Wargrave proposal for a footbridge across the Thames

The article in this week's Henley Standard suggests there is widespread support for the proposed footbridge from Wargrave going across the Thames to Shiplake, but the comments I have received suggest this support is largely from Wargrave, not from Shiplake.

Points that have been made to me include:

• Wargrave residents may wrongly believe that the fields along the river on the Shiplake bank are available for recreational purposes – they are not. The fields are part of a working farm. One of the fields is used by the Wargrave and Shiplake Regatta every summer but is rented by the farm to the Regatta for just those few days each year.
• The Thames Path runs through the fields on the Shiplake side and can already be easily accessed from both Sonning and Henley.
• Parking in the lanes in the vicinity of Shiplake Lock is already a big problem during the summer and a new bridge would exacerbate this with people from out of the area driving to Shiplake to use the bridge, especially if there was a pub at the other end.
• The train service between Wargrave and Shiplake is a prized local resource, and a bridge would take passengers away, reducing its viability.

I would welcome more comments from Shiplake residents – both for and against the proposal – in order that I may properly represent the village should a planning application come forward. I understand that Shiplake Parish Council will also be conducting a village survey on this subject.

Henley Standard article

Posted by: David Bartholomew | 25/04/2021 10:33 am

I don't believe this is nimbyism but common sense. Mill Lane is single track and unmade. Last year post lockdown cars were blocking the lane and the riverbank was strewn with rubbish.Emergency vehicles needed access to attend to people leaping off the railway bridge. I believe the arguments against this proposal are very valid.

Posted by: Erica Thorburn | 28/04/2021 8:05 am

I support a pedestrian footbridge over the river.

Posted by: Janet Thompson | 27/04/2021 7:02 pm

My wife and I are both opposed to the idea of a bridge over the river linking Shiplake and Wargrave. There is a good rail link already and the addition of a bridge would be a waste of money. Cyclists, who should not be using the tow path in any event, can put their bikes on the train if they want to cross to Wargrave. It would also inevitably lead to unwelcome additional parking in Mill Lane where there is insufficient parking with the normal level of dog walkers and visitors as it is.

Posted by: Julian Morse | 26/04/2021 10:13 pm

Dear David, Thank you for your message. We are totally against the bridge proposal. Most Shiplake residents will remember the hordes of youngsters discovering Shiplake last summer with the attendant noise, litter and police involvement. Imagine the effect of the addition of loads of inebriated day trippers coming over the bridge next to the pub from Wargrave. Finally we feel there will be a huge increase in cars parking LEGALLY in Shiplake as well as illegal parking. J.Jasinski

Posted by: Janusz Jasinski | 26/04/2021 7:49 pm

I believe the increase in foot traffic into Lower Shiplake will be detrimental to the village. The road (MIllRoad) is the only access to the village and any increase in pedestrian along this road is surely a heath and safety issue and will only lead to some sort of traffic accident.

Posted by: graham Spearpoint | 26/04/2021 6:05 pm

Regarding cycling a quick Google comes up with the following Most of the Thames Path is a public footpath on which cyclists have no legal right to ride unless they have permission from the landowners - cycling without permission is a trespass offence against landowners. If you choose to cycle by the river, please be aware it is potentially dangerous https://www.visitthames.co.uk/things-to-do/cycling#:~:text=NOTE%3A%20Most%20of%20the%20Thames,is%20a%20potentially%20dangerous%20activity.

Posted by: Michael Ryan | 26/04/2021 4:27 pm

The bridge to Wargrave is long over due and was first mooted, to my knowledge over twenty years ago but was blocked by a certain influential person who wielded more power than he actually had. A pedestrian and bicycle bridge would cut down on traffic and pollution at the car bridges because people could access the other side of the river without driving. Twyford Station would be minutes away by bike rather than half an hour by car.

Posted by: Anthony de Normann | 26/04/2021 3:27 pm

Dear Nicholas, It is not a nonsense as you suggest. I have just walked down the road and the notice put up by the Council next to Mill House states Restricted Byway only. - Private Road - No Vehicle Access except residents. In addition at the gate by the lock there is a sign that states Public Footpath No Cycles. This forum does not permit photos so unfortunately cannot share. Finally I have photos of people diving into the Thames from the Railway line last summer that needs to be addressed.

Posted by: Michael Ryan | 26/04/2021 11:20 am

I wholeheartedly support the proposal. It is nonsense to suggest that Mill Lane is only accessible to the private houses adjoining. It is a RUPP. Everybody has a right to walk, drive and cycle along it. Using the redundant railway bridge piers would be best. There always used to be a ferry providing access across the river. It would be great for residents of Shiplake to be able to walk across the river and enjoy the amenities of Wargrave and vice versa. It would encourage use of the footpaths.

Posted by: Nicholas Blandy | 26/04/2021 10:44 am

In addition and I stand to be corrected, it is not permitted to cycle on the Thames Path. We are now constantly having walks ruined by cyclists running us over and the new bridge would just encourage more cyclists.

Posted by: Michael Ryan | 25/04/2021 11:01 am

Dear David Thank you for this. We live in Mill lane and to add to your objections 1. Mill Lane is a private road with Pot Holes and only access to houses permitted. There is no parking and moreover at the junction with Mill Road it is very tight with people ignoring the yellow lines meaning emergency vehicles cannot get down the lane. 2. Throughout the summer last year copious amounts of rubbish were left on the riverside a danger for animals. Mike Ryan

Posted by: Michael Ryan | 25/04/2021 10:58 am