Mixed reaction to new one-way system on ‘danger’ road in Mossley

TWO sets of traffic orders have divided residents with a one-way system on a ‘hazardous’ road praised despite bosses being told they had ‘got it wrong’ after approving new sets of double yellow lines. 

The plans to change the flow of the streets in Mossley were voted through unanimously by Tameside’s planning committee.

Roughtown Road, Mossley

Two thirds of Roughtown Road, a steep historic track road leading from Carrhill Road to Manchester Road, is to be made one-way.

Resident Carl Gannon said he and other residents of the area were supportive of the council’s proposal to tackle the ‘hazardous’ highway.“If you approve the council’s road safety proposal, you may well prevent serious injury or even a fatality – it really is as serious as that,” he told councillors.

The planned one-way order would also resolve the ‘log jams’ of traffic on the road, with the worst lasting 20 minutes.

Two residents had to marshal traffic in that situation and had to stop the traffic on Manchester Road which was ‘absolute chaos’, he said.

Examples from residents about the dangers caused by drivers going uphill included using it as a rat run, a rear end collision which caused £3,000 worth damage and boundary walls being extensively damaged by a vehicle losing control.

Mr Gannon said he himself had suffered £900 worth of damage when a vehicle had attempted to reverse down the road and into his front gate.

“The most worrying one, a resident was travelling very slowly uphill through a blind double-S bend and a cyclist was coming downhill and collided with the vehicle,” he added.

“If that had been one of the speeding drivers going uphill the cyclist would have undoubtedly been seriously injured or even killed.”

Cars had also been seen speeding round corners with the drivers laughing, residents said.

“It really puts your heart in your mouth. Imagine a mother and child or cyclist coming down at that point,” Mr Gannon said.

“The residents’ only concern is road safety. We’ll actually be more inconvenienced than anyone else because we can’t now go uphill to our houses but we’re not bothered.

“We’re sick of seeing near misses, so we support it on safety grounds. There was a huge sense of relief when this proposal was announced.”

There were eight objections and six comments in favour of the scheme, which was backed by the MP Jonathan Reynolds.

Lee Holland, head of environmental services, told the meeting that the majority of objectors raised concerns that the scheme was in the wrong direction – and should be in an uphill direction rather than downhill.

However, he said that if the direction was reversed, the entirety of the road would be one-way and the new plans only affect six residents.

“The council also thinks that having it in a northerly direction would increase rat running,” Mr Holland added.

Mossley Fire Station had objected twice, saying that the one-way restrictions may prevent ‘on call’ firefighters getting to the station in the time required.

Mossley Fire Station had objected twice, saying that the one-way restrictions may prevent ‘on call’ firefighters getting to the station in the time required

However, officers said that due to the delays on the road when two vehicles had to negotiate passing each other, it would be easier and potentially quicker to use the main arterial routes to the station.

Councillors also agreed to implement new ‘no waiting at any time restrictions’ on sections of roads in the area known as ‘Top Mossley’ and within Mossley town centre.

This was despite 12 objections being received, with the majority raising concerns about residents being unable to park or displaced to where parking is already ‘at a premium’.

The roads affected include Argyle Street, Chapel Street, Cross Street, Dean Street, Dyson Street, Greaves Street, Hanover Street, Lancaster Street, Lees Road, Market Street, Quickedge Road, Shire Croft, Stamford Street, Stockport Road, and Wyre Street.

Resident Janet Bates spoke against the plans, saying in 20 years of living in Mossley she had not experienced problems around people parking on the streets.

“The problem is the traffic on Lees Road, it’s too much on a narrow road and we’ve got congestion all the time, every day now and the pollution is horrendous,” she said.

“I can’t sit outside sometimes, and I have to come in because of it. I can’t have my front windows open.

“Sometimes it’s choking and you can’t breathe. That is the problem, not this parking on little side streets.

“Apart from that, these people that you’re going to stop parking, where are they going to put their cars?

“It’s going to cause chaos. There’s a pandemic going on, everyone’s got enough problems.

“I don’t mean to be rude but you’ve got it wrong.”

Mr Holland said the purpose of the scheme was to increase the sight lines at junctions, and therefore road safety within Top Mossley.

“Parking at junctions causes a major hazard and as part of the highway code drivers should not be parking within 10 metres of a junction anyway,” he added.

“Unfortunately, there is no legal entitlement for residents to park outside their property.”

6 Replies to “Mixed reaction to new one-way system on ‘danger’ road in Mossley”

  1. Whether you like it or not, the truth is that if Stamford Road is shut, Roughtown Road was the only way to get from bottom Mossley to Top Mossley without either going up to Well-i-hole Road in Saddleworth or round by Darnton Road in Stalybridge – both very long detours, especially for an ambulance or fire engine. That’s why a one-way system should be from bottom to top.

    1. Applaud making Roughton Road one way…. However completely the wrong direction, common sense dictates Roughtown Road upwards whilst leaving mill Lane downwards. Still time to do the right thing.??.

    2. Nah – a fire engine couldn’t even get up Roughtown Road from Manchester Road, Aaron. Narrowest point of the road at that end and is one of the reasons why one way up is a non-starter. You’d also maroon all the residents living on/around Roughtown Road ( there’s several roads off Roughtown Road at top end which many don’t even know about) Removal vehicles, skip waggons, large deliveries of building supplies etc. have always had to go downhill from Carrhill Road because they are too wide to come up from Manchester Road. You’d also maroon those living on New Earth Street on some winter days. The ONLY way they can get out in icy conditions is by going DOWN Roughtown Road. Anyone living around Roughtown knows these things. Council have got this one right. It’s become too busy – beats me why anyone who doesn’t live there even bothers using it. It takes about 30 seconds longer to go to Top Mossley via the main roads.

  2. Roughtown Road is a serious injury to someone waiting to happen and, on balance, the council have got this right. Let’s be honest, it’s not a road suitable for traffic at all in reality but it can’t be shut. It’s got far busier over the years as more people have discovered it as a rat run uphill and the one-way down will put an end to that, which makes sense from a road safety point of view.

  3. Right call by the council this. I`ll be able to cycle down it again at long last. Gave up about a year ago as it became too dangerous. One driver came speeding up around the railway bends and nearly wiped 3 of us out. Deadly road for anyone not in a car – and can’t be very pleasant in a car either! It should actually be closed to traffic full stop.

    1. Agreed Dave. I still cycle down it, although very, very slowly to avoid the maniacs speeding up it in the morning.

      Seen some really comical scenes on this road. Cars meeting on the bends and then people unable to reverse properly because they simply can’t. Seen them reverse into the walls, reverse into the bollards by the road over the railway; they’ve all been knocked down lol.

      It’s a farce of a situation, mainly caused by lazy drivers who can’t be arsed going along Manchester Road and Stamford Road to get to top Mossley.

      Great news its being made one way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *