Back in 1990 there was no Junction 21a and to get to Glenfield was under this bridge and along what a fairly narrow lane. But after 21a was opened there was no traffic through the bridge and some travellers moved in. They were there for some time. Walking a dog through there became difficult if attempted, walking or cycling was avoided. They lit fires and were the inevitable nuisance. After they had been moved the Coucil acted to stop this happening again.
The verge was raised along with the gates and though they remain solid the verge has been flattened over time. It is a lot less imposing that it was. Overall it’s not pretty but it works. Cars cannot get through but horses, moped drivers and everyone else can. Then in the last couple of years youths would start congregating near that gate during the evening. There would be 2 or 3 cars, girls, drinking, smoking cannabis, condoms and all manner of litter down there in the mornings. Note that not all youths down there are causing problems – far from it. There are many in the village who will play football under there and congregate there without problem – after all it’s dry, they can make noise and there are no windows to break. They are also polite and not intimidating.
But the problems with these others persisted despite the local beat officer intervening. Eventually the Council realised that maybe there might be a problem and the process of “doing something” started.
And we have a gate.
Or if you look at it from another angle, a minor inconvenience.
So should the travellers come looking again they will be deterred by the kerb. The gap there is so big and the verge flattened you could get a caravan or truck through without any problem. On the path from Kirby to Glenfield there are two gates on a path – the type used to slow cyclists down. A couple of months ago they were ripped out and the support posts hammered flat. We cannot assume they will not be back.
The gap to the side of the gate needs 2 or 3 concrete bollards as a minimum. That would secure the area and keep open what is an important route.
In the recent Council election: “In Glenfield Lane and Vicarage Close David [Parsons] is committed to the scheme to stop traffic using the road beyond the Glenfield Lane / Viacarge Close junction towards the motorway bridge in order to cur down anti-social behaviour” Scheme? It’s a gate, just a gate. Maybe a scheme would have included bollards…
That looks to me like the perfect place to install a Mosquito alarm to deter loitering teenagers.
A simple, safe and relatively cheap solution to the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mosquito
I agree that bollards are needed i regularly walk this route and cycle through on occasions too and the gap is huge and could easily fit a number of vehicles through this, i feel that they never really thought this threw. Further to the mosquito alarm i do believe this was tried on a set of shops in Eyres Monsell and was a failed attempt as it made a target for the youths and did not seem to annoy them at all.
The Mosquito has 2 other problems:
1. It would inconvenience those youths who use the bridge to play football. They aren’t bad, they are polite and they live in the village too.
2. For those that would cause damage there would be nothing stopping them breaking the device. No-one could see them. And to stop that we’d need CCTV (another scheme!).
3 or 4 concrete bollards. Not the collasping sort, just concrete. That would work.
And have you seen the new cycle lane? I bet cyclists feel SO much safer there now….
if you keep blocking off all these areas where are the kids gonna hang out and have a couple of beers? we used to get hammered down the park but charlie stanniforth used to chase us over the corn fields.
Exactly this is why we want it blocked off KIDS and HAMMERED don’t mix, most of the time you will leave your litter and you make people feel intimidated if you want a beer go to a friends house and sit in the garden.
On this topic I would like to clarify a few things.
Having patrolled the location frequently the Beat Team dealt with the few individuals as necessary after complaints from residents and local dog walkers etc. It was highlighted to us by the residents as an issue and so we contacted the County Highways Department who began to work toward a solution to preventing the Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) rather than us just patrolling when we were on duty.
The Council consulted local residents by delivering the proposals through letterboxes and had details available at the location to contact them for any passer by who wanted to add their support/objections.
There were bollards in the original proposal, however, this was opposed. This was an opposition from someone who has an interest in the area. Middle ground was reached where it was decided that the bollards would be an option to be added at a later date should the gate not deter the unwanted vehicles visiting the area. So if ASB does begin to occur at the location, with vehicles driving over the path to the bottom, then the bollards can be put into place if the issue can not be resolved another way.
It is not an oversight on the Councils part that there are no bollards, it is the wish of the public. The Council have retained the ability to put the bollards in at a later date if required without the need to go through expensive protocol as it is already covered in the proposal.
However, there is no need to add these at the moment and I do not envisage there being a need for them. The gate has solved the problem and the Beat Team have been approached on many occasions and informed by numerous local residents and area users of the vast improvement in the area as a whole.
Councillor Parsons part in this was instrumental in this local bug bear being turned once again into a place to enjoy.
On the subject of itinerants, it is unlikely that they will return and they will be dealt with if they do.
Lets all remember that these days there is due process which must be followed and not everyone will always be happy with the outcome once a project is completed.
Regards,
Duane
waste of councils money again
The only reason that bollards were not put in place was that 1 person had objected to them as he parked his van there. I think the person involved should take a look at the Highway Code and find information about parking on public footpaths.
I agree that this “was not thought through” – at the time the road was closed alot of villagers said that this could remain as a access to Glenfield and a cycle lane could have been added. We now have just 1 exit towards town out of Kirby up blood hill from this end of the village, there are queues and in bad weather it is v v slow . Short sighted Council I am afraid.
I feel cut off down here as it’s difficult to get in or out. Public transport is limited to Mon-Fri in daylight hours only, and if you try to get out by car in peak times you have to set off earlier or just not bother at all. I wish it had never been blocked off.