a bridge never to be crossed

Hi All
 
Following the email I sent round the membership last Tuesday after attending the Council Meeting last Monday, I received a phone call from the Town Council Office during Wednesday morning to inform me that the Tennis Club could be allowed to purchase the bridge for £1, provided certain conditions were met.
 
These were:

• That we would then be required to put a gate at both ends and attach appropriate signage (eg 'Access for Tennis Club Only').
• That we would need to provide keys for all club members.
• That we would need to go ahead and pay for the 'quick fix' repair that we had offered the Trust/Council.
• That our Lease would have to be amended and that at the end of the 25-year term, the Lease could be renewed or we could sell back the bridge.
• We would have to pay for the appropriate legal advice re:liability and responsibility and would have to have it noted that the bridge had been decommissioned.
• Any documentation would have to show that the Trust/Council is exempt from all liability.
• This would need to be Land Registry Compliant.

Bearing in mind that this was late Wednesday morning, I was told that I would need to inform the Trust/Council of the Tennis Club's decision by noon on Monday (ie today) + would need in the meantime to take legal advice on where we would stand regarding responsibilities.  Basically then I had 2 working days + Wednesday afternoon.
 
I replied that the club's committee would need to meet to fully discuss the implications of taking over the bridge.  I also said that we would not be paying for legal advice in advance of agreeing to buy it.
 
We met on Saturday afternoon and on Sunday I emailed the following to the Trust/Council Office:
 
As promised, here are the thoughts and decision of the Lydney Tennis Club Committee regarding the purchase of the footbridge.
 
Advantages:

• Easier access to the club for members.
• Access available for when we need to get equipment for repairs etc on to the site.
• Access available for medical help if and when required.

Disadvantages:

• We queried the feasibility of putting locks at either end of the bridge and monitoring security.
• We do not want to alienate the public and dog-walkers who have been able to use the bridge since its installation.
• As a community sports facility working on a not-for-profit basis, we were concerned at the potential cost involved in setting up the whole project.  We were prepared to pay for a 'quick fix' repair, as we have enough in the account to cover such an outlay + it would have bought time for the Trust Chairman, Derek Biddle, to pursue the funding necessary for bridge replacement.  However, it is unlikely that we have the funds available for the repair + the legal fees and as yet any other unknown items of expenditure connected with such a purchase.
• We were also mindful that this would be a legacy for future generations of members running the club.

All things considered, therefore, it was the decision of the committee not to pursue the offer made.  It was also felt that the time-scale involved was unreasonable.
 
Bearing in mind that this was sent to the Trust/Council Office on Sunday, I was informed on Saturday evening that quotes were already being sought for the bridge's removal!
 
Several replies were sent to me in response to last Tuesday's email suggesting that this matter be put before a wider audience, which is what we are in the process of doing and I shall be in contact again in the not-too-distant future to update the membership of any developments.
 
Regards
 
Martin Godwin (Club Chairman)

---