Further Consultation Following Design Changes To A27 Arundel Bypass

A controversial road scheme to reduce congestion on the A27 by building a bypass around Arundel has gone back to consultation following design changes but councillors are sceptical.

National Highways last consulted on the proposed A27 Arundel Bypass in spring but has now opened a further consultation following a redesign.

The company believes this will address concerns about local roads becoming ‘rat runs’ and the impact on wildlife.

What are the changes?

Changes include attempts to reduce traffic impacts in and around Walberton. National Highways predicted an increase of 1,300 vehicles a day along The Street (east of Tye Lane) but believes the changes will bring this to 100.

A bat crossing has also been proposed nearby as further surveys found roosts.

Avisford Park Golf Club will be directly affected and, since the previous consultation, National Highways discovered the need for more woodland dormice habitat. This means the course will have to be changed to nine-holes with a driving range and practice facilities or may have to close completely.

Changes are also proposed at Crossbush after traffic modelling found ‘capacity issues’. These include a bridge to carry northbound traffic; a dedicated left-turn lane for approaching southbound traffic; and roundabout reconfiguration.

Council to respond

Arun District Council’s Planning Policy Committee considered the changes on Wednesday (7 December).

It is due to send a response to National Highways, pending approval by full council.

Members are ‘not confident’ that rat running has been resolved and challenged the accuracy of National Highways’ traffic modelling in light of new figures produced by Walberton Parish Council, which is opposed to the ‘Grey Route’.

Councillors did support a bat crossing, the Crossbush changes, and Yapton Lane proposals but said support for the bypass as a whole is conditional on a Ford Road junction.

Grant Roberts (Con, Arundel and Walberton) called the consultation ‘nothing but a tick box exercise’ and said locals had been left feeling ‘fobbed off’ by National Highways. He also claimed that the traffic figures are ‘inaccurate’.

Isabel Thurston (Green, Barnham) said the scheme was ‘too costly in every way’ and suggested that the council withdraw its support for the bypass altogether.

“At the end of Tye Lane, where the village green, pond, and community orchards are, we will have an extra 800 vehicles,” she said, “Now this is also the walking and cycling route to the primary school. It is completely unacceptable.”

But chair Ricky Bower (Con, East Preston) discouraged withdrawing support for the bypass and said A27 congestion is currently ‘strangling the economy of Arun’.

What’s next?

Because the bypass is considered a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) the final say won’t rest with the local planning authority.

Instead, National Highways will submit a Development Consent Order, or DCO, to the Planning Inspectorate.

It then has three months to make its recommendations, at which point it could take the Secretary of State for Transport a further three months to make a final decision.

The current consultation runs until Friday (16 December):  https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.com/he/a27-arundel-bypass-supplementary-consultation-22/.