Objections to Stowe Bridge scheme are expressed

Stowe Bridge is set to be widened in August
Stowe Bridge is set to be widened in August
0
Have your say

PLANS to widen a narrow bridge have been met with strong opposition from residents who claim it is a waste of money.

Lincolnshire County Council has decided to reconstruct Stowe Bridge, in the road between Barholm and Langtoft, to make it wide enough for two cars to pass over it following several collisions in recent months.

The work is set to start in August and will cost the council an estimated £47,000.

People who use the road, however, believe that is a high cost and that alternative safety improvements could be trailed first, such as priority or narrow bridge signs.

Ibis Channell, 65, from Main Street, Greatford, said: “I’m not disputing the fact that something needs to be done but what the council is planning is just a waste of money.

“I use the bridge on a regular basis and think priority signs either side of it for traffic and narrow bridge signs would be a much better option.

“Just think of what the council could do with that money instead of wasting it on this. It’s an incredible amount of money for something that could be fixed for cheaper.”

David Hetherington, 65, from Barholm, said: “I consider it a complete waste of money in the current climate. I would agree with Ibis that alternatives could be trailed or looked at first. Priority signs would help draw people’s attention to how narrow it is.”

The work is set to start on August 13 and the road will be closed for about two weeks for it to be completed.

The county council’s principal structures engineer Richard Waters said: “Safety of people on the roads is our absolute priority and we therefore propose to widen the bridge so that the parapets are set back from the road. This will greatly reduce the risk of cars colliding with the walls, and the risk of head-on collisions between vehicles meeting on the bridge. We have erected narrow bridge signs, however, improvement of signing on its own does not offer a satisfactory reduction in risk. We want to do all we can to prevent the likelihood of further instances.”