FAMILIES in Marshfield are using people power to try to force Newport council to reverse a decision to remove a footbridge.
Residents say their children's safety is being compromised by the decision, which means they have to walk along a busy main road to get to school.
And yesterday the work was stalled when parents and children staged a protest on the bridge, which links two housing estates in Marshfield.
Council workmen removed part of the bridge but were forced to put it back by police monitoring the protest, who said it was unsafe.
Now the community is split - with some parents saying they fear the decision could put youngsters at risk.
Protester Carol McIver, 34, of Mallards Reach, spent seven hours on the bridge making her point.
She said: "I'm a registered childminder and I use it as a short cut to take the children to school because it's safer than the road. No-one told us that the bridge was going to go, we found out by accident."
Her husband, Ian McIver, said: "It compromises the safety of children who now have to cross the road rather than go over the bridge. If someone is knocked over here in years to come, then I hope the council remember the decision they are taking here."
But one resident, who didn't want to be named, said the bridge was attracting gangs of youths intent on causing trouble.
He said: "They have spray-painted our cars and garages, urinated in our gardens and stolen ornaments. It's terrible. We all feel intimidated and some people have even moved out. The bridge has to go."
Newport council say they are acting in response to residents' concerns about anti-social behaviour caused by gangs of youths who used the bridge as a meeting-point.
Marshfield councillor Tony Boswell said: "We have received a petition from local residents, and numerous complaints over the past two years relating to anti-social behaviour in the area, with the bridge being identified as a focal point regarding this problem.
"Despite intervention by both the community safety wardens and the police, the problem has continued and the decision was taken to remove the bridge."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article