Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
Alan de Enfield

Worries that bridge repairs won't happen

Featured Posts

 

Are C&RT too busy naval gazing ?

 

 

 

 

0_NDR_TEM_040320CanalJPG.jpg

 

 

A large funding pot for improving a 200-year-old canal bridge in Hinckley could soon disappear as plans have yet to be put forward for how the money is to be used.

The £50,000 is set to pay for upgrades to the towpath and other areas around the road bridge over the Ashby Canal, on Nutts Lane, a busy route often used by lorries heading for the nearby industrial estates.

The money is derived from section 106 funds paid by developer Taylor Wimpey as part of the now completed Sansome Drive estate, which borders the canal.

The cash is currently in the hands of Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council , which is waiting on the Canal and River Trust to present a scheme.

A spokesperson for the trust said: “We’re very sorry for the delay in delivering the towpath improvements on the Ashby Canal in Hinckley and would like to thank the local community and Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council for their patience.

“It is still very much our intention to improve the towpath for local people and we’re in the process of tendering the project with the aim of delivering the scheme within the timeline to claim the section 106 funding.

 

“We’ve kept the borough council updated on the timetable.”

Councillor David Bill said the bridge is “obviously crumbling” and he has written to the trust urging the group to put forward a proposal.

The deadline for using the funds is July 9, 2020, by which time invoices need to have been arranged to carry out the works.

He said in his letter: “Unless this money is claimed almost immediately, it will revert to Taylor Wimpey and the opportunity to improve the local environment will be lost.

 

“Can you please let me know the current position of what is intended and could I please urge you to look at the 200-year-old bridge itself which is clearly in need of repair?

“Built for horse and carts, it is clearly obvious to everyone that it should not be taking the 44-tonne articulated vehicles which often ground at the top of the bridge causing even more damage to the structure.”

 

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/worries-50k-revamp-crumbling-canal-3914769

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

Is the bridge CRTs responsibility or highways ? 

Irrespective, you'd have thought C&RT, having been offered the money would have taken it (gladly) and rebuilt the bridge and towpath.

 

“It is still very much our intention to improve the towpath for local people and we’re in the process of tendering the project with the aim of delivering the scheme within the timeline to claim the section 106 funding.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps £50k is far too smal to make anything but a contribution to the cost of 'rebuilding' the bridge. If lorries are using it a new structure would be needed??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

Perhaps £50k is far too smal to make anything but a contribution to the cost of 'rebuilding' the bridge. If lorries are using it a new structure would be needed??

And can they use it for rebuilding the bridge or does it have to be used to build cycleways along the canal?

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

And can they use it for rebuilding the bridge or does it have to be used to build cycleways along the canal?

My thoughts also to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Are C&RT too busy naval gazing ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I see no ships!:wacko:

 

Howard

  • Greenie 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds to me that there is more to this story than the partisan report cited indicates.

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given 50k is nowhere near enough to rebuild the bridge.

 

Best thing for that bridge is to create a width restriction on its approaches (the diversion route is less than a mile and on better roads), any money left over could be spent just trying to make the towpaths less muddy, for what should be a fairly busy area for dog walkers etc the towpath is in a sorry state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the money was allocated for towpath improvements and the councillor now wants it spent on the bridge instead.  Whether that is possible depends on the wording of the S106 agreement, which will have been agreed by the developer, the council and CRT at the time planning permission was granted. In practice I suspect it is too late now for that particular change of direction anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, howardang said:

I see no ships!:wacko:

 

Howard

Blooming spellchucka - I noticed that and changed it to Navel, it must have changed it back again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Sounds like the money was allocated for towpath improvements and the councillor now wants it spent on the bridge instead.  Whether that is possible depends on the wording of the S106 agreement, which will have been agreed by the developer, the council and CRT at the time planning permission was granted. In practice I suspect it is too late now for that particular change of direction anyway.

Agreed.

But surely it is unlikely that s106 money can be used to repair a bridge?

 

I'm no expert, but it doesn't sound within the scope of what uch funds are usually used for.

I suspect this is a bit of a non story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

Agreed.

But surely it is unlikely that s106 money can be used to repair a bridge?

 

I'm no expert, but it doesn't sound within the scope of what uch funds are usually used for.

I suspect this is a bit of a non story.

S106 has to be "related to the development", one would have to be quite inventive to get bridge repairs to qualify especially if it is someone's statutory duty to undertake said repairs! 

 

Strange as it may seem councils don't like giving money back to developers and developers are usually none too keen on having it back - too much paperwork, too many awkward questions, so when the deadline is looming almost anything that even vaguely resembles the original proposals will do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds similar to the Aylesbury arm towpath 'improvements' from the Dayla development.  Local council got the  S106 moola  from Dayla,  CRT refused to let the council appoint contractors to do the job because of the CRT contract with Keir.   Council did not want to give the money to CRT especially as Keir rumoured more expensive, so less cycleway for the money.  In the end CRT got their way, Keir subbed the job to Rothens and the job was done, but not all the way.

N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BEngo said:

Council did not want to give the money to CRT ...

Mendip came close to returning money to developers as they wouldn't let Frome Town Council spend it on the approved purposes (I was FTC Town Centre Manager at the time) - although various reasons were given the mostly amounted to "wasting money is our job..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.