grumpy cyclist point of view.
1. If you want a change, what do you want to change to?
2. If you want a change, how much more will it cost?
3. If it costs more, how will we pay for it?
4. If it takes longer, what are the implications for traffic delays?
5. If it takes longer, what are the implications for local businesses?
6. Given that there are 40 years of experience which all show it's good way of prolonging the life of roads, what evidence do you have that a change is going to be better?

Stop trotting out boring commuter stories about your near-death experiences on bits of gravel and start thinking about the reality.

Think as well about the impact that this petition has had; does it demonstrate an attention to detail, or a sensible, well thought out approach or does it read like an opinionated rant aimed at the wrong people?

I'm done.

Anecdote and opinion shared between cyclists hasn't really helped so far has it?

You know the questions you need to answer.
So far it's been suggested that we get more money from heavy vehicles and now from utility companies.
I'm not seeing this actually happening even with my rose tinted glasses.
I'm not commenting to display my experience as a cyclist, which is vast. I'm commenting to point out that the whole issue has been approached without any thought.

There is a pressing need for sensible cycle related campaigning, this isn't.

You know the questions you need to answer.
So far it's been suggested that we get more money from heavy vehicles and now from utility companies.
I'm not seeing this actually happening even with my rose tinted glasses.
I'm not commenting to display my experience as a cyclist, which is vast. I'm commenting to point out that the whole issue has been approached without any thought.

There is a pressing need for sensible cycle related campaigning, this isn't.

Um, no.
You proposed the whole idea of heavy vehicles paying for repairs to roads.

A national change in vehicle taxation in response to a small number of disgruntled cyclists who don't seem to be able to answer even the most basic questions raised?

Call me an old cynic, but I can't quite see it happening.

I bet you're great at parties.

Quote:

This is not whataboutery but an attempt to get you to see that your idea that we have to work out, perhaps for the sake of fairness, how the costs of bodging road repairs with top dressing are incurred, and charge these costs to the vehicles which use each road, is not how things are done, and anyway is unworkable

Um, the whole idea of getting heavy vehicles to pay for the costs was your idea...

So, still stuck at square one, what do you do instead and who pays for it?

Surface dressing is apparently about 5 times cheaper than conventional resurfacing. Somehow I can't see many people agreeing to pay 5 times as much to repair roads to allow cyclists that smoooooooooth journey to work.

Bye.

All of which is more whataboutery and sidesteps the actual issue which is surface dressing rather than the complexities of HGV taxation.
The majority of roads that are surface dressed are not subject to HGV traffic*, therefore the taxation or not of HGVs would seem to be a subject for a wider national road repair debate rather than one pertinent to local council road repair technique.

*in my experience...

Felix; unfortunately I need to complicate matters further. Heavy vehicles spend most of their time on Motorways, dual carriageways and A roads. Chipseal repair, in my experience, is used largely on minor suburban roads, where heavy vehicles do not count for the majority of traffic. Tax them as much as you like; you're not actually addressing the issue.

Jimmy; I've no idea what all that Tesco related whataboutery is trying to say.
I've lots and lots and lots of experience of riding on chipseal repaired roads. My local villages have all been through the whole thing this year, and yes, it made riding different. I no longer have to think about the next stretch of road, nor do I have to carry a mental map of where all the potholes and damaged tarmac is because the chip seal surface has covered it all.

It requires a little more care for a month or so, until the surface has bedded in and the excess chips have been brushed up, but now it's a great surface for riding on, laid quickly with minimum traffic disruption.

I do hope you will all be careful during the autumn when the roads become covered in wet leaves, and during the winter, when the roads can become icy...

I notice that no-one has yet addressed any of the actual practical issues raised, namely;
What are you going to repair roads with instead, how much will it cost over the use of chipseal, and who is going to pay for it?

I heard a spokesman from Manchester council say that their budget has been cut by 41%.
Local councils have the responsibility for road repair.
Any serious attempt to look at this as an issue needs to do so realistically...

Crikey indeed...

So having been so wonderfully corrected my clear stupidity, I'll make one more blundering, ignorant post and move on.

Personally I believe safety concerns are valid to raise, and in my obviously dense head, I foolishly value safety concerns over pure cost savings.

There is a fantastic quote from the boss of Tesco's that talks about the 'efficiency' of the public sector, but I don't have it to hand, but to paraphrase... he basically says that if he Tesco's was run in the same manner as the Public sector, there would simply be no Tesco's. But then... he only runs a few grocery stores; clearly a moron.

Caveat: I appreciate that the recent profit mis-calculation thingy does not brilliantly support my above point, but hey ho, what can I do, I'm a think chump.

Out of interest, what are your experiences of riding this style of road dressing?

Personally I've gone down once (many moons ago) and had several very big moments. But then, I won't have the skills I guess...