A NEW Greenock cycle route has been branded a 'monstrosity' by a senior councillor who insists it should be SCRAPPED.

Chris McEleny says the lanes being developed from Container Way to Battery Park are causing major congestion for people trying to get in and out of the town centre and have narrowed the main road in a 'dangerous' way.

The Tele has received a number of complaints about the new lane, with drivers saying it is causing havoc along a key stretch of the town centre at Patrick Street/Brougham Street and leading to lengthy tailbacks.

Now as the controversy escalates council officials have been ordered to prepare an urgent briefing for elected members over a number of problems highlighted with the project.

Councillor McEleny told a meeting of the local authority's environment and regeneration committee he wants the lane ripped up.

He said: “I have real concerns over what can only be described as a monstrosity lane between Patrick Street and the Esplanade.

“It’s quite clear this cycle lane isn’t fit for purpose.

“The lanes are dangerous because of how narrow they’ve made the road and the impact on traffic is causing unsustainable hold-ups.

“This isn’t just an issue for Greenock, it is causing unacceptable delays to people trying travelling into the town centre and from Gourock."

"I’m all for greener active travel, but what works for civil servants and yuppies cycling about the likes of Edinburgh doesn’t necessarily work in Inverclyde.

"We should be more careful in future when imposing these ideas on our area.

Alba's Mr McEleny said he was 'pleased there seems to be cross-party support' for his request for the newly installed lanes to be removed.

He added: "I hope the changes required will happen as soon as possible."

The new cycle route is part of a near £600,000 package of works to encourage active travel in the area.

It is one of the first projects to be delivered by the council after it lodged a successful bid for £585,000 of funding from the national Spaces for People initiative, which is financed by the Scottish Government and delivered by the Sustrans charity.

The works are nearing completion but people have been left up in arms over the new layout and the knock-on effect it is having.

Regeneration boss Stuart Jamieson says changes will be made after Municipal Buildings meetings were held to discuss the issues raised.

SNP councillor Innes Nelson said: “This lane is not serving the people of Inverclyde well.

"It’s just causing major congestion and it needs to be sorted sooner rather than later.

“I have hardly seen any bikes on it.” 

Councillor Jim Clocherty said there was a need to find the right balance between space for cyclists, vehicles and pedestrians.

He said: “I’m very much supportive of active travel but we’ve got to make sure it’s not to the detriment of pavement and road users.”

Council leader Stephen McCabe said he shared some of the fears expressed by his colleagues but defended the decision-making process of the local authority over the new cycle route.

He said: “There’s obviously a lot of concerns around it and I share those, around certain aspects.

“But we should all accept that we all had a chance to feed [our views] into the cycle lane and we all agreed in principle to invest money in cycle lanes.

“We are supportive of active travel and encouraging more people to cycle and I think what’s been done has been done with the best intentions.”

The council says that when the idea of a new cycle route through the town was proposed they consulted about it.

They added that elements of the project are temporary and could be removed.

A spokesman for Inverclyde Council said: “We secured national funding last year to make changes and improvements to assist with physical distancing in light of the pandemic and also to encourage more active travel, such as walking, cycling or wheeling, in the longer term with an added focus on helping to reduce carbon emissions and improve health outcomes.

“The project was developed following a public consultation.

“Some changes are permanent and others are temporary and will be reviewed for a period of up to 18 months so we welcome feedback on what works, what doesn’t and what could be altered.”