A Trowbridge resident has branded a 17-metre £10,000 cycle path “a waste of money.” The money went on three new poles, six signs and nine painted symbols on the ground.
The Wiltshire Times reports that the path runs from the end of Longfield Road to the end of Cheviot Close, with a junction to Biss Meadows.
Local resident Alan Cooper feels that it is an expensive token gesture on the part of the council.
“This is a total waste of money for a council that is supposed to be short of money – I do not see the positive side of this.
“17m is just so short, what is the point of it? Thousands of pounds on something that is very, very short.
“Wiltshire Council are ticking off something that is easy to do so that the highways team can say they are addressing this issue.”
Behold! A majestic 4.2-metre long cycle lane
A Wiltshire Council spokesman said: “This path has been used by cyclists for many years, however we wanted to ensure it was appropriately signed and wide enough to be safely used by both pedestrians and cyclists – especially because it is now used more regularly due to the nearby housing estate.
“The £10,000 scheme was funded from a local housing development which specified it had to be spent on pedestrian/cycle links in the vicinity of the site. This was the only viable scheme which fitted the criteria and budget.”
Cooper doesn’t believe the path has been made any safer.
“Cyclists in Trowbridge feel at liberty to cycle on any footpath and I have never read of anyone being prosecuted. I am sure there are much more risky places that could benefit from a formal cycle path.
“You could argue that this could cause more accidents as there is not a pedestrian lane and a cycle lane to separate people. A lot of people walk down there but not many cyclists at all. I am sure there are other places that could do with something like this, but this is just not the right place for it. It is not a danger spot.
“They have done all this paintwork, put up signs and poles – what a load of clutter. I am sure this could have gone on something more appropriate or for services that are being cut, for which there are an ever growing list of things, which is troubling.”
Last year we reported on a three-metre bike lane in Hampshire that cost over £6,000. Not only was the lane short, it also directed cyclists straight towards parked cars.
26 thoughts on “Wiltshire council spent ten grand on a 17-metre cycle path”
@ £10K – someone was ripped
@ £10K – someone was ripped off.
HowardR wrote:
Yeah,us.
brucethebruce wrote:
That’s what I was thinking…
This just shows that whoever
This just shows that whoever controlls the expedature in the local councils doesn’t question the quotes for the jobs that go out for tender to local contractors.
These contractors must be laughing all the way to the bank…..and probably then all the way to the pub……
Naah. Surrey is spending £5
Naah. Surrey is spending £5.88 milions on “improvments” to a signle A road roundabout in the – and I quote – “hope” that it improves congestion.
Brown envelope anyone?
rest assured there is a box
rest assured there is a box with a tick in it, we can sleep easy tonight.
Madness
Madness
Anyone know how much per
Anyone know how much per metre cycle infrastructure should cost so I can calculate my level of outrage based on the disparity?
“This path has been used by
“This path has been used by cyclists for many years, however we wanted to ensure it was appropriately signed and wide enough to be safely used by both pedestrians and cyclists – especially because it is now used more regularly due to the nearby housing estate”.
Insert honest subtitles:
“It’s all the non helmet wearing red light jumping cyclists that have murdered many many pedestrians fault and in no way linked to us giving permission for another housing estate to be built by a company owned by our Councillor’s third cousin Rupert and then supposedly spending a fortune increasing pedestrian safety. By the way, these affordable 2 bed semis start at £185,000 on a shared ownership basis so we can kick you out when you default”.
So this £10k didn’t actually
So this £10k didn’t actually cover building the path, just a bit of paint and a few posts? Does anyone have the number of Wiltshire Council, I’d like to bid for a few contracts.
If that really is it in the picture, the money would have been better spent actually bringing it up to a respectable width.
burtthebike wrote:
Oh yes. If you are not feeling agahst enough, it’s well worth penning a few FOI requests to see the outragous level of squandering of tax payers’ money the councils induldge in.
burtthebike wrote:
Perhaps you didn’t click the link in the report, and just looked at the picture in this article, which is from Streetview and is over two years old.
Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:
I clicked – got to love a f-off great cast iron bollard in the middle of a cycle path just around a corner. Ficktards.
