Stratford bridge will not be built

[RLWP]

Stratford council can't afford it apparently BBC story

 

Richard

[BlueStringPudding]

Interesting - I wonder if that's really the case of whether a certain large theatre company (who shall remain nameless) who stood to benefit from it might intervene?

[Dominic M]

Interesting - I wonder if that's really the case of whether a certain large theatre company (who shall remain nameless) who stood to benefit from it might intervene?

Gosh! Now who could that be. Errrrrm..............can I phone a friend?

[Chris J W]

Why the "Thank Goodness" ?

[BlueStringPudding]

Why the "Thank Goodness" ?

 

I agree with the thank goodness as the vista is beautiful and it'd be a shame to wack another bridge across it. Also it suggests development work on the rec which would be mad as it's A. a frequently submerged floodplain and B. it means the loss of more greenery. They've already cut down all the old chestnut trees from waterside to replace them with sh*tty little lollipop trees (limes which will drop sticky sap on everyone, are tiny and will not cope with the flooding, plus the old established trees would have helped retain water for slow release suring times of flood - the limes won't). And they've (for no apparent reason) cut down a vast number of the lovely weeping willows from the opposite bank which were such a signature mark of the beautiful Stratford water scape. Petitions were drawn up against it all but of course financing was already in place so they were ignored.

Edited July 17, 2008 by BlueStringPudding

[WJM]

Cant see why it was ever needed - there is already an abandoned tramway bridge being used as a pedestrian bridge.

[RLWP]

Why the "Thank Goodness" ?

 

Because of what Lisa said. I agree with her.

 

Richard

[Sir Nibble]

And they've (for no apparent reason) cut down a vast number of the lovely weeping willows from the opposite bank which were such a signature mark of the beautiful Stratford water scape. Petitions were drawn up against it all but of course financing was already in place so they were ignored.

You would be amazed how much water willows will rob from the waterway, a stand of thirsty willows is as bad as a leaky lock.

[Chris J W]

I agree with the thank goodness as the vista is beautiful and it'd be a shame to wack another bridge across it. Also it suggests development work on the rec which would be mad as it's A. a frequently submerged floodplain and B. it means the loss of more greenery. They've already cut down all the old chestnut trees from waterside to replace them with sh*tty little lollipop trees (limes which will drop sticky sap on everyone, are tiny and will not cope with the flooding, plus the old established trees would have helped retain water for slow release suring times of flood - the limes won't). And they've (for no apparent reason) cut down a vast number of the lovely weeping willows from the opposite bank which were such a signature mark of the beautiful Stratford water scape. Petitions were drawn up against it all but of course financing was already in place so they were ignored.

 

Ta! Not knowing the area I wasn't too sure what "the fuss" was about, but I understand now.

[Breals]

You would be amazed how much water willows will rob from the waterway, a stand of thirsty willows is as bad as a leaky lock.

 

Not really an issue on the Avon where oversupply of water is more of a concern ;P

 

I'm glad this has been shelved too, money would be better spent tidying up some of the ugly postwar buildings that let the town down, and maybe a bit of investment in the public ferry crossing? A much more fun way of crossing the river.

Edited July 17, 2008 by Breals

[tony collins]

Another reason for saying thank goodness is that a major part of the funding was to come from the council tax payers of Warwickshire. The vast majority of whom would gain no benefit from the building of the bridge.

 

Tony.