21 comments

• Comment Link Tuesday, 29 October 2013 18:16 posted by Carol Box

  I fully support this idea!
  "Before Surrey County Council could lend its support to such a suggestion, we would need to be
  satisfied that the anticipated benefit would justify the likely cost, would outweigh any negative
  impact, and that the priority of
  such a suggestion would compare
  favourably to other schemes elsewhere in Surrey". What a pity Nick Healey isn't on the planning committee for the very UN-eco park.
• Comment Link Monday, 28 October 2013 21:00 posted by Bob

  Comparing the "stadium" being built in Walton with Chelsea is ridiculous and just negates that argument completely
  
  Please tell me which team exactly will play there? Average attendance as well please
  
  Stop being a nimby
• Comment Link Thursday, 24 October 2013 17:24 posted by Richard

  John E English ... ? Wasn't that a Rowan Atkinson comedy character ?
  Just about sums up the level of this debate !
• Comment Link Thursday, 24 October 2013 09:35 posted by Jon Wallsgrove

  In my experience as the Principle Architect at the Highways Agency for ten years, the location of a bridge is the most critical factor to its acceptance. I found that people would rather have no bridge than one that is in the wrong location.
  
  To connect the two communities for business the bridge must link the village centre in Sunbury with the Weir Hotel and Xcel Leisure centre in the easiest way, without adversely affecting local people or the environment.
  
  I examined five possible locations for a bridge linking Sunbury to Walton. Kings Lawn is the shortest, most central and most direct crossing to Sunbury Lock Ait connecting with the existing bridge over the lock cut. It would use the natural levels opposite St Mary's Church and was the cheapest option by far costing £2.4 million to £4.1million.
  
  Other options are less central and more expensive: Rivermead Island would be 60% more expensive, the EA depot to Xcel would cost 70% more. Some people have suggested using the weir as a crossing, but the total route is one kilometre long, which would hardly encourage its use, and it is 80% more expensive than a bridge at Kings Lawn.
• Comment Link Wednesday, 23 October 2013 16:59 posted by Ziz

  A cycle/pedestrian bridge over to the towpath would be a fabulous idea. I often drive over the river, to walk my dog along the towpath, both at Hurst Park and Desborough Island. It all makes perfect sense.
• Comment Link Wednesday, 23 October 2013 14:05 posted by Samantha

  My husband and I have been saying for such a long time that a bridge would be a massive benefit to us and Lower Sunbury as a whole.
  Definitely gets our support.
  It would also mean my husband won't have to drive to work in Walton every day.
• Comment Link Wednesday, 23 October 2013 10:28 posted by John Hirsh

  Ref: Richard Stephenson's comment of 22nd Oct, (13.07) first para, in which he states that scheme was "roundly rejected by a majority of Lower Sunbury residents".
  
  Before embarking on this project LOSRA was anxious to test that proposition with a questionnaire survey. The survey was conducted over a number of weeks with 100 local residents being approached at a number of locations on both sides of the river. A spreadsheet is available which details the responses and it will show that every respondent, perhaps unsurprisingly, was supportive of the proposal to construct a foot/cycle bridge provided it was positioned at the best possible site. If one were to be constructed, 97 respondents stated that they or their family members would use it, with those resiling giving old age or infirmity as their reasons.
  
  The reduction in car journeys would be considerable with 16 respondents stating that they would always use the foot/cycle bridge in preference to driving over the road bridges; 54 would often choose to do so; 26 sometimes; and a mere 2, for reasons mentioned above (ie infirmity), would never choose this option.
  
  In addition to the questions each respondent was given the opportunity to comment and these have been recorded. It was significant that many residents always thought the bridge was to have been built many years ago and couldn’t understand why it hadn’t. The level of enthusiasm for the proposal was very evident throughout the survey with many respondents quoting their personal frustrations at having no option but to drive to destinations on the south bank.
  
  Hope that helps
• Comment Link Tuesday, 22 October 2013 22:05 posted by Richard Stephenson

  Hmmm, this is beginning to remind me of a campaign some time back, which got known as "Rent-a-letter"!
• Comment Link Tuesday, 22 October 2013 16:44 posted by John E English

  Dear Mr Stephenson
  
  A bridge that affords access both
  on foot & by cycle will not unnaturally be utilised by townsfolk domiciled in areas that breach your rather narrow intepretation of what constitutes the local COMMUNITY.
  I'm also pretty sure that such a footbridge won't lead to a tsunami of civil disturbance being inflicted on our parish.
  
  Can we please keep to sensible cogent dissent in the future please?
  
  Kind Regards,
  
  A Resident beyond the 38th Parallel North(OK, Staines Rd Est).
• Comment Link Tuesday, 22 October 2013 15:43 posted by John E English

  Good to see the positive feedback on the comments page for this, such a scheme will benefit both the town's inhabitants & local trade.
  We will of course have to duke it out with the nah sayers & soaked in aspic brigade who will fight such a proposal.
  Remain tolerant of change people!