To discuss report on Temple footbridge (Thames Path) closure – Does LAF support lobbying Govt and EA?

This item had been moved up from Item 9 on the agenda to allow for a registered speaker.

The Chair invited the registered speaker, Councillor Larcombe, to address the LAF on the item. Councillor Larcombe highlighted issues with Berryhill footbridge, which broke two years ago and had not yet been replaced. The cost to remove the timber footbridge was £100,000 and the replacement cost, estimated to be around £400,000, would be borne by Buckinghamshire Council. Councillor Larcombe expressed alarm over similar issues potentially occurring with the Temple Footbridge and noted that several footbridges, originally designed and possibly built by the Environment Agency, were subsequently passed over to borough or county councils, leading to maintenance and replacement challenges. Councillor Larcombe said he would keep a close eye on this item and closely monitor the actions, or lack thereof, by the Environment Agency in addressing these issues.

The Chair reiterated the agenda item which was whether to write to the Environment Agency and the relevant government department for advice and guidance on the bridge issue and should the LAF support this communication effort or let the situation unfold? The Chair asked for comments, noting the Ramblers who used the bridge frequently.

Steve Gillions was in support of writing to the Environment Agency and said they should pose a series of questions and request regular reviews of progress against any plan they provide. Steve Gillions noted that given the Environment Agency’s tendency to delay, they must ensure accountability but asking for at least six-monthly reports on progress and intentions regarding the closure.

Councillor G Singh shared concerns about the significance and inconvenience caused by the bridge closure. He queried that the initial report from 2019 suggested that the bridge could not be repaired but upon revaluation the repair now seemed feasible and asked for clarification if that was the case.

Jacqui Wheeler explained that her colleague had recently attended the Thames Path Partnership meeting, where it was reported that the Environment Agency was conducting survey work on the bridge, which was currently at the end of its life. Jacqui Wheeler said it was reported that the survey would be completed in the next few weeks and the Environment Agency expected to issue a report by early January to assess refurbishment options. It was noted that monitoring gauges were being installed to assess the structure’s condition, with results expected to guide decision-making within the first few months. Jacqui Wheeler said the bridge was temporarily closed, a public right of way, and an extension to the closure was planned, pending approval. However, concerns had been raised about the safety of the temporary diversion route, prompting the Environment Agency to explore alternative options.

Alan Keene noted he had brought this up at the previous meeting on behalf of Bisham Parish Council due to Bisham being on the diversion route and raised concerns about the bridge’s impact on their community. Alan Keene asked for clarification on who was responsible for the bridge repair due to conflicting information, Jacqui Wheeler confirmed that it was the Environment Agency who held sole responsibility for the bridge’s repair. Alan Keene in response proposed the LAF lobbied strongly to the Environment Agency and potentially Government to address the issue, as it signified a decline in river crossing standards.

Councillor G Singh endorsed Alan Keene’s proposal. He mentioned that in the report it said that funding for a new bridge would need to come from government, and currently there was no funding in place for this. It was noted if they could repair the bridge, it could buy them another five to ten years, but they would need to ensure funding would be available for a new bridge in the future and therefore lobbying now was crucial to secure future funding.

Steve Gillions suggested that they inform Theresa May about their position since she was a keen Rambler and had been a strong lobbyist in the past for similar issues. The Chair suggested they proceed cautiously as he had communicated with Theresa May on other matters and felt they needed to take the initial step of communicating their concerns to the relevant authorities first. The Chair proposed that Jacqui Wheeler and themselves to draft a letter to send to both DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) and the Environment Agency highlighting their concerns and emphasising the LAF’s statutory duty as it was a public right of way. The Chair asked if the LAF was happy for the letter to be drafted and sent right away or they would like it circulated for comment prior to be sent off.

Claire Taylor said she was happy for the letter to be sent without approval but asked Councillor Larcombe about bridges further downstream in RBWM’s jurisdiction and whether they were impacted. The Chair noted that whilst the information may be relevant for understanding the broader implications of the issues, he suggested that they stick with what was on the agenda but could add a necessary paragraph to express concern it may extend up and down the river.

AGREED: The LAF supported lobbying Government and Environment Agency.

ACTION: The Chair and Jacqui Wheeler to draft letter on Temple Footbridge for the LAF.