LEYTONSTONE: Run down footbridges "could be asset"

“THREATENING” vandalised footbridges across a busy main road are barriers to economic growth, it has been claimed.

The two distinctive red footbridges across the A12 road in Leytonstone have been blighted by vandalism and muggers and act as a deterrent to people who may want to move more freely between their homes and local businesses, councillor Ed Northover says.

The Leytonstone resident is now calling for the footbridges, which link Church Lane and Harold Road and Dyers Hall Road and Norman Road, to be cleaned up and improved.

He says residents claim they feel unsafe using the bridges and insists improvements to their lighting and structure would turn them into an asset rather than a “psychological barrier”.

“The foot bridges are in an appalling state,” he said.

“My feeling has been for some time that the A12 has acted as a barrier for people wanting to get around Leytonstone, and the bridges are neither safe nor pleasant to use.

“I would like to see some investment put into them.

“They are quite threatening to people and there are blind spots - you cannot see who is hanging about on them.

Urban Eye, a charity which helps rejuvenate run down and neglected areas in London, is working with Transport for London in an attempt to secure funding for the project.

But they need backing from Waltham Forest Council before it can go ahead.

One resident says she is worried that the police are re-evaluating whether the bridges should be accessed at all.

Michele Sweetman, 55, of Norlington Road, said that if the bridges were improved, more people would use shops in Leytonstone town centre.

She added: “I think they can be a great asset to Leytonstone if they are given some attention.

“They are very narrow and hard to see out of and they are very intimidating to use at night.

“At the moment, I just want to avoid them. They are seriously dangerous places and some funding would make a huge difference in the numbers that use them.”

Click here to follow the Waltham Forest Guardian on Twitter

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:28pm Tue 29 Jun 10

rubberneck says...

Totally agree, I have walked across them and it is frightening, even more than the old iron ones.
Totally agree, I have walked across them and it is frightening, even more than the old iron ones. rubberneck

8:34pm Tue 29 Jun 10

Techno2 says...

They are a symptom of the corruption and ineptitude of this two-star rotten borough. The council doesn't do the basics right, they would rather waste our money on fat cat salaries and fripperies, turn a blind eye to crime and corruption and then hire spin merchants at public expense to tell us all what a fine a place it is.
They are a symptom of the corruption and ineptitude of this two-star rotten borough. The council doesn't do the basics right, they would rather waste our money on fat cat salaries and fripperies, turn a blind eye to crime and corruption and then hire spin merchants at public expense to tell us all what a fine a place it is. Techno2

8:58pm Tue 29 Jun 10

rubberneck says...

Techno2 wrote:
They are a symptom of the corruption and ineptitude of this two-star rotten borough. The council doesn't do the basics right, they would rather waste our money on fat cat salaries and fripperies, turn a blind eye to crime and corruption and then hire spin merchants at public expense to tell us all what a fine a place it is.
One only has to go round the abortion of a one way system in Church lane to get very depressed after all the years of disruption putting the road through to 'ease traffic' Utter chaos.
[quote][p][bold]Techno2[/bold] wrote: They are a symptom of the corruption and ineptitude of this two-star rotten borough. The council doesn't do the basics right, they would rather waste our money on fat cat salaries and fripperies, turn a blind eye to crime and corruption and then hire spin merchants at public expense to tell us all what a fine a place it is.[/p][/quote]One only has to go round the abortion of a one way system in Church lane to get very depressed after all the years of disruption putting the road through to 'ease traffic' Utter chaos. rubberneck

9:10pm Tue 29 Jun 10

md-j says...

At last night's Leyton & Whipps Cross Community Council, a presentation was made of proposals for repaving and signing 'walking routes' to the Games site from Leyton, including c.£1.5 million for the short route from the Tube station. It emerged that nothing is intended to improve the station itself, not even to reopen the side access for the duration of the Games, which many of us feel is a major safety problem: when pressed on this, and the numbers expected to access the Games via Leyton, the officer retreated to the line that it wasn't the Olympics that was really driving these improvements , but the legacy to us lucky people afterwards. The official line is that only an insignificant number of non-local people will go to the site via Leyton Tube. This didn't explain why it was only routes and streets near the Games that seemed to merit the funding.
When we see the condition of infrastructure only a few years old in this Borough, as in the story above, the answers seemed less than convincing.
At last night's Leyton & Whipps Cross Community Council, a presentation was made of proposals for repaving and signing 'walking routes' to the Games site from Leyton, including c.£1.5 million for the short route from the Tube station. It emerged that nothing is intended to improve the station itself, not even to reopen the side access for the duration of the Games, which many of us feel is a major safety problem: when pressed on this, and the numbers expected to access the Games via Leyton, the officer retreated to the line that it wasn't the Olympics that was really driving these improvements , but the legacy to us lucky people afterwards. The official line is that only an insignificant number of non-local people will go to the site via Leyton Tube. This didn't explain why it was only routes and streets near the Games that seemed to merit the funding. When we see the condition of infrastructure only a few years old in this Borough, as in the story above, the answers seemed less than convincing. md-j

