With things starting to get back to something like normal, the Club is delighted to be able to get its 2022 programme of Music Nights at Sunbury Cricket Club under way by welcoming back SKELETON CREW, always one of our most popular bands, who have a big local following. They have appeared at the Club not only at Music Nights but at two of their Beer and Music Festivals.

Their line-up is unchanged from their last couple of appearances - they are led by Paul King, on guitar, mandolin, banjo and squeezebox, an original member of Mungo Jerry, who was voted Evening Standard pub entertainer of the year several years in a row, and was a founder member of the King Earl Boogie Band. On bass is Colin Pattenden, original member of Manfred Mann’s Earth Band in their hit-making days, and now also with Jackie Lynton and the Nashville Teens, plus Chris Bryant on guitar, and drummer/percussionist and cajon player Amber Hough. Also appearing will be various volunteers wielding the zob sticks! (Google it if you don’t know what a zob stick is).

As always, it will be a rollicking evening featuring their distinctive brand of jug band music, blues, skiffle and rock.

Admission is £10.00 on the door, payable by cash or card.

Hot food, prepared by the expert chefs from our resident caterers from the community food redistribution organisation Surplus To Supper, will be available from 7pm, and the band will be on stage about 9.00pm.

This may take a bit of time so please persevere to the end:

Those readers who have been following the progress of our campaign for the construction of a foot/cycle bridge connecting Lower Sunbury to Walton (See top of Home Page) will be aware of our recent application to YFS (Your Fund Surrey) to bring the campaign to fruition.

It is therefore disappointing to receive the following from the YFS Project advisor: "Regrettably, Your ideas submission has been assessed against the criteria and requirements for the fund and unfortunately does not meet the requirements to be shortlisted to progress to the full submission stage...."

All does not appear to be lost as the advisor continues: "However, whilst this project is not suitable for YFS at this time, the Lower Sunbury Crossing has been added by SCC to the Surrey Infrastructure Plan which was reviewed at Cabinet on 26^th October....

"The Lower Sunbury Crossing is designated a Category 2 project within the Surrey Infrastructure Plan Cabinet Report Annex 2 (pg198), noting that further feasibility work will be required and without a specific funding commitment at this time.

"I realise that this is not the information which you would have wished to receive, but I hope that the above information is helpful and that we can work together regarding the feasibility of this project as an infrastructure project as we move forward".

Coincidentally, and quite separately, the following Council notice has hit our inboxes and offers another medium through which we can make our views and preferences known:

"Surrey’s 2050 Place Ambition presents a long-term ambition and priorities for Surrey local authorities and their strategic partners. The priorities and implementation framework set out what we want collectively to achieve over the next 30 years in terms of “good growth” and how we intend to deliver it.

"There are real opportunities for Surrey to grow and become even more attractive as a place to live and work, but this needs to be done in a way that helps address the challenges around climate change, doesn’t put excessive pressure on our infrastructure, improves the overall quality of our environment and enables our economy to grow sustainably.

"The Place Ambition has been developed by the Surrey Future partnership and is informed by, and will be implemented through, various local and countywide plans and strategies including district and borough local plans, climate change strategies, economic strategies, and the local transport plan. It does not replace any local proposals and priorities but is intended to promote a long term, co-ordinated and cross boundary approach to planning and managing the impacts of growth. The Place Ambition will be used to help shape projects we are working on together as well as seek the support of our wider sub-national partners and Government, particularly in relation to accessing additional funding and investment opportunities for infrastructure and to support a zero-carbon future".

To maintain the momentum please make your views on the footbridge known by visiting and completing this easy to follow questionnaire and, in particular, questions 3, 4 & 6 at:

https://www.surreysays.co.uk/environment-and-infrastructure/placeambition/

Closing date 4th March

The Association has received a number of emails querying why we have remained silent over the proposed 5G Mask in Thames Street. To put the record straight, we reproduce below the representation made by the Chairman on 17th December 2021:

Subject: FW: SPN20391-Planning pre-consultation enquiry for proposed new telecommunications mast on Thames Street, Sunbury-on-Thames,Spelthorne, Surrey,TW16 5QH

Dear Sirs

I am writing on behalf of the Lower Sunbury Residents Association.

May I firstly welcome the introduction and expansion of the 5G network as this is widely seen to be essential to the future of technical communications.

The proposal states that ‘As per the extract from the Spelthorne Borough Council Plan we note that this site is not located within a designated Conservation Area.’. This is wrong. We’ve plotted the proposed mast site on Spelthorne’s own map which shows the outline of the Lower Sunbury Conservation Area; it is well within it. This would also exclude it from all of Sunbury Park , Orchard Meadow , the Walled Garden and the two car parks.

The proposal rightly rejects other possible sites within the ‘Nomination Point’ circle – in The Avenue, Kingsmead Avenue and Saxonbury Avenue – as being ‘Residential street’ and/or ‘overlooked by residential properties’, and yet the proposed location in Thames Street is also a residential street and additionally places the mast and its antennae adjacent to two multi-story blocks of flats and close to a primary school? This is surely wrong?

It also hardly seems sensible to have such a tall mast and its attendant large cabinets taking up space on a pedestrian pavement on a busy street.

There are a number of points we would like clarification on, please:

In terms of services the mast obviously needs power –  and we also note from the specification that it is only receiving transmission data from the fibre network. Does this mean that it has therefore to be located on a pavement above a fibre network route, or can it be installed at an alternative location with a new separate fibre feed routed to it?

With regard to the map shown as Figure1 on p2 of the Site Detail Sheet document, just above the ‘blue circle’ map what does the ‘green marker’ refer to?

We would like to propose that you, the surveying company, or 5G company, talk to LoSRA directly and for us potentially to understand more clearly what the constraints are, and suggest/discuss where any mast might sensibly go. It seems to us that a location away from housing and schools and not on a pavement would make more sense. Within the proposer’s Nomination point circle there might be some less obtrusive alternatives.

Finally, we should like to know why the specification is showing the use of Huawei 5G equipment when that has, we believe, now been banned by the UK Government?

Paul Thompson

Hon Chairman

LoSRA

Spelthorne Borough Council successfully prosecuted a man for the breach of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) for cutting the roots of a Horse Chestnut Tree in The Avenue without the authority of the Council.

The Avenue is arguably the most iconic residential thoroughfare in the Borough largely due to the linear arrangement of mature horse chestnut trees which have framed the detached houses for generations. Indeed, we were inspired to adopt the horse chestnut tree as our emblematic logo at the Association's inception 50 years ago.

It therefore comes as a great disappointment to read that a resident has been found guilty at Guildford Magistrates' Court of cutting the roots of a protected horse chestnut, presumably to end its viability as a living mature tree. He has found himself over £1,500 lighter in the pocket as a result. (A breach can lead to an unlimited fine if it is likely to result in the tree being destroyed, otherwise up to £2,500).

As an Association we have frequently pressed for the enforcement of the legal requirement to replace trees which, through disease, have been granted permission to fell and we will continue to do so.