Council bosses have come under fire after it emerged they had spent £100,000 building a homeowner a new 65-metre-long garden wall.
The 6ft-high brick structure is to protect the privacy of the property after its small wooden fence and bush were removed as part of the controversial revamp of Norwich's Heartsease roundabout.
Norfolk County Council's spending on the wall has prompted anger in the area, especially after the authority confirmed it would not pay compensation to businesses that have lost trade due to the overrunning £4.4m road scheme.
Steve Morphew, leader of the Labour group at County Hall, said it was "staggering" and accused the council of "splashing the cash".
COSTS EMERGE
The spending emerged at a meeting of the Conservative-controlled cabinet, when Alison Birmingham, Labour county councillor for Crome, asked how much the wall - around St William's House, on the corner of St Williams Way and Plumstead Road - had cost.
Graham Plant, the council's cabinet member for highways, infrastructure and transport said the council had bought land from the householder so extra space could be created for a walking and cycling route.
The council has not revealed how much it paid for that land, saying that is a "private arrangement".
But Mr Plant said: "This wall is needed to demarcate the revised boundary of this property and is therefore an essential element of the scheme.
"The wall is extensive in length and it was agreed with the landowner as part of the purchase of the land that it would be constructed to a height of 6ft to provide privacy, considering the previous boundary consisted of tall, dense foliage.
"The specification of the wall meets all required safety and structural standards given the fact that this will be located adjacent to a busy footway and cycleway.
"The costs of constructing the wall form part of the wider construction works of the project and cost in the region of £100,000, which is part of the overall funding from the Department for Transport."
NO ALTERNATIVE
The council said it would not have been possible to provide replacement planting to the height and density of the well-established greenery which was there before.
Officers said a wall was considered most appropriate because of the need for a strong and safe boundary near a footpath and cycleway, along with a need to deal with specific issues about drainage given the different levels of surfaces in the area.
Local businesses say the roundabout revamp work, which started in September and will now continue until May because of delays triggered by "unexpected" problems with drainage, has hit their earnings.
SPENDING UNDER FIRE
Ozgul Balcimer, who owns Hartlands fish and chip shop, in nearby Harvey Lane, was told by the council that it has no legal liability to pay compensation for disruption to businesses caused by the work.
Mr Morphew, the Labour councillor, said: "It is staggering that Graham Plant can justify £100,000 for a massive wall to replace a low wooden fence and some shrubs, but nothing for the businesses on the brink, because of an overrunning scheme that was excessively long anyway.
"No wonder people get furious with how Norfolk Tories splash our cash."
But Mr Plant defended the construction of the wall. He said: "The purchase of land from a private owner to deliver key infrastructure is very different from the topic of providing compensation to commercial businesses.
"Feedback from our consultation on improvements to Heartsease roundabout told us that many people who cycle and walk through the area would prefer more space with segregated facilities and we could not have delivered this on the corner of St Williams Way without securing the land.
"As a result, we pursued the purchase of the land needed, rather than delivering the shared-use path in the original proposals within a limited space.
"I understand that this element seems like a significant cost, but the overall project remains within budget and I’m pleased we’ve been able to provide a better outcome for people travelling on foot and by bike.
"The main objective of this project is to improve on the roundabout’s currently very poor safety record, particularly for those cycling, and the presence of a separate path for them is a huge asset to the final scheme."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel