Green Party

I'm concerned about the slow speed of progress on the project to create pedestrian and cycle links from the city centre and Thorpe Hamlet to Whitlingham Country Park.

Whitlingham is a tremendous local asset, great for watersports, wildlife and country walks on the doorstep of Norwich, but not easy to get to from the city despite being so near because of two rivers being in the way! The victory in the vote to win Big Lottery money for this project in December 2007 was a great step forward, but the Councils need to ensure this money is used as soon as possible, and certainly within the five year time limit.

My colleague Phil Hardy (our County Council candidate for Thorpe Hamlet) asked a question about this at a recent County Council Cabinet meeting. It seems that the City and County Councils are passing the buck over who should provide the revenue funding for specialist officer time to take the planning work forward. Apart from being another argument for unitary status (to prevent such buck passing) this is an argument for a review of current Council priorities when it comes to transport. A million pounds per year is spent on modelling for the Northern Distributor Road, even though funding has not been secured yet, and yet much cheaper walking and cycling routes are not getting such support.  

I asked a question about this at last night's City Council meeting. My question and the answer are below.

Councillor Adrian Ramsay to the Leader of the Council:-
‘Recent press reports have claimed that the Sustrans Connect 2 project, to connect Thorpe Hamlet and the City Centre to Whitlingham Country Park by cycle and pedestrian footpaths and bridges, is at risk. A reported six year delay until 2013 will be deemed unacceptable by many residents who voted to win £900,000 of Lottery money by a public phone-in in 2007. Could the Leader of the Council please detail what the situation is with funding and, as the current chair of the Greater Norwich Development Partnership, can he indicate the current prioritisation of this project compared to other projects for funding and resources?’

Councillor Steve Morphew, Leader of the Council’s reply:-
‘The Whitlingham Link project is estimated to cost £5 million. It was originally envisaged to be paid for via a mixture of developer, Local Transport Plan and government grant. The Connect2 funding will provide £0.9 million towards the £5 million. Since then the economic situation has changed significantly and the amount of grant funding to the Greater Norwich Development Partnership (GNDP) in the short term is significantly less than bid for. Also changes in audit regulations mean it is now more difficult to capitalise project development fee costs.
These changes present challenges to the project particularly as the project is so linked to development at the Deal Ground and Utilities sites and therefore dependent on market conditions. Such risks have been understood since the project’s inception however and they are not affecting the project’s critical path.

The most time critical task at present is to undertake ecological surveys and funding for these has been secured (from a mixture of public and private sector sources) to allow these to be carried out.

Unfortunately no further funding can be committed through GNDP at this stage due to a lack of revenue funding. As the immediate need is to progress with surveys, design work developer negotiations etc, this is being taken forward in conjunction with the landowners. There is not necessarily a need for major capital funding during 2009 and 2010. This will change as we move through to 2011 and 2012. City Council and GNDP officers are working on a revised project funding package and I remain optimistic about delivery.’

Councillor Ramsay asked, as a supplementary question, whether councillors would be kept informed of the revised funding package. Councillor Morphew said yes. There were a large number of projects and it was important for councillors to be kept informed.

Write a comment

• Required fields are marked with *.

Name:
Email:
Website:
Subject:
Comment: *

Help prevent spam - enter security code above: