Barston Bridge Consultation

​

Barston & Eastcote parishioners may wish to state that:

• The consultation material does not treat the options of keeping the bridge open and closing it on an equal footing.

• The survey framing appears to assume closure as a preferred or inevitable outcome, rather than presenting it as one option among others.

• The implications of closure are understated, while the disadvantages of keeping the bridge open are over-emphasised.

• As a result, respondents are not being asked to make an informed choice, which undermines the validity of the consultation.

Suggested phrasing:

“The consultation does not present the options of keeping the bridge open and closing it in a balanced or neutral manner, and therefore does not allow residents to give a properly informed response.”

 

Loss of network resilience and community access

Key points parishioners can make:

• Closure of the bridge would leave the community with only a single vehicular access route, creating a single point of failure.

• Any incident on the remaining route (collision, flooding, fallen tree, utility works, roadworks) would:

  • Cut off the community entirely, or

  • Require very long and impractical diversions.

• Maintaining two access routes is fundamental to resilience, particularly in rural communities where alternatives are limited.

Suggested phrasing:

“Closing the bridge would remove critical network resilience by leaving the community with only one way in and out, creating an unacceptable single point of failure.”

​

3. Emergency services and response times

This is a strong, material issue.

Parishioners may point out that:

• Emergency services rely on route choice and redundancy to maintain response times.

• Bridge closure would:

  • Increase response times for ambulances, fire and police services.

  • Reduce flexibility if the remaining route is obstructed.

• In serious incidents, seconds and minutes matter; forced detours could have life-critical consequences.

• The consultation material does not adequately assess or evidence:

  • Impact on blue-light response times

  • Operational constraints during peak periods or adverse conditions

Suggested phrasing:

“The consultation fails to properly consider the implications of bridge closure for emergency access, response times and operational resilience, which is a critical concern for residents.”

​

4. Daily life, vulnerability and indirect impacts

Residents may also highlight:

• Increased isolation for:

  • Elderly residents

  • People with disabilities or mobility issues

  • Households without access to multiple vehicles

• Longer journeys for:

  • School runs

  • Medical appointments

  • Carers and care providers

• Increased traffic on the remaining route, with:

  • Road safety implications

  • Noise and disturbance

  • Additional wear on infrastructure

• Closure would fundamentally change the character and connectivity of the community, not merely “re-route traffic”.

Suggested phrasing:

“The bridge is not simply a traffic route; it underpins everyday access to services, support networks and community life.”

​

5. How parishioners can frame their responses (important)

Encourage parishioners to:

• Focus on practical consequences, not just preference

• Use real examples:

  • “If the remaining road is blocked…”

  • “In the event of a medical emergency…”

• Explicitly state that the consultation is inadequate as currently framed

• Request that:

  • Both options be assessed equally

  • Emergency service impacts be formally evaluated

  • No decision be taken on the basis of a flawed survey

A strong closing line residents could use:

“Given the unbalanced presentation of options and the failure to properly assess the consequences of closure, the consultation should not be relied upon as a sound basis for decision-making.”

 

HOW TO RESPOND

1. Answer honestly — you are not required to support both options!

You are not obliged to identify benefits of closure if you do not believe they exist.

 

• It is acceptable to state:
  “I do not believe there are benefits to closing the bridge.”

• If you feel any suggested benefits are minor or outweighed by harm, say so clearly.

​

Avoid guessing or inventing advantages simply because the question asks for them.

​

2. Specific examples are more influential than general statements.

 

Where relevant, explain:

 

• How often you use the bridge

• Why you use it (work, school, healthcare, caring responsibilities, business, social connection)

• What would change if it closed (extra distance, time, cost, safety concerns)

Example:  “Closing the bridge would add approximately 25 minutes to my journey to work and require travel on narrower, less safe roads.”

​

3. Consider all types of impact

​

Think beyond convenience alone. Impacts may include:

Community and social impacts

• Isolation of residents

• Access to schools, GP surgeries, hospitals, shops

• Effects on elderly residents, families, or those without cars

Economic impacts

• Local businesses, farms and services

• Tradespeople, deliveries, tourism

• Increased travel costs

Safety and emergency access

• Ambulance, fire and police response times

• Alternative routes in poor weather or flooding

Environmental impacts

• Longer journeys and increased emissions

• Traffic displacement to other villages or rural lanes

• Impacts on walking, cycling or equestrian use

​

4. Think beyond the parish

The bridge serves a wider purpose than individual journeys.

 

You may wish to comment on:

• Connectivity between communities

• Whether closure would simply move traffic problems elsewhere

• Consistency with wider policies (rural sustainability, climate goals, active travel)

 

5. Use free-text boxes fully

Free-text answers are often the most important part of a consultation.

Tips:

 

• Use complete sentences

• Be clear and calm in tone

• Repeat key points if they apply to more than one question (this helps reinforce important themes)

​

6. Be consistent

​

Try to ensure your answers do not contradict each other.

If you oppose closure:

 

• Make sure this is clear throughout your responses

• If you acknowledge a theoretical benefit of closure, explain why it does not outweigh the harm

• ​

7. Remember how consultation responses are used

Responses are often:

 

• Counted and summarised

• Quoted in reports

• Used to justify decisions

​

What you write becomes part of the formal evidence base. Clear, reasoned responses carry more weight than short or ambiguous ones.

 

8. You can submit your own view

​

Each response counts. You do not need technical expertise to take part — lived experience matters.

 

Final reminder

This consultation is a referendum and the majority 51% counts.Thoughtful, well-explained responses help ensure the importance of the bridge is properly understood.

 

​

​

​