Viewpoint: Alternative proposal for Maidenhead United stadium solution

Motorists lose out at new-look roundabout

Having had a close up look at the new Holyport Road roundabout junction, my conclusion is that due to the design, pedestrians and cyclists have been given priority and much more, to the detriment of motorists.

The central obelisk has a large space around it, with a white demarcation line for the carriageway.

However, drivers are in many cases, still going over the red inner area, as it’s a natural line.

The outer area is dominated by paths and cycle lanes.

I’m all for promoting cycling and walking, but I have yet to see either a walker or a cyclist using the new dedicated lanes.

I do not understand the logic in this.

On the other hand, drivers have restricted width of exit lanes, due to minimising the width of road for walkers to cross over.

This results in too tight a turn when leaving Holyport Road, to turn left towards Maidenhead.

The near side kerb is difficult to judge, and at night, difficult to see due to poor lighting.

It’s the same situation leaving the roundabout going towards Windsor.

I did say before the work started, it was unnecessary, as the existing set-up wasn’t as bad as made out, and with some simple improvements, could have been made better.

I also said that building a totally new junction may solve certain issues, but could unwittingly throw up unforeseen new ones, which I think is the case.

Traffic flows better, but is it safer and better for drivers? Time will tell.

Bearing in mind it cost £1.3million and caused so much disruption and hold-ups for so many months.

Was it all worth it? I’m not convinced.

The other thing to mention is that in the process of changing the layout, the bus stop lay-by on the Holyport side of Windsor Road has disappeared.

There is a temporary stop 30 yards towards Maidenhead, which may become permanent.

Also, I noticed the post box is covered over and out of use, presumably.

BOB TAVINOR

Hearne Drive

Holyport

Offering a solution for MUFC’s stadium move

The future location of Maidenhead United’s (MUFC) ground has been a concern to many of your readers for a long time.

This letter proposes a solution.

The space available at York Road is too small for modern standards of clubs at Maidenhead United’s level.

A new ground should be situated as close as possible to the town centre and the railway station. In effect, that means it has to be in Braywick Park.

But the Maidenhead Rugby Club ground is already in Braywick Park and a second major ground in the park would seriously diminish its open character.

A further stadium would require a reduction in pitches for the many children who enjoy junior rugby, and for adults who can’t make it into the top side.

Maidenhead Rugby Club (‘MRC’) has 16 seasons left on its lease, and who knows what the local authority will be like at the end of that period?

It seems to me to be a possibility, but no more than that, that the MRC lease will be renewed.

But look what happened to Maidenhead Golf Club when the local authority wanted them out.

Having the hub for both football and rugby at Braywick Park won’t work well from either club’s perspective, and it will require further development of an area intended to be open space.

My company, Summerleaze Ltd, is removing gravel and restoring land at Water Oakley on the Windsor Road, part of which we are prepared to give to MRC for new grounds (just like we gave the land needed to relocate Thames Hospice).

To build the rugby club facility would be expensive.

I have commissioned a preliminary study and the existing rugby clubhouse, changing rooms and ground would be perfectly suitable for football, with minor changes to bring it up to Football Association standards, at relatively trivial cost.

Extra stands would be required either side of the clubhouse.

I believe that MRC would give up their lease at Braywick, provided planning consent was granted for new grounds at Water Oakley and funds were made available for suitable facilities.

By using the rugby club facilities, the football club would avoid a great deal of cost.

The end result would be Braywick Park with a football ground suitable to meet MUFC’s aspirations, with ample junior pitches available for football, and the rugby club at Water Oakley with ample space for their ground and sports fields for junior teams.

Braywick Park would not be further developed except for the provision of two extra stands.

This is a solution which RBWM and MUFC should consider seriously.

This is my proposal, not MRC’s, but I believe that most people would recognise this as a sensible solution for the location of the town’s two premier sporting organisations, without further compromising the openness of Braywick Park.

Over 20 years ago, there were letters of complaint in your paper concerning the state of the ditch that ran through Maidenhead.

I wrote to you and proposed that a meeting should be held.

The result of that meeting is the waterway that runs through Maidenhead and which is generally regarded as a great asset.

I believe that this proposal would be regarded in a similar light 20 years from now, or even in three years’ time when the changes have been completed.

PETER PRIOR

Chairman

Summerleaze Ltd

Questions over water firm’s pipe response

Thames Water’s response to the appeal to remove their redundant low pipe crossing over the waterway (Advertiser, August 1) rather misses the point.

Their spokesperson states simply that they have ‘..a visible pipe crossing programme in place, guided by asset health and public safety risk’.

Their approach is said to prioritise the highest risk assets first.

But what does that mean?

Is it a programme simply to monitor the condition of their visible sewer pipes, or will they commit to removing them when as in this case they have been redundant for many years?

Their own technical investigation reports that a new pumped twin main was laid in the empty Moor Cut channel around 1990, to serve the Green Lane sewage treatment works.

The new twin main replaced the function of the old gravity sewer running along and over York Stream, including the dangerously low pipe crossing by the GWR.

So why, 35 years later, is the old sewer still sitting there, rusting away and a danger to users of the restored waterway?

Thames Water has powers to install sewers over private land in order to deliver its public service.

Public bodies have a duty to cooperate to enable this.

However, in this instance RBWM has been unable to find a wayleave ever consenting to the pipe crossing, which must be well over 60 years old.

Thames Water surely has a clear obligation to safely remove its redundant assets, when they are decommissioned and no longer required.

Taking ownership and committing to the pipe removal as part of their ongoing capital programme can only help Thames Water’s public reputation.

RICHARD DAVENPORT

Chair of trustees

Friends of Maidenhead Waterways

A cheaper solution to get rid of sewer pipe

Apropos the disused Thames Water pipe that is obstructing full use of the waterway, it beggars belief that it should cost £1.1million to remove this section.

You could build a five-bedroom detached house for less than that!

Surely all that’s needed is a gang of well-built chaps with angle grinders and then something to lift out the cut-away section.

I detect the heavy hand of HSE here – or perhaps an estimate deliberately inflated in order to put everyone off.

Or am getting too cynical these days?

Dr B W DARRACOTT

Maidenhead

Digging deeper could solve the problem

Re the article on removing the pipe bridge over York Stream – the cost of which will be £1million.

It would be much cheaper to excavate the river bed under the bridge by 2-3 feet – allowing the water level to reduce and let passing canoes and small boats to navigate under safely.

MDG

Forlease Drive

Maidenhead

Raising questions over third runway proposals

Thomas Woldbye, Heathrow CEO, states that, ‘It has never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow’.

Not necessarily, given that the South is peppered with airports (Advertiser, August 1).

Elsewhere in the article it is reported that the cost is ‘expected’ to be £49billion and the Government's ‘ambition’ is for the runway to be operational within the decade following planning consent.

Really!? Given the experience of HS2, probably not.

One of the matters that should be exercising RBWM is the loss of over 700 houses from two villages near Heathrow that will be demolished.

The distress and disruption to these households will be immeasurable and where are they to go?

Will RBWM be told to increase the already excessive target for housing?

In addition to that, the ecological damage does not bear thinking about.

DIANE HAYES

Hearne Drive

Holyport

Making the most of our short time on Earth

When scientists such as Professor Brian Cox talk of space, they talk in millions, billions, trillions and no doubt quadrillions of years, miles, stars and galaxies.

It certainly puts our lives on this Earth and indeed the Earth itself into perspective.

That is why it’s important we live life to the best of our ability with family and friends and try and spread fun, joy, happiness, justice and peace in the 100 years (if we’re lucky) on this Earth.

For in time, we all come and go.

Businesses come and go; governments come and go; empires come and go and as composers Betsy O’Hogan and Raymond Wallace say:

“Kingdoms may come, kingdoms may go, whatever the end may be.

”Old Father Thames keeps rolling along, down to the mighty sea.”

Which just about sums up our brief life on this Earth.

T D SMITH

Village Road

Dorney

Government failing to listen to our farmers

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the Government is neglecting our borders with the mass uncontrolled immigration that is happening.

At the same time they seem quite prepared to put the country’s food safety at risk.

How can a Government be so openly destructive to its own country?

I believe that farmers in this country produce about 60 per cent of the food we eat.

To tax family farms at a percentage of capital assets e.g. combined harvesters, tractors, land and other farming materials could well bring about ruin for so many of them.

Donald Trump on his latest visit to Scotland literally told our PM what to do, scrap the tax.

This is what Trump had done in the USA.

Instances of farmers taking their own lives in both countries have been quoted as a result of this tax.

We have many such family farms within the Royal Borough Of Windsor and Maidenhead and they couldn't be more vital or important to us all.

It is quite shameful what the Government is doing and in spite of strong protests the farmers are making, the Government appears not to be listening.

I do sincerely hope that our new MP Joshua Reynolds is doing what he can for both of these causes.

Finally, I would just like to say how lucky we are in the Royal Borough to have an independently owned local newspaper in the Maidenhead Advertiser.

Cllr LEO WALTERS

Con, Bray

Netball for the boys?

From Saturday, July 26 to Tuesday, July 29 there was much fanfare, anticipation, discussion, coverage, commentary, and post-victory congratulations concerning the Women’s Euro Football Final 2025.

Subsequent talk included the boost for women’s football, and the need to ensure equal access to the game.

A presenter on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Today’ programme reported on July 29 that 85 per cent of primary schools do, but half of secondary schools do not provide equal access for boys and girls to playing football.

There was no talk of boys’ access to playing netball.

I offer the following, to the tune, ‘Que Sera Sera’.

When I was just a little boy,

I asked my mother, ‘What will I be?

Will I play netball, maybe midwife?’

Here’s what she said to me:

‘Make me laugh, me laugh.

Such things just can’t be, can’t be.

Boys can’t have equality.

Make me laugh, me laugh:

Just can’t be, can’t be.’

JAY FLYNN

Moneyrow Green

Holyport