The Isle of Wight Council will press ahead with the idea of a Medina Bridge, despite potentially prohibitive costs.
A feasibility study to understand the potential cost-benefit analysis for a crossing over the River Medina was undertaken recently by Hampshire County Council.
Isle of Wight Council documents say the findings from the study has indicated while it would be possible to build a bridge, the cost and environmental impact of it would make funding such a scheme ‘prohibitive’ .
Councillor Dave Stewart, leader of the Isle of Wight Council, has said he is totally in favour of a bridge as it would be a positive infrastructure development, giving people better and quicker access across the Island, alleviating some of the pressures in Newport.
He’s said:
“I will be advocating this in the coming months as I think that is the right thing to do.
“A number of options have been suggested, it is all about cost and analysis but I don’t just consider the costs and I think we need to look at the social and environmental value of these things.
“We are not saying it would be an alternative to the floating bridge but if we were to have a bridge there now, certainly some of the traffic issues into Newport, the East and West Wight would be alleviated.”
Article continues below this advertisement
The report also recommended a wider study of traffic flows and transport provision would be required to determine whether a crossing would be the best option.
Cllr Julie Jones-Evans, ward representative for Newport Central, argues whether the bridge is needed because as a council and a community, the plan was to have fewer vehicles on the roads. She has said:
“I am very much looking forward to the outcome of the feasibility study to having rail links between Newport and Ryde or some sort of other public transport link — I think that is where we need to be going.”
Responding to her comments, Cllr Stewart has said the government’s transport secretary, Grant Schapps, does not see cycling as an alternative to cars and Queen Victoria did not see the floating bridge as an alternative to a proper crossing.
“Isle of Wight Council documents say the findings from the study has indicated while it would be possible to build a bridge, the cost and environmental impact of it would make funding such a scheme ‘prohibitive’ “.
The cost and environmental impact of the floating farce are also “prohibitive” and that’s without the economic impact to local business etc, yet the council is in denial about this and insults the islands taxpayers by continuing to waste money on it.
A bridge is a no brainer and it must happen.
The millions extra they gain in thousands of new homes council tax will, perhaps help fund such as they ruin this Island by en masse building.
Let’s hope though they allow some of that ‘new money’ for the ‘knock on’ costs from such developments, such as more Police needed, more cash for A&E for victims of the increase in stabbing, r ape, m ugging, gun shot wounds, acid attacks, arson, and all the other ‘delights’ which importing those with no roots here will undoubtedly bring as the ‘inner city comes to the seaside’.
Watch, and learn, when it is too late.
Vote this uncaring council out next time..
Yep. Could have offset the £6 M that has been fritted away on FB6 to build it….
Prohibitively expensive? That’s got to be a joke in the present climate of its broke and keeps breaking again and again!
all talk – there won’t be a bridge
it would take years and years of planning, discussion, appeals, refusals, re-appeals, funding, arguments and tax payer funded meetings for councillors to financially feast on for as long as possible. Just getting an environmental impact assessment submitted will take them an absolute age and no doubt cost a fortune.
don’t hold your breath for this to happen and be open this side of the year 2030
As you say, probably all talk – no doubt designed to deflect attention away from the floating farce saga, make us feel that the council are actually listening to the issue and doing something about it.
Yes it will take forever, but it IS something that should happen – its a bit of a no brainer really.
This will never happen why didn’t council put the money they have wasted on floating bridge towards a proper bridge crazy council
The headline does not match the story. If it is financially prohibitive then its not happening. Is this a diversion tactic from the council to take attention from the non floating bridge? Or does Dave Stewart think he can get some money from central Gov? Be sure if he does Seldom Seen Bob will claim it as his victory.
£16 million squandered on St Mary’s roundabout and the floating skip. Those funds would have made a decent hole in the cost of a bridge. And by the time they waste another £9 million putting the roundabout back when they realise it didn’t work, they could have pretty much paid for a bridge.
There must be a few villages around the country that are missing their idiot. They all came here to work for the council.
My thoughts exactly but sadly they will never put the roundabout back as that would be admitting they were so wrong about st marys.
The old boys in construction say that saunders way in east cowes was originally built as a bridge approach and a feasibility study done way back. More money wasted back then.
For £16M they could have built a yarmouth style bridge in place of the floating bridge I recon.
It is shocking, that in times of warfare, blown up bridges were constructed, by engineers, under enemy fire, and with little of the technology we now have, nor the use of computers, ground analysis skills, and modern materials.
The railways built over 100 years ago were cut through mountains in solid rock with no power tools. They made solid land over miles of bog and swamp, no digger, lorries etc.
YET we can’t span a narrow river by building a couple of short piers each side, and placing a swinging central section to allow a few boats through once in a while.
Disgraceful, sack all of this useless council. Vote them OUT
Cllr Julie Jones-Evans, ward representative for Newport Central, argues whether the bridge is needed because as a council and a community, the plan was to have fewer vehicles on the roads.
That is a totally unrealistic plan. Natural and un natural population growth = more cars on the roads.
Agreed. What planet is this fool on?
Planet FB6, in stationary orbit ‘somewhere’ in the Medina Galaxy, even now about to disappear into a black hole.
No the Gov know that as the population increases then cars cannot keep up the same growth as people as roads cannot cope. They have an answer. But need 5g first to be rolled out.
The answer is, driverless battery taxis for public use. So, instead of as now driving your car to work, leaving it till home time for eight hours, then driving it back, leaving it on a road for the next sixteen hours, and doing the same next day etc etc YOU will be instead just order a driverless EV to pick you up, pay for it on your phone, get given a code to car access, it will take you to work or wherever, wait whilst you shop etc, then once you have finished it will drive off to the next customer.
When needing charging it will go to its out of town charging station, along with hundreds of others to self charge, then return for service when needed.
That way no more streets lined with cars, no ‘how are we to all have room for chargers?’ as we won’t ALL have too.
The wealthy will own private cars, and have quiet roads once more to drive on as they wont be littered up with parked private cars for the masses anymore. For the masses will be priced off the road.
Thus the rich get quiet roads, the poor get better individual private cheap cabs to travel in without having to sit with the low lives, as we do now on buses etc. and the fare will cover the loss in revenue of fuel duty road tax etc.
Less accidents as driverless, so stoned, drunk or both will travel safely.
The future for YOUR children, watch and see it gradually ‘roll out’ in the UK
In one of my previous posts I mentioned that in the mid70’s a bridge over the River Medina was being discussed within the council office chambers. Here we are 45 years later that this idea is being talked about. If we had done this then the floating bridge disaster wouldn’t be in the headlines. Also years ago a footbridge over Coppins Bridge was also being discussed . The councils answer to this was ripping up St Mary’s roundabout and installing traffic lights at a very high cost which will not make Coppins Bridge any better. This drawn out episode beggars belief . Can’t wait to see what the increase in our council tax will be.
The council solution to every problem seems to be to install copious amounts of traffic lights everywhere!
Probably they will install some by the floating bridge to ease traffic flow!
Maybe this is how they plan to reduce traffic on the island by making it an unviable mode of transport.
This council will go ahead with this for two reason,
Its our money and NOT theirs.
If its a horrendous failure, they wont have to take the blame.