Hi Brian,

Fact - The consultation document issued by Cumbria County Council document states
"Why is this scheme being looked at
The existing bridge is substandard with very poor approaches and is difficult for pedestrians, let alone cyclists to use".
The access steps are a " considerable barrier for cyclists, people with pushchairs and those with limited mobility"

Opinion
I agree.

Emily feels that it is a ridiculous to talk about the bridge being dangerous. You say that your views are in line with hers.

I respect your views but contend that the current bridge represents by virtue of its steep steps and poor access, a danger to users (pedestrians, cyclists and wheelchair users) travelling from one side of the city to another.

If the bridge does go ahead I hope the county council see fit to include local contractors on the tender list as placing a contract with a company from Manchester or Leed etc. does nothing for the local economy in terms of creating jobs.

To use arguments like that 'A cyclist' then it is only fair to say that every single task we undertake is dangerous. Unfortunately you use the word 'appears' to support your argument which does little more than underline the fact that your point is an opinion rather than a fact. Emilys opinion is in line with my own, the bridge is not dangerous to all who use it as another respondent has claimed. It is however inaccesible to some and the points relating to disabled access are fair. Cyclists however will no doubt be claiming that as they have to get off their bikes to cross the bridge is unfit for purpose. This is little more than a self centred argument and as I expect (just an opinion) they want to be able to cross the bridge without dismounting they will be then also expect to be riding across a bridge shared with pedestians which will create a health & safety hazard as we have all witnessed the iresponsible way in which cyclists ride in Carlisle.

£1 Million think I need to get into the "win a tender for council work" business

Is this the bridge over the railway?, if so, is it not Britishrail should be responsible for it?
So they should foot any bill.

I attended the Currock public meeting (whose community allegedly signed a 600 named petition) and did not see one person with a wheelchair or one cyclist and even those who moan the most did not see one mother with a pram or pushchair. I hope the officers and councillors refer to the Carlisle District Plan which states "Development in areas at risk of flooding on undeveloped land will only be permitted where a Flood Risk Assesment has been submitted with a planning application that confirms with several key issues within the policy. The Environment Agency will also need to be consulted on development proposals which are within or close to boundaries of floodplains.

I totally agree with Graham. I have only ever used the bridge once and would certainly avoid at all cost until it is replaced. Definitely a "danger" to anyone using it.

its not good enough, im a cyclist and dog owner,this bridge is unsuitable full stop.

Fair point, TB but at least you now have your menu and can make your choice.

Yes, there is a question mark as to whether the meal will actually arrive and as to who is going to pick up the tab (if this proposal ever gets off the ground) at the end of the day but you can certainly highlight that concern in your representations.

As for Emily's comment, the council's own consultation document appears to accept that the current bridge is indeed dangerous and certainly describes the bridge as substandard. There have been reports of trip and slip accidents on the steps. There is, I submit, a clear danger to anyone trying to negotiate a pram or buggy up or down those steps. I have not been injured hauling my bicycle (and the bicycles of my two kids) up and down the steps but I am sure that there is a manual handling danger there.

As for disabled access....

I'm sorry to disagree with you Graham but the bridge is not a danger to all who use it. What a ridiculous comment to make.