Unbelievable, somebody
Unbelievable, somebody actually
builtmarked 17 metres of cycle path. I suspect sustrans and UK Cycling are throwing a party at such an achievement.It sounds ridiculous but
It sounds ridiculous but unless you’re local and know it, I’d withhold your opinion. There’s two streets I know that are linked only by a very poor footway, but loads of cyclists use it because it completely avoids a load of very busy A roads. It really could benefit from some investment to upgrade it and make it safer to use, and it isn’t far off 17 metres long either.
https://goo.gl/maps/iGkE7VazNRp
I’m sure lots of people would see £10,000 spent there as a waste, but knowing that route I can tell you it’d be a good idea. And the path in the report may well be similar.
Lawks a-mercy, you can go six
Lawks a-mercy, you can go six summers with neither hide nor hair mention of Wiltshire, then three come along in a matter of days.
one of my pet hates in that
one of my pet hates in that picture – vehicular access crossing the ped/cycle shared path with nil visibility for drivers exiting what looks like a carpark because all obscured by the overgrown “hedge” and any visibility for the more vunerable is zero – also the roadway appears continous implying vehicles have priority – my money is on none of the £10,000 was used to fix these recurrent issues
I guess one could come up
I guess one could come up with some great names for a a strava segment:):):)
“paid for by local housing
“paid for by local housing developments”, = the planners making buyers of new homes pay the £10,000.
This actually a useful bit of
This actually a useful bit of infrastructure, I use it daily on my ride to work. Previously I’d have to bunny hop two kerbs and ride a narrow path or take to the grass. This is better and certainly not pointless like some.
recycled again wrote:
I’m sorry, but that’s just not in keeping with the spirit of the thread. Go back and try again.
recycled again wrote:
Add to this, standard width footpath is about £250 per meter, so would be £4250 for just the path and kerbing. Add in a metal bollard at each end (which unfortunaly is needed to stop idiots driving on it) and painting, plus a healthy rounding up for a local paper and an anti cycling moaner and your at £10k. This seems to be just another bit of anti cycling complaining:
“17m is just so short, what is the point of it? Thousands of pounds on something that is very, very short.
“Wiltshire Council are ticking off something that is easy to do so that the highways team can say they are addressing this issue.
“Cyclists in Trowbridge feel at liberty to cycle on any footpath and I have never read of anyone being prosecuted. I am sure there are much more risky places that could benefit from a formal cycle path.
“You could argue that this could cause more accidents as there is not a pedestrian lane and a cycle lane to separate people.
“A lot of people walk down there but not many cyclists at all.
“I am sure there are other places that could do with something like this, but this is just not the right place for it. It is not a danger spot.
“They have done all this paintwork, put up signs and poles – what a load of clutter. I am sure this could have gone on something more appropriate or for services that are being cut, for which there are an ever growing list of things, which is troubling.”
Mostly it seems that people seem to forget that things cost money. Yes, a friendly Irish mobile drive renovation expert may be able to do a drive for less, but unless you want your local highways team to start working out of a caravan, doing tax returns based on made up numbers and health and safety limited to “Hold my fag for a second will you Bartley? I need to siphon off some more petrol for the van” then this is a reasonable cost. Unfortunatly construction work is not cheap.
By the looks of it this is a
By the looks of it this is a non story by those not understanding the process this came about by, the complainant or the councillor, who really should know better.
This will have been done as part of a Section 106 agreement between the developer and council, the housebuilder will have funded it as part of the conditions to build their site, the council probably do the work (unless the developer is known to be trustworthy and competent). If this didn’t go ahead there would have been no £10k to ‘waste’. As John Smith points out, everything has a cost, the £10k (assumed, not actual value) covers design (yes, it needs designed – the lads on site need a drawing to know the width, levels, coordinates, spec etc of the path, the sign shop needs the TSRGD no’s, class and size of the signs, theres the construction cost, the materials, traffic management and inspection). £10k sounds perfectly normal. Its about £3k in background costs to get you on site to put in a couple of sign posts.
As Moist says above – this
As Moist says above – this will absolutely have been S106 funds. Now, a better question is why that figure wasn’t £100k or £1m and then what could have been built?
I also didn’t realise this
I also didn’t realise this was a resurrected thread from 2 years ago.
Moist von Lipwig wrote:
Don’t worry Wilts council are always ready to entertain.
12grand for floodgates that they couldnt be botherd to shut!
https://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/17967735.delay-using-12k-flood-gate-staverton-despite-flooding-river-avon/