Closure of the walkway between the Squiggly Bridge and Quay

[bespinfugee]

Hello Folks

Apologies first of all I'm new and couldn't find a forum to post to about this but,

The Resident's Association of the Waterfront development (Windmillcroft Quay) decided at its december meeting to inform the City Council that it intended to close the walkway along the Clyde from the Squiggly bridge to the Kingston Bridge/Quay Cinema area.

To this end it is intended to hold an EGM of residents in February.

To be honest I was disgusted at this turn of events and it was not a representative decision of the meeting. Two owners were very vocal in their wish to close the walkway one spoke very much against and the remainder said nothing.

The factors were mandated to inform the council of the intention to hold the meeting.

In the mean time I'm trying to raise some opposition both within the development and esp. without.

Does anyone know if the walkway will constitue a right of way as it have been open for over 20 years.

Also if like minded folk could email the Councillors involved it is Govan Ward. Any ideas how to stop this happening would be gratefully accepted.

[Delmont St Xavier]

I maybe wrong (often I am) but I would doubt that they had the legal right to prevent people from walking, in what could be constituted a 'right of way' but I guess there will be others who disagree.

Legal advice is the best solution that I can provide, other than that (has the area been developed?) perhaps a suggestion at the EGM that by taking this action they will deem the whole area their responsibility; maintenance both physically and financially.....strangely enough this seems to often melt peoples' stance when they realise it will hit their pockets! After all, it sounds as if they are suggesting this is private land - well they can't have it both ways!

[Mori]

We had a similar problem as yourself bespinfugee a while back but were fortunate enough to act in time to stop the council from opening up our walkway @ Mavisbank Quay, it took us nearly 10 years but we managed to do it to stop through traffic of pedestrains until such time the council took on the responsibilty and ownership of the path.

This thread > Squinty Bridge / Springfield Quay riverside walk might explain and give you links to some documents that the council have produced over the last few year in the process of this, i'm not trying to deter you but i think the residents of Windmillcroft Quay may have lost rights to close up the path as it has been open from the development first opend.

Wish you success in this matter as i know what we have been through with the council over the years in getting them to listen to our residents association.

[scoobydoo]

.....strangely enough this seems to often melt peoples' stance when they realise it will hit their pockets! After all, it sounds as if they are suggesting this is private land - well they can't have it both ways!

From memory the land is private with the walkway and the quay wall being the responsibility of the property owners to maintain.

Is the stance being taken because the walkway has been identified as a potential core path on GCC's Core Paths Plan and possibly an attempt to get the council to fund maintenance in the future if the residents 'allow' access in return - I think there was a similar issue at the Mavisbank development.

[bespinfugee]

Thanks everyone

Scoobydoo- the issue is some residents think that since the opening of the squiggly bridge at tradeston, that hordes of the great unwashed are dispoiling the shared gardens.

There has certainly been an increase in footfall but my opinion is this makes the flats more appealling. Increased amounts of litter are negligble and if anything the greater usage has discourage a few jakes from guzzling buckie near the Kingston bridge.

The proposal to close is being foreced by a very vocal owner who claims that the open walkway has lowered property values. This owner doesn't actually live in the development, so closure would not be an inconvience to them as much as it will residents and owners who live in the waterfront and pedestrians wishing a traffic free route to the Quay.

This owner is also working everyone up by saying if someone falls that the 200 owners will be liable. To me this is a nonsence as the geography of the development means that by a short detour people will still be able to access at the squiggly and exit by tramping across a lawn at the quay. Closure will also encourage pedestrains to use the internal footpaths which a provide slightly longer path to the Quay If they injure themselves when efforts have been made to close I think we would be more liable.

Does anyone know if you can register a right of way in the same way you might get a tree protection order?

Personally I would like to see the walkway opened all the way from the squiggly to the science centre.

[delirium]

Well I'll be emailing a councillor or two. I've lived near the Quay end of that path for the last 10 years and use it fairly often. Since the opening of the bridge it has become much safer and more pleasant to use due to the increased footfall whereas I often avoided it when it was quieter as there were too many neds hanging about under the Kingston bridge.

Surely that footpath being well used makes those flats less vulnerable to break-ins and the paths between the houses generally safer for residents than when it was fairly deserted! I realise I'm pretty much repeating myself from the other thread, but paths away from roads need to be reasonably well frequented to be safe to use. And the OP is right of course, closing it would just divert people in among the houses. I walked that way at commuting time on a day when the path was barriered off for some reason and everyone filtered off through the carparks and internal paths.

I'm all for the path being open right along and under council responsibility. It's a busy route, people will use it whatever signs are up and physical barriers just block it for the residents too - nose cut off to spite face! At least with the council you know who to complain to, but neglected repairs by private owners are a nightmare. The streetlights in the private road (bordering Mavisbank Quay) behind my flat have been out for well over a year. This an area where kids play and people park. And in an area where drug abuse and crime is all too close to hand this is not acceptable. I'm afraid it will it take an attack before they're fixed.

Please do keep us posted of any progress on this.

[fourbytwo]

After spending 'lots of dosh' to get an apartment that looks directly on to the Brown and Effluent Clyde, I can fully understand why local residents are complaining about the 'great unwashed' treading paths previously used for decades.
I fully understand the need to 'shut-out the unacceptable side of Glasgow', and to be able to show-off to my friends with a glass of Merlot (not a cheapie one), that I had an unobscured view of the historic Clyde and the 'nice view of Glasgow'.
And the vast rafts of empty Buckfast bottles that ebb away on each tide, are not as offensive as actually chancing on someone guzzling the stuff. poor private owners, such a burdon.............!
However, Glasgow remains a bright light in Scotland irresspective of all its historical faults, and THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE LIKE IT THAT WAY, we do not want it 'sanitised to be Edinburgh', nor do we want it ruined by Councils who have systematically 'basterdised it to suit Middle-Class tastes'.
If unchecked.....what will the next move be....?
Perhaps a photographic identity card for the bridges to ensure no 'unsavoury characters' are allowed to encroach on the area, renamed as NIMBY....?
Once you let these people dictate who and what decades old 'rights-of-way' and access routes are to be omitted....then where do you stop...?
Its bad enough with self-inflated Council Officials changing areas for 'Medals', but to allow so called Glaswegians to dictate policy that would destroy the character of what drew people to Glasgow in the first place....is horrendous...!

[minxy]

I went a walk along the Clyde last year, wanted to walk along the Clyde to take some nice pics, but just could not find a way to get on a path...it was a path.....along the Clyde. I eventually realised there was no way in, I could not understand it...I climbed over the steel fence, and went my walk. It was lovely. I must have been, oooh about at least 30 feet away from the nearest residential building. (I'm talking on the south side of the river here BTW, still a valid point though, same kind of issues).
Looks like its all happening a wee bit at a time, might be the bit next, where the suspension bridge is, all that place where people sit in the sun on the big steps. That will be developed into flats and the area infront of the Clyde will yet again be residents only.
Fair enough if a building is right on the edge of the Clyde and maybe some ones garden, but a path!!..Thats like cutting off a street and "residents only".

[Doorstop]

'Gated Communities' in other words .. now where do they have those again .. hmmm?

[hungryjoe]

A wee touch of mass civil disobedience might work wonders.

[stevienoo01]

i've got bolt cutters

[penguinmonkey]

A wee touch of mass civil disobedience might work wonders.

Kinder Scout moment anyone?

[BrigitDoon]

i've got bolt cutters

You speak my language

[Doorstop]

Indeed .. do you have a newsletter we can subscribe to?