On the rails in 2015

Let the train take the strain

Welcome to 2015 and higher rail fares, while oil prices fall to new low, resulting in even cheaper motoring.  No doubt that will lead to more pollution, congestion and associated health impacts, but that’s alright as long as motorists don’t pay for the many external costs they impose on society.

In addition, buses continue to be under attack from local authorities who see them as easy targets for cuts.  Even when East Sussex County Council votes not to cut bus services, it appears that its decision can be overruled by an elite cabinet, seemingly unaccountable to no one.

In the meantime we have a rail network straining at the seams with the large increases in rail travel over recent years.  Yet away from the main intercity routes, services and connections can be pretty poor and offer little choice to people who need or want to move around without a car.  That’s why three consultations might be of interest to people, some with pretty short deadlines so don’t delay if you want to have your voice heard:

  • Network Rail is currently consulting on its South East Route Sussex area route study.  This is currently rather London-centric and largely ignores other rail journeys. Email them at SussexRouteStudy@networkrail.co.uk to ask for the re-opening of the Uckfield – Lewes line.  Reasons here if you need them plus other ideas for improvements along the south coast, such as building the Willingdon chord and new stations.  All would help reduce traffic on A27 and other roads.  Feedback required by 13 January, so hurry!  See this blog for ideas of what to say
  • Govia Thameslink is nearing the end of a 12 week consultation on a new off-peak timetable from December 2015.  The Cooksbridge Station Partnership has contacted SCATE to ask for our support in pressing for more off-peak and weekend services.  There may be other areas we wish to see improvements too.  Email your comments to: gtr.timetableconsultation@gtrailway.com by Friday, 30 January
  • At the same time as all this is happening, Network Rail is holding a consultation on radical proposals which could drastically alter the way the railways are planned and run.  Improving Connectivity is a long-term proposal to deliver substantially improved rail connectivity across Britain. It requires a different approach to planning both the network capability and the train services which operate on it.  Deadline for comments is 31 January.  Email improvingconnectivity@networkrail.co.uk or complete their online survey.

Amusing take on the Government’s Roads Announcement

Today saw the Government announce that it is committed to building a mile of new dual carriageway through the Stonehenge World Heritage Site and dismiss the environmental impact of building in the South Downs National Park, destroying ancient woodland and harming the setting of Arundel.

Added to this the huge amount of money being spent on roads in a gamble to boost the economy is likely to fail.  Meanwhile the coastal railway is starved on any real investment and air pollution and congestion in our towns and cities is likely to rise.  Bus services are being cut and local authorities are struggling to provide much needed services as their budgets are slashed.

In the face of all this, take some time out for an amusing reworking of the Department of Transport’s press release.  Sometimes you just have to laugh.

Arundel residents want ‘smart’ spending of government funds for A27

As the government announces £350m for the A27 corridor, from Chichester to Polegate, Arundel residents say the money for Arundel should be spent on improvements along or near the existing route and include better access to public transport, cycling and walking, rather than be wasted on an ineffective and unaffordable bypass, seriously damaging the Arun Valley landscape and National Park.

The proposed ‘offline’ options for an Arundel bypass would mean a dual carriageway crossing the Arun Valley from Crossbush, over water meadows and either cutting through the ancient woodland at Tortington Common, close to the western edge of Arundel, the village of Tortington and Havenwood Park, or through the historic landscape and villages of Binsted and Walberton.

‘This would be a gross waste of money.’ said Sue White, Arundel resident and business woman. ‘We want smart, 21st century thinking for transport, not lumbering, outdated roads that we know will simply generate more traffic, increase local congestion and destroy town centres and small businesses, just as similar roads have done elsewhere.’

Philip Gadsby, retired engineer and Arundel resident pointed out that local people have been excluded from the discussions about options for transport and access along the Sussex coast and many people had no idea about plans until SCATE brought them to their attention. ‘We are now told we will be consulted, but the Department for Transport appears to have already narrowed our options to a bypass. There has been no debate locally on this controversial issue in over 20 years and ideas about transport and related issues have changed.’

He added, ‘the DfT study appears to have been unreasonably rushed and, contrary to modern transport thinking, it has focused only on road-building rather than addressing transport in an integrated way.’

Kay Wagland, resident of Ford Road, Arundel and chair of the Arundel SCATE group , said ‘The offline proposals are hugely damaging and just won’t help in the long term. They would destroy the countryside and wildlife that local people love and that attracts visitors to the area, adding noise and light pollution too. There are other options that would provide more choices for commuters, young people and the elderly, that would be less wasteful and damaging. Recent DfT reports have shown that money spent on improving local access, walking and cycling are not only healthier, but better value for money.’

The residents’ group, Arundel SCATE, was set up this year in response to the Department for Transport Feasibility Study which started a year ago, to inform local people about the plans and to provide a forum for discussion.

ENDS

Write, write, write before 3 December 2014

Please write to the email addresses below objecting to the A27 study outcomes and process. The Autumn Statement is on  the 3 December 2014 and after that date, it could be too late.

Bullets points to make in letter-writing:

Money to burn – Will waste public money (road building is very expensive and often offers poor value for money)

Hidden costs – Will cost far more than it costs to build (it will increase air and noise pollution, increase carbon emissions, loss of countryside and tranquillity and contribute to more costs for the NHS and society in general) (today’s news that obesity is costing UK economy £47 billion)

Trashing the South Downs – Together, the road schemes will cause massive damage to the South Downs National Park and create pressure for even more to follow (harming this important part of the local economy)

Driving up congestion – Time savings on the A27 will be offset by increasing congestion and delays in our towns and cities (as more people are encouraged to drive)

Local democracy bypassed – There has been no proper public debate about all the options (and based on sound evidence)

Better solutions – Investing in public transport, walking and cycling instead would deliver better value for money (would reduce pressure on the A27, cause little or no harm to the National Park, be healthier, be quicker to implement in many instances and potentially cheaper – the coastal railway is being starved of investment yet runs parallel to the A27, while the coastal plain from Brighton to Hampshire is ideal terrain for Dutch / Danish levels of cycling)

George Osborne MP:For those writing to George Osborne as chancellor this is the correct address:public.enquiries@hm-treasury.gov.uk Or by post etc: The Correspondence & Enquiry Unit, HM Treasury, 1 Horseguards Road, London, SW1A 2HQ or telephone 020 7270 5000

and copy your letter to
John Hayes MP (Roads Minister):  john.hayes@dft.gsi.gov.uk
Eike Ndiweni-Muller is DFT’s study lead for A27:  eike.ndiweni-muller@dft.gsi.gov.uk
Your local MP:
Arundel (Arundel and South Downs) – nick.herbert.mp@parliament.uk
Worthing (West Worthing) – bottomleyp@parliament.uk
Worthing (East Worthing and Shoreham) – loughtont@parliament.uk

Local transport is healthy and cost effective

A new University of the West of England study for Department for Transport was recently published which showed how investment in walking and cycling, offers better economic returns than road building.  The executive summary says: ‘Investment in infrastructure or behaviour change programmes which enable increased activity levels amongst local communities through cycling and walking is likely to provide low cost, high-value options providing benefits for our individual health. This improvement also has major benefits for the NHS in terms of cost savings, for the transport system as a whole, and for the economy through more efficient use of our transport networks.’

Road supporters take misleading campaign to Westminster

Using public money, the A27 Action (a front for local councils, MPs and some businesses) is promoting a controversial proposal for the A27 that was rejected 10 years ago for the harm it would cause the Arun Valley and the huge cost and damage that would result at Worthing.  It has used its members influence to get an audience with the Secretary of State for Transport hoping to influence the outcome of the current Department for Transport (DfT) A27 feasibility study.

A27 Action is misleading local business and residents, telling them that more roads will bring long term benefit despite the lack of evidence to support these claims. It is also telling the DfT that its proposals are supported by residents, when it is clear that there is considerable local concern over the nature of its proposals at Arundel and elsewhere and people have not been informed or consulted on this in over 20 years.

However, DfT has increasing evidence of local opposition to A27 Action plans and itself published a new report showing that investment in integrated public transport and improved access provides much better value for money than large scale road building.

It is hoped that the government will not succumb to what Steven Norris, a previous Conservative Transport Minister, described as ‘grand project-itis’, that it will ensure information provision and open public debate and not opt for a massively damaging and money-wasting schemes.

Arundel MP appears ‘unaware’ over bypass say residents

Arundel residents who organised a public meeting in their local church, on A27 Bypass proposals, are surprised at continuing reports of their MP’s anger at them exercising democracy. They feel that Nick Herbert MP appears to be misinformed and unaware about local people and bypass issues.

Residents’ group, Arundel SCATE, was accused by their MP of organising a ‘deliberate’ and ‘one-sided’ meeting and failing to invite him.

Group founder, Rita Godfrey said, “Nick Herbert and the A27 Action group have been putting one side of the A27 issue for months without opening up debate to anyone else to challenge – and all using public money. West Sussex has a paper, ‘Connections’, delivered to all homes in the county, with a front page devoted to the A27 Action campaign, and devotes staff time to the campaign, with no other views acknowledged. Nick has staff issuing regular one-sided press releases, paid for by the tax-payer. We’re trying to redress the balance with our public meetings open to everyone.”

Kay Wagland, the group’s Chair pointed out they she had invited Nick Herbert to speak at their first public meeting, giving three weeks notice and asking him to ask someone else from the A27 Action campaign if he couldn’t come. “No-one came back to us, even though we chased Nick up. No-one was interested” she said. “Since the second meeting on November 3rd was simply a repeat of the first – so many people turned up that they couldn’t fit in the town hall, so we said we’d run another – we simply invited him on the same basis as everyone else in the town and would have been delighted if he had been able to come. It was short notice, but the Department for Transport process is so rushed, we couldn’t hang about and the church had only one date free. Our priority is for residents to be informed and to express their views before decisions are made without us.”

“We are asking that all the options in the Department for Transport Feasibility Study on the A27 should be kept open at this late stage, for discussion rather than relying on our MP and County Council representatives to convey what they believe local views to be, as they have clearly been unaware of those views until now.” said Sue White, Arundel businesswoman and group member. She continued, “Nick was clearly unaware that, far from being supportive of a new bypass as he’s claimed, many local people had no idea about it.” Hundreds of people from Arundel and its environs have attended Arundel SCATE meetings and others have contacted them to find out about A27 proposals.

They also fear that Nick Herbert doesn’t understand the classification of Tortington Common, part of the Binsted Woods complex popular with local people, which his favoured route would destroy. They explain that it is ‘ancient replanted’ woodland as recorded in the Sussex Woodland Inventory, but that their MP appears to believe that this simply means conifer plantation rather than a particular ancient woodland type. They feel that if he was aware of its value and the presence of dormice and threatened species there, he would not be suggesting that its destruction can be ‘offset’, ie by planting other trees on a new site, as it is not possible to offset ancient woodland.

Philip Gadsby, Arundel resident, pointed out that there is little substantive data coming from their MP or A27 Action beyond pointing out obvious congestion problems. He wondered if they were aware that West Sussex traffic levels were in decline (1), HGV levels on the A27 are very low (1) but that building a continuous dual carriageway A27 would draw in HGVs from other motorways to the A27, that most congestion is down to car journeys of less than 15 miles and that Alistair Darling rejected the favoured pink-blue route in 2003 for financial and environmental reasons rather than inaction.

He added that Arundel SCATE members were concerned that misinformation and lack of awareness meant that trunk road expansion was being pursued by authorities with little understanding of the real consequences, in the name of local people.

Arundel SCATE can be contacted at arundelscate@gmail.com, Facebook at Arundel SCATE.

A27 at Hollingbury

Lack of transport vision could blight National Park

On Tuesday, the South Downs National Park Authority discussed its position statement on new transport infrastructure.  This has been drawn up in response to the potential expansion of the A27 but broadened out to include rail, ports and airports.

At the start of the meeting members were reminded that they were there to uphold National Park purposes, not any other interests that they might represent outside of the room.  They were then addressed by Dr Tony Whitbread, chief executive of Sussex Wildlife Trust, Chris Todd from Brighton & Hove Friends of the Earth and Campaign for Better Transport and by Kay Wagland, local Arundel resident and founder of Arundel SCATE.

A27 at Hollingbury

A27 at Hollingbury

All expressed their concern that expanding the A27 would have a large impact on the National Park.  This would not be localised to where changes were made but spread along the whole length of the South Downs and potentially lead to other expensive and damaging interventions.  Indeed, a key concern was that rather than solving congestion, an expanded A27 would create more traffic and ultimately more congestion, albeit in slightly different places.

The debate was interesting and highlighted that several members were struggling to leave their other responsibilities at the door.  However, the vast majority were sincere in their approach, even if they did occasionally say some rather contradictory things.

The Authority eventually agreed a much amended but largely improved position paper, although it did contain a few anomalies and leading statements – for example it specifically mentions the A27 and roads when it is meant to be a position statement for transport infrastructure.  The final statement while a useful and competent outline of the Authority’s position and the South Downs’ special qualities, is a rather dry document.  It contains no vision, nor does it really come across as championing the South Downs landscapes in a way that it could and perhaps should have done.  It also contained one serious omission in that it failed to mention, let alone address, the cumulative impact of expanding several sections of the A27.  This is a serious omission and weakness which is hampered by not having a strategic vision.

While an amendment to insert a vision into the document narrowly failed, members agreed that it would be good to take more time to develop one and that perhaps this could be developed through the Local Plan process.  We shall have to wait and see whether the Authority delivers on this, but in the meantime it will be interesting to see whether this new position statement will have any impact on the current A27 study process.

Second public meeting for Arundel

Due to the fact that so many people were unable to get into the meeting to discuss the A27 held at Arundel Town Hall at the end of September, a second public meeting has been organised next week by Arundel SCATE.

This time the meeting is being held at a larger venue: St Nicholas’ Church, London Road, Arundel, from 7.30 – 9pm, on Monday 3 November, so hopefully everyone will be able to get in.

While there was much concern raised at the first meeting at the impact of any offline bypass for Arundel, a key concern now is to make sure that the Department for Transport doesn’t narrow the options ahead of any full and proper public debate.  So come along and find out what is being proposed and what the implications for Arundel might be.

Second Public Meeting Flier