Plans to demolish York’s Bridge unveiled

Plans are afoot to demolish York’s Bridge in Pelsall.

Plans for a new bridge

The bridge, which is next to the Fingerpost Pub, on Norton Road, could be replaced with a wider one alongside.

The plan, right, is now with Walsall Council’s planning department.

Click on the image if you want to see a larger version.

Common People would love to know your thoughts on this.

Email pelsallnews@gmail.com or leave comments below.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Home Page, News and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Plans to demolish York’s Bridge unveiled

  1. stymaster says:

    I’d hate to see the old bridge go, just like I hated to see the next one up in Lime Lane go. York’s bridge is perfectly safe with appropriate caution, even with a double-decker coming over it, and the old bridge up by the boatyard was a cracker: drive right and you could get over it quickly, safely, and have a bit of fun, the new one is dull to drive, and less characterful to walk under.

    All the proper old bridges are going: Clayhanger went in 1994. I hope they don’t hit Blackcock Bridge too.

    • CommonPeople says:

      It would be a terrible shame to see it go. It can be a bit hairy driving over it, but maybe installation of traffic lights would make it safer.
      Blackcock Bridge is like a rollercoaster ride – fab bridge!

      • stymaster says:

        Clayhanger bridge pre-1994 was steeper than Blackcock, and when I was a teenager had traffic lights. Made York’s bridge (and Blackcock) look tame, trust me.

        The key thing when driving is appropriate care: all of these bridges are/were safe if treated properly.

  2. janet says:

    All it needs is traffic lights.

    Or if they match it up with the one at Lime Lane they will have created a perfect through road for heavy vehicles and wouldn’t that be handy for the opencast that they want.

    Let this bridge lose its character and the rest of Pelsall will follow.

    • Paul Vincent says:

      Not so sure about that – after all, there’s already a suitable through road from that direction which HGVs could already use – the one from Brownhills to Pelsall. I used to be terrified of crossing York Bridge when I was a kid, since there’s no room for a footpath. Used to feel I was taking my life in my hands just to get to the other side of the canal. It’s a beautiful old bridge, but my mind still shouts “deathtrap!” whenever I see it, even if that’s a hangover from my childhood days playing on the top common!

  3. Paul Vincent says:

    Seems like most of the grumbles are from boy racers who viewed the old bridges as some kind of adventure playground. No loss, then.

  4. Sorry, I have no love for any of these bridges, but anyone who describes Stymaster as a ‘Boy racer’ is very, very wrong. I know what they mean; they add character to their area but they are a pain in many respects.
    What surprises me is that nobody has noticed why, in an era of cuts, this is deemed necessary.
    WMBC have marked out the land over the bridge on the left – opposite the Royal Oak – for mineral abstraction. The bridge is being improved to carry HGV traffic for it. You may want to get your campaigning pants on.

    Best wishes

    Bob

    • Paul Vincent says:

      I think Janet’s earlier comment, which included a reference to “opencast”, indicates someone else DID notice, Bob! And, yes, my “Boy Racers” crack was a bit hasty – it was mainly sparked by one particular comment on a different blog (though I wasn’t aiming it at Stymaster him/herself). It’s all very clever, though: hard to justify protesting about a bridge “improvement” on the grounds of why we suspect it’s being done. And then, in turn, once it’s been “improved”, that weakens the case when we come to protest about the opencast proposal when it comes (as it inevitably will). Sneaky blighters these mineral extraction types.

      • stymaster says:

        Hmm.

        I know the comment you mean. That commenter is far from a boy racer (he’s a very capable ex-motorcyclist in his late 40s, and drives tens of thousands of miles a year, accident free for as long as I can remember) and neither am I. I sometimes enjoy driving, and driving quickly, though less and less around here, as all the enjoyment either gets engineered out or ruined by traffic density and dawdlers that drive everywhere, be it NSL roads or a housing estate, at 40mph.

        There’s a simple rule: only ever go as fast as you can see to be clear. You’ll actually find me driving at far below the speed limit in many places, above it elsewhere. Current road safety education focuses on speed and speed alone as a number, sadly.

        My point about the old Lime Lane bridge for driving was that provided you treated it with respect you could get over it safely, within the speed limit, and have some fun. An approach in 3rd at well less than half the speed limit, and hard out of the exit provided a little entertainment without any danger.

        York’s bridge is also perfectly safe at an appropriate speed (i.e: slow enough to see what else is coming over it).

        I agree with Bob and Janet’s observations: The bridge has been there since the 19th century, and still seems adequate to me: It’s (just) possible to get over with a double-decker coming the other way, so why is it felt necessary to replace it now.

        There’s always an ulterior motive: The people that campaigned for Blackcock bridge to be closed on ‘safety’ grounds a few years ago actually got all upset after moving into new houses nearby without realising that many drivers sound their horn at the summit because you can’t actually see over. Never mind that the bridge has been there for nearly 150 years and the house for 5.

  5. CommonPeople says:

    Would it be an option to keep York’s Bridge as a pedestrian/cyclist bridge if the authority is intent on building a new one?

    Someone also asked if the bridge was listed or protected. I don’t know …

    I like these old bridges, but appreciate I am wearing my rose-tinted specs with this. When I cycled, it was a complete nightmare to negotiate.

  6. jayne says:

    Couldn’t it go to the black country museum? Shame to loose it altogether?

    I agree the road/bridge needs widening as I personally think its not safe especially at night and traffic lights will cause traffic delays back into the village.

    To me it seems that the mining will go ahead and we’ll loose more greenspace. Unfortunately money talks and the big rich boys always wins in today’s get rich quick society! Still a shame to loose it but isn’t that progress? I rest my case because personally I can’t change policy makers choices!

  7. jane says:

    i’m 45 lived in pelsall all my life don’t really like it but carn’t afford to move seen so many houses threw up i hate it here and this bridge buisness is the icing on the cake.it should just be repaired i drive over it daily i’ve never had a problem being a mere woman drive.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s