10:34pm Tue 29 Jun 10

techiebabe says...

Things have changed so much; the area is so divided since the M11 link was built. Residents' groups are working hard to forge links but ultimately you need to cross the M11 link somehow and we need to find a way for it to feel safe for everyone, including our older and more vulnerable citizens. I'd love to hear Ed's plans but I fear that ultimately the divide is hard to manage.
Things have changed so much; the area is so divided since the M11 link was built. Residents' groups are working hard to forge links but ultimately you need to cross the M11 link somehow and we need to find a way for it to feel safe for everyone, including our older and more vulnerable citizens. I'd love to hear Ed's plans but I fear that ultimately the divide is hard to manage. techiebabe

10:40pm Tue 29 Jun 10

Redfox says...

Can MD-J answer whether the CC assembly heard anything about the 'quiet' TFL/ODA proposal that: for the duration* of the Games Leyton Station will only be open for disembarking passengers because of the safety concerns?
* maybe timed for events such as from 1pm.
If not, maybe somebody should raise the question at the next CC. Or did not Farooq Querishi not produce his statement about the Station concerns as promised in May?

What about Draper's Fields playing fields site - any response to that "being used as a VIP's car park for 2012?
Can MD-J answer whether the CC assembly heard anything about the 'quiet' TFL/ODA proposal that: for the duration* of the Games Leyton Station will only be open for disembarking passengers because of the safety concerns? * maybe timed for events such as from 1pm. If not, maybe somebody should raise the question at the next CC. Or did not Farooq Querishi not produce his statement about the Station concerns as promised in May? What about Draper's Fields playing fields site - any response to that "being used as a VIP's car park for 2012? Redfox

1:44pm Wed 30 Jun 10

Earle Martin says...

"The Leytonstone resident is now calling for the footbridges, which link Church Lane and Harold Road and Dyers Hall Road and Norman Road, to be cleaned up and improved."

As if all the other Leytonstone residents haven't? Although Mr. Northover did mention the issue prominently in his election literature, which is appreciated.

"Urban Eye, a charity which helps rejuvenate run down and neglected areas in London, is working with Transport for London in an attempt to secure funding for the project. But they need backing from Waltham Forest Council before it can go ahead."

Really? I've been asking the Council about this, usually at Community Council meetings, for several years. Councillor Loakes was always supportive of the notion of refurbishing the bridges and explained that it largely depended on TfL providing funding. What kind of "backing" does the Council need to give?

Incidentally, last year I managed to get the issue raised at the Mayor's Question Time. You can read Boris's response at http://mqt.london.go
v.uk/mqt/public/ques
tion.do?id=28138 .
"The Leytonstone resident is now calling for the footbridges, which link Church Lane and Harold Road and Dyers Hall Road and Norman Road, to be cleaned up and improved." As if all the other Leytonstone residents haven't? Although Mr. Northover did mention the issue prominently in his election literature, which is appreciated. "Urban Eye, a charity which helps rejuvenate run down and neglected areas in London, is working with Transport for London in an attempt to secure funding for the project. But they need backing from Waltham Forest Council before it can go ahead." Really? I've been asking the Council about this, usually at Community Council meetings, for several years. Councillor Loakes was always supportive of the notion of refurbishing the bridges and explained that it largely depended on TfL providing funding. What kind of "backing" does the Council need to give? Incidentally, last year I managed to get the issue raised at the Mayor's Question Time. You can read Boris's response at http://mqt.london.go v.uk/mqt/public/ques tion.do?id=28138 . Earle Martin

2:32pm Wed 30 Jun 10

jef costello says...

I'm always bigging up E11 to people looking for somwhere to move - but wouldn't be at all surprised if the bridges were a factor in why the long-awaited gentrification of Leytonstone hasn't happened.

The bridges are an embarrassment - literally. Who wants to show Leytonstone round to visiting friends when you have to negotiate these horrors? Whether or not they do in fact harbour ne'er-do-wells, they certainly look like they do.
I'm always bigging up E11 to people looking for somwhere to move - but wouldn't be at all surprised if the bridges were a factor in why the long-awaited gentrification of Leytonstone hasn't happened. The bridges are an embarrassment - literally. Who wants to show Leytonstone round to visiting friends when you have to negotiate these horrors? Whether or not they do in fact harbour ne'er-do-wells, they certainly look like they do. jef costello

3:29pm Wed 30 Jun 10

mr rusty says...

"Things have changed so much; the area is so divided since the M11 link was built.".............
...........it was always thus I'm afraid techiebabe, because of the central line. If my memory serves me right, and it's a while since the M11 link was opened, there are now actually more crossing points than there were when it was only the central line doing the dividing. There was the Leytonstone station foot underpass which obviously is still there, then the road underpass with the sharp bend and steep climb that was just down from the station, and then I think there was only the footbridge at Norman road until you got to Cathall road......but then again my memory may be wrong.
"Things have changed so much; the area is so divided since the M11 link was built."............. ...........it was always thus I'm afraid techiebabe, because of the central line. If my memory serves me right, and it's a while since the M11 link was opened, there are now actually more crossing points than there were when it was only the central line doing the dividing. There was the Leytonstone station foot underpass which obviously is still there, then the road underpass with the sharp bend and steep climb that was just down from the station, and then I think there was only the footbridge at Norman road until you got to Cathall road......but then again my memory may be wrong. mr rusty

3:37pm Wed 30 Jun 10

mr rusty says...

The current bridges only need the perspex covers removing and then being open to the elements to improve them immensely. At the moment they are too closed in and obviously a nice and dry place for scummers to hang about in- open them out so they're less inviting to hang about on, and then also anyone who does loiter can can be seen.
The current bridges only need the perspex covers removing and then being open to the elements to improve them immensely. At the moment they are too closed in and obviously a nice and dry place for scummers to hang about in- open them out so they're less inviting to hang about on, and then also anyone who does loiter can can be seen. mr rusty

4:48pm Wed 30 Jun 10

Helen, Walthamstow says...

Saying "We told you so" is not, I realise, particularly productive. Nevertheless, it is a fact that many of us who gave evidence at the two public inquiries into the M11 Link said that the road would divide Leytonstone in a way that the Central Line itself did not. We argued for what was known as the Lister-Goldsmith plan - a covered deep cut(not tunnelled) road with a park on top, even some buildings, keeping the access across at ground level.

What we have now is a double barrier, and the road is in a dip - quite deep at several points.

These two footbridges have never worked. They should have been open and they should have been much wider. They should have been properly lit. In the end, they were thrown up almost as an afterthought when the budget had already been blown because of the long years of delay which preceded the start of the building programme.

Good luck to Mr Northover - I hope he manages to move the issue on. But I hope that before anything is done there is proper public consultation so that people can say what would make them feel happier using the bridges.
Saying "We told you so" is not, I realise, particularly productive. Nevertheless, it is a fact that many of us who gave evidence at the two public inquiries into the M11 Link said that the road would divide Leytonstone in a way that the Central Line itself did not. We argued for what was known as the Lister-Goldsmith plan - a covered deep cut(not tunnelled) road with a park on top, even some buildings, keeping the access across at ground level. What we have now is a double barrier, and the road is in a dip - quite deep at several points. These two footbridges have never worked. They should have been open and they should have been much wider. They should have been properly lit. In the end, they were thrown up almost as an afterthought when the budget had already been blown because of the long years of delay which preceded the start of the building programme. Good luck to Mr Northover - I hope he manages to move the issue on. But I hope that before anything is done there is proper public consultation so that people can say what would make them feel happier using the bridges. Helen, Walthamstow

5:41pm Wed 30 Jun 10

Tom Thumb says...

mr rusty wrote:
The current bridges only need the perspex covers removing and then being open to the elements to improve them immensely. At the moment they are too closed in and obviously a nice and dry place for scummers to hang about in- open them out so they're less inviting to hang about on, and then also anyone who does loiter can can be seen.
Mr Rusty is right. In the short term this is the solution. Both bridges are claustrophobic and threatening. Making them open like the one by Gainsborough Road would make them a lot more attractive. Also get rid of the perspex panels, which are ugly and grafiti spattered. Replace them with metal. The Gainsborough Road bridge has no grafiti.

