Footpath 070

Criterion and examples

Score

Comment

Is the path made easy to use and is it worth using?

Signage (legible, accurate and useful statement of destination, distance, any hazards, not  vandalized?)

2

Non- specific  and old (pre-dating HOOP) ‘Rural Walk’at access point. At junction with Wymondley Road ‘Public footpath 15 Ashbrook ¾’, which does not make clear whether the short access section from Wymondley Road is 15 or 70. Sticker on lamp post shows HOOP here  – easily missed.

Connectivity (is the path useful in connecting locations, providing a shortcut or alternative to road journey)

4

The section of the HOOP, and avoids walking along Ninesprings Way / Oakfield Avenue.

Attractiveness (are there points of interest, pleasant surroundings, wildlife opportunities,  freedom from noise – e.g. of factories)

4

The streamside habitat attracts a variety of birds. Waxwings have been sighted in recent winters. There are plenty of wildflowers. The area is quiet.

Health, safety and security

Surface (evenness, potholes, evidence of recent maintenance, dry and not muddy, where paving slabs, are they secure and even?)

4

At the time of writing, the grassy surface was firm, not muddy and pleasant to walk on. This is a low lying area, and can be muddy after rain and in winter.

Boundaries (are they in good repair, clear of graffiti or other vandalism, overgrown where hedges, is the path free of over-hanging branches?)

5

Fences and hedges all in good repair. Very little graffiti.

Wheelchair access (wide enough, suitable surface and gradient, steps?)

3

Flat. Would be suitable for wheelchair use when dry.

Barriers to prevent children running onto busy roads at ends?

N

Barriers to prevent access by motor vehicles? (are they broken or have they been removed / damaged?)

N

Cycling – do cyclists routinely ride, do they pose a danger

?

None seen, but no tracks noticed.

Lighting (distance between, does it work?)

NA

No lighting, but this is a rural path – lighting would not be appropriate.

Visibility (is there passive surveillance, are there bends or corners which would raise perceived crime threat?)

4

The path is overlooked throughout its length.

Litter and vandalism

Is there evidence of vandalism, litter and / or fly-tipping (both on path and in visible surroundings) Is litter ‘offensive’ – e.g. syringes / condoms?

5

No litter seen at all.

Litter bins – are there any and have they been emptied?

Y

At play area at E end.

Dog fouling – recent?

N

None seen, but residents do complain about dog walkers

Dog excrement bins – are there any?

Y

In playground

Conclusions

·         Although only part of the path walked on this occasion, I have walked the whole length to the Stevenage Road recently and the above comments would apply to the whole path.

·         Signage is not specific when not joining the path from the ends. The Council footpath numbering system is unclear.

Recommended action

·         Improve signage, especially directing HOOP walkers under railway bridge, and making it clear that there is no footway beyond the Wymondley Rd / St Michaels Rd rdbt and make numbering consistent with definitive map.