In the long term all these bridges need redesigning and rebuilding, need making wider, and need CCTV.
[quote][p][bold]mr rusty[/bold] wrote: The current bridges only need the perspex covers removing and then being open to the elements to improve them immensely. At the moment they are too closed in and obviously a nice and dry place for scummers to hang about in- open them out so they're less inviting to hang about on, and then also anyone who does loiter can can be seen.[/p][/quote]Mr Rusty is right. In the short term this is the solution. Both bridges are claustrophobic and threatening. Making them open like the one by Gainsborough Road would make them a lot more attractive. Also get rid of the perspex panels, which are ugly and grafiti spattered. Replace them with metal. The Gainsborough Road bridge has no grafiti. In the long term all these bridges need redesigning and rebuilding, need making wider, and need CCTV. Tom Thumb

10:07pm Wed 30 Jun 10

md-j says...

redfox,
'Can MD-J answer whether the CC assembly heard anything about the 'quiet' TFL/ODA proposal that: for the duration* of the Games Leyton Station will only be open for disembarking passengers because of the safety concerns?'

Just vague noises that stations can be closed if concerns arise. This is hopelessly inadequate: anyone who can read a map will be tempted to sidestep hordes of people by dodging Stratford. Even if the Heysel-type incident that some of us fear is averted, that's not much consolation to people who may have come halfway round the world to miss an event at the last minute due to cheeseparing and blind lack of foresight by the authorities .
Cllr Qureishi has been told emphatically that the side entrance will NOT be kept open, even for the short duration of the Games, for which the staffing costs would be minimal.
My take on this is that, since the Kings Cross fire, all tube stations are meant to have more than one entrance and exit, so TfL are already breaking the law. Should we all write to the HSE?
redfox, 'Can MD-J answer whether the CC assembly heard anything about the 'quiet' TFL/ODA proposal that: for the duration* of the Games Leyton Station will only be open for disembarking passengers because of the safety concerns?' Just vague noises that stations can be closed if concerns arise. This is hopelessly inadequate: anyone who can read a map will be tempted to sidestep hordes of people by dodging Stratford. Even if the Heysel-type incident that some of us fear is averted, that's not much consolation to people who may have come halfway round the world to miss an event at the last minute due to cheeseparing and blind lack of foresight by the authorities . Cllr Qureishi has been told emphatically that the side entrance will NOT be kept open, even for the short duration of the Games, for which the staffing costs would be minimal. My take on this is that, since the Kings Cross fire, all tube stations are meant to have more than one entrance and exit, so TfL are already breaking the law. Should we all write to the HSE? md-j

11:31pm Wed 30 Jun 10

rubberneck says...

Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Saying "We told you so" is not, I realise, particularly productive. Nevertheless, it is a fact that many of us who gave evidence at the two public inquiries into the M11 Link said that the road would divide Leytonstone in a way that the Central Line itself did not. We argued for what was known as the Lister-Goldsmith plan - a covered deep cut(not tunnelled) road with a park on top, even some buildings, keeping the access across at ground level. What we have now is a double barrier, and the road is in a dip - quite deep at several points. These two footbridges have never worked. They should have been open and they should have been much wider. They should have been properly lit. In the end, they were thrown up almost as an afterthought when the budget had already been blown because of the long years of delay which preceded the start of the building programme. Good luck to Mr Northover - I hope he manages to move the issue on. But I hope that before anything is done there is proper public consultation so that people can say what would make them feel happier using the bridges.
I agree Madam, you are correct and you will know that they dug under the posh Wanstead bit and covered it over and put the Oak back on and built posher walls and you hardly notice the road is there but scrimped with the Leytonstone bit as it was er....... Leytonstone.
[quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: Saying "We told you so" is not, I realise, particularly productive. Nevertheless, it is a fact that many of us who gave evidence at the two public inquiries into the M11 Link said that the road would divide Leytonstone in a way that the Central Line itself did not. We argued for what was known as the Lister-Goldsmith plan - a covered deep cut(not tunnelled) road with a park on top, even some buildings, keeping the access across at ground level. What we have now is a double barrier, and the road is in a dip - quite deep at several points. These two footbridges have never worked. They should have been open and they should have been much wider. They should have been properly lit. In the end, they were thrown up almost as an afterthought when the budget had already been blown because of the long years of delay which preceded the start of the building programme. Good luck to Mr Northover - I hope he manages to move the issue on. But I hope that before anything is done there is proper public consultation so that people can say what would make them feel happier using the bridges.[/p][/quote]I agree Madam, you are correct and you will know that they dug under the posh Wanstead bit and covered it over and put the Oak back on and built posher walls and you hardly notice the road is there but scrimped with the Leytonstone bit as it was er....... Leytonstone. rubberneck

2:10pm Thu 1 Jul 10

marsdan says...

Like all trainee politicians North over is try to get his name in the paper.
But I have noticed that all the things he says I have been reading about them in the Liberal dem Focus ( fight the flights, Church lane, and the footbridges).
Try and offer something new Mr. Northover and not steel other peoples work may be the way for would.
Like all trainee politicians North over is try to get his name in the paper. But I have noticed that all the things he says I have been reading about them in the Liberal dem Focus ( fight the flights, Church lane, and the footbridges). Try and offer something new Mr. Northover and not steel other peoples work may be the way for would. marsdan

7:59pm Thu 1 Jul 10

Mr Bernard says...

Marsdan,

If I remember correctly...only a few months ago Waltham Forest council was run in a coalition between Labour and the Lib Dems therefore they actually had a say in council policy.

Yet in Leytonstone we still have that one way system which kills trade by making people avoid the high rd like a plague, these neglected footbridges amongst a host of other issues.

So exactly what did the Liberals (as well as Labour) do for Leytonstone? If four years was not enough than how long did they need?

Some comments mention gentrification which Waltham Forest Council does everything in its power to stop happening in places like Leytonstone as they know these new residents may not be the 'put up and shut up' type that the council has become used to and so see them as a threat who may have the power to push them off their pedestals.

There is no reason why Leytonstone should not be more like its neighbours Wanstead and Woodford.

Mr Northover may be a 'trainee politician' but at least he has a genuine interest in the area which cannot be said for most of our councillors, some or one in particular, who helped to cause the mess that is Leytonstone!
Marsdan, If I remember correctly...only a few months ago Waltham Forest council was run in a coalition between Labour and the Lib Dems therefore they actually had a say in council policy. Yet in Leytonstone we still have that one way system which kills trade by making people avoid the high rd like a plague, these neglected footbridges amongst a host of other issues. So exactly what did the Liberals (as well as Labour) do for Leytonstone? If four years was not enough than how long did they need? Some comments mention gentrification which Waltham Forest Council does everything in its power to stop happening in places like Leytonstone as they know these new residents may not be the 'put up and shut up' type that the council has become used to and so see them as a threat who may have the power to push them off their pedestals. There is no reason why Leytonstone should not be more like its neighbours Wanstead and Woodford. Mr Northover may be a 'trainee politician' but at least he has a genuine interest in the area which cannot be said for most of our councillors, some or one in particular, who helped to cause the mess that is Leytonstone! Mr Bernard

3:26am Fri 2 Jul 10

Earle Martin says...

"Yet in Leytonstone we still have that one way system which kills trade by making people avoid the high rd like a plague"
.
When are people going to stop flogging this old chestnut (to mix metaphors a bit)? People do _not_ avoid the High Road because of the one way system. They avoid it because most of it is, frankly, a shower of crap. This red herring is constantly dragged out at the slightest opportunity by people whose only real interest is being able to drive faster, not to resuscitate a moribund trade environment.
"Yet in Leytonstone we still have that one way system which kills trade by making people avoid the high rd like a plague" . When are people going to stop flogging this old chestnut (to mix metaphors a bit)? People do _not_ avoid the High Road because of the one way system. They avoid it because most of it is, frankly, a shower of crap. This red herring is constantly dragged out at the slightest opportunity by people whose only real interest is being able to drive faster, not to resuscitate a moribund trade environment. Earle Martin

7:24am Fri 2 Jul 10

rubberneck says...

They covered in the bridges to stop yobs chucking bricks and slabs onto the passing traffic below by the way.
They covered in the bridges to stop yobs chucking bricks and slabs onto the passing traffic below by the way. rubberneck

12:34pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Mr Bernard says...

Earle,

While I am well aware that the High Road was dying long before the one way system was put in place...it strikes me as odd that the council (yet again a Labour council) would put a system in place which would act as the final nail in the coffin!

As you put it "a shower of crap" is due to the types of businesses the council has allowed to open up in the High Road and the saturation of the same types of shops all within a small space. If the council encouraged more diversity in the types of businesses that were placed there then people would actually brave the unneeded road system to shop here.

While I understand your point Earle, I do think that the one way system has to go if we want new, more diverse shops to come to Leytonstone. More parking needs to be encouraged too.
Earle, While I am well aware that the High Road was dying long before the one way system was put in place...it strikes me as odd that the council (yet again a Labour council) would put a system in place which would act as the final nail in the coffin! As you put it "a shower of crap" is due to the types of businesses the council has allowed to open up in the High Road and the saturation of the same types of shops all within a small space. If the council encouraged more diversity in the types of businesses that were placed there then people would actually brave the unneeded road system to shop here. While I understand your point Earle, I do think that the one way system has to go if we want new, more diverse shops to come to Leytonstone. More parking needs to be encouraged too. Mr Bernard

4:41pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Earle Martin says...

rubberneck - if that were true, why is the Gainsborough Road/Kingswood Road footbridge not covered then?

Mr. Bernard - I agree that the Council should have been more proactive in regulating the kinds of businesses on the High Road. How many more minimarkets do we need? (At least two of them opened near Leytonstone Station and went bust within a year.) Not to mention hairdressers and estate agents.
.
I do understand that there are issues with the one-way system, and I'm glad we can agree that they're not the be-all and end-all of concerns about the High Road. Many people have tried to reduce it to such a black and white issue and it's clearly more complex than that.
rubberneck - if that were true, why is the Gainsborough Road/Kingswood Road footbridge not covered then? Mr. Bernard - I agree that the Council should have been more proactive in regulating the kinds of businesses on the High Road. How many more minimarkets do we need? (At least two of them opened near Leytonstone Station and went bust within a year.) Not to mention hairdressers and estate agents. . I do understand that there are issues with the one-way system, and I'm glad we can agree that they're not the be-all and end-all of concerns about the High Road. Many people have tried to reduce it to such a black and white issue and it's clearly more complex than that. Earle Martin

8:46pm Sun 4 Jul 10

rubberneck says...

Earle Martin wrote:
rubberneck - if that were true, why is the Gainsborough Road/Kingswood Road footbridge not covered then? Mr. Bernard - I agree that the Council should have been more proactive in regulating the kinds of businesses on the High Road. How many more minimarkets do we need? (At least two of them opened near Leytonstone Station and went bust within a year.) Not to mention hairdressers and estate agents. . I do understand that there are issues with the one-way system, and I'm glad we can agree that they're not the be-all and end-all of concerns about the High Road. Many people have tried to reduce it to such a black and white issue and it's clearly more complex than that.
Because they have lots of CCTV there.
[quote][p][bold]Earle Martin[/bold] wrote: rubberneck - if that were true, why is the Gainsborough Road/Kingswood Road footbridge not covered then? Mr. Bernard - I agree that the Council should have been more proactive in regulating the kinds of businesses on the High Road. How many more minimarkets do we need? (At least two of them opened near Leytonstone Station and went bust within a year.) Not to mention hairdressers and estate agents. . I do understand that there are issues with the one-way system, and I'm glad we can agree that they're not the be-all and end-all of concerns about the High Road. Many people have tried to reduce it to such a black and white issue and it's clearly more complex than that.[/p][/quote]Because they have lots of CCTV there. rubberneck

8:08pm Tue 6 Jul 10

Earle Martin says...

"Because they have lots of CCTV there."
.
You're a fantasist and a liar. There is no CCTV covering that bridge. None.
.
Please stop posting here, crawl back under whatever rock you emerged from, and stay there.
"Because they have lots of CCTV there." . You're a fantasist and a liar. There is no CCTV covering that bridge. None. . Please stop posting here, crawl back under whatever rock you emerged from, and stay there. Earle Martin

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree