Stop the Arundel Bypass
Laura Brook
Conservation Officer
A consultation is now underway on proposals to build an 8km bypass around Arundel. Sussex Wildlife Trust remains firmly opposed to this damaging scheme and will be responding – but the consultation is open to everyone, so now is your chance to speak up and help us defend nature:
The Sussex Wildlife Trust maintains our strong objection to the proposed Arundel Bypass. We believe that the scheme presented is outdated in its approach and fails to deliver any progress towards a sustainable future. The proposed 8km road will cut through critical wildlife corridors, damage important woodlands and move us in completely the wrong direction in terms of the climate and ecological emergencies. We urgently need to reduce travel by private car, not spend millions of pounds building more roads, which simply encourage more traffic.
One of the ongoing issues we’ve had with this process is a lack of information provided by National Highways – and it is still not forthcoming. Yet again, this latest consultation is asking for comment without providing any clear information, so there’s effectively nothing to comment on. One of our long-standing concerns is the impact on nationally important populations of rare bats but there’s no additional information here. All that’s presented in the consultation brochure is a couple of paragraphs and map indicating a corridor of vegetation, which is meant to help bats cross Tye Lane. There’s no information on the bat species affected; no information on hedgerow creation, so we don’t know which species will be planted to create it; no information on the design of the bat crossing, or how effective it would be based on what’s been learned from other similar schemes. Without this information, we cannot provide meaningful comments on whether this proposed bat crossing would work at all, or how it might be improved, or whether it’s enough on its own or should be accompanied by other measures to make sure the landscape is connected for wildlife.
After this consultation closes (on 16 December), National Highways have made it clear that they intend to push through the next stage of the process in spring 2023 by submitting what’s known as the Development Consent Order (DCO) for the bypass. This is in effect the planning application for the new road, and we’re incredibly concerned that National Highways intends to submit this despite the continued absence of critical information about how the proposed bypass will impact wildlife, and how Highways England will address these impacts.
We’re also concerned because once the DCO is submitted, it is much harder to influence the proposals. National Highways’ own publication makes it clear that the best time to influence the scheme is before the DCO process begins. In effect, our environment is being bound into a process where we have no opportunity to meaningfully influence the scheme for its benefit.
That’s why we’re asking you to respond to this consultation today. We want to make sure that National Highways and the government hear loud and clear that the Arundel Bypass must be stopped, and should not proceed to a Development Consent Order.
Find out how to respond to the Supplementary Consultation here.
Comments
The consultations refers to the Preliminary Env Information Report (PIER) from the January 22 consultation. So no new info provided. Chapter 8 of the PIER (volume 2b) lists the bat species found in surveys including Annex II species and an important Bechstein’s bat crossing identified. It highlights that significant effects on bats can’t be ruled out until further design work happens. However, there is no further info provided by National Highways about whats been done since that report was written to address it which is unhelpful!
01 Dec 2022 11:26:00
National Highways’ unprofessional approach to ‘consultation’ is disgraceful. The information provided is wholly inadequate. Yet they are only seeking responses on a few specific issues. No doubt if National Highways proceeds with a DCO application, the Planning Inspectorate will take a dim view of the fixated road-builders riding roughshod over local communities and precious wildlife.
01 Dec 2022 11:55:00
TWO WEEKS and right before Christmas! Disgraceful! So typical of many Councils nowadays to try and slip things through when people are otherwise engaged.
I love the area and if, indeed, there is a population of rare bats ~ and other animals ~ then surely there should be a thorough consultation and amendments to protect the bats.
01 Dec 2022 17:23:00
Wholly unacceptable lack of detail – woefully lacking in specifics on mitigation & the effectiveness of such measures. It’s a sloppy, arrogant & completely unacceptable consultation – a sham basically.
01 Dec 2022 19:04:00
I strongly object to this ridiculous idea, which would unnecessarily ruin more beautiful land in West Sussex
01 Dec 2022 21:34:00
I do not believe the national highways proposal takes adequate account of the bats , a protected species, that live in the highway’s proposed route. Therefore their proposals should be rejected until the bats and all other natural species in this wetland are completely protected in accordance with current legislation
02 Dec 2022 18:47:00
We need to start looking forward to a future with less reliance on cars and attach more importance to our natural world, this proposal meets neither. A bypass is unnecessary, the damage to wildlife is just another nail in the coffin. The decrease in wildlife in the UK over the past 20 years is shocking, we have to stop unnecessary ‘development’ NOW!’
03 Dec 2022 03:46:00
Stop destruction of nature!
08 Dec 2022 11:25:00
From the beginning of this process National Highways have been deliberately misleading the public on their intentions. Completely leaving Binstead ancient woodland off their original maps and now missing out many details. The environmentalists involved say in their studies that Binstead woods is of international importance. Cutting it off from the surrounding habitats will cause huge damage.
We can only hope that the billion pound cost will make them think again.
08 Dec 2022 11:36:00
Absolutely horrified by more of our green spaces being dug up!! Our wildlife need these spaces more than we need more roads.
I do hope that this does not go ahead. Such a waste of time and money!!!! This money could be spent in a much more environmentally friendly way.
Please think of the future generations and don’t let your names be scarred from all the ruin that this will cause
Thank you for reading
08 Dec 2022 11:43:00
You HAVE to listen and take into consideration local opinion. Arundel absolutely needs a by pass but not at the expense of trashing the countryside
08 Dec 2022 11:50:00
The Arundel By-Pass! Why? A total waste of money, pandering to the motorist. Just reduce and enforce the speed limit. How about spending the money on doing up/enlarging what was Arundel Hospital?
08 Dec 2022 12:40:00
Dear Sir
I strongly object to the proposed Arundel Bypass based on there not being any recent available data on decisions being made and the lack of transparency for concerned parties to consult on any details.
This surely goes against any Governmental mandate.
Regards
Paul
08 Dec 2022 12:44:00
This is such a damaging scheme. And if it goes ahead you can bet that infilling, houses or industrial buildings, will take begin in a year or two.
08 Dec 2022 12:47:00
More roads mean more cars and less wildlife. This proposal is an error of judgement.
08 Dec 2022 13:07:00
I think this idea is against the very environmental things the government is trying to do. Why not spend the money on repairing the giant potholes in our roads and put the age of driving consent back up to 21 and everyone over 80 to retake a driving test that will ease congestion and the environment!
08 Dec 2022 13:22:00
I am totally against this bypass as we have lost so much of our wildlife, far more than other countries. We need to stop building more roads, to protect wildlife and to reduce car use.
08 Dec 2022 13:22:00
I need to know about wildlife protection. This project needs to consider every aspect. JBS
08 Dec 2022 13:35:00
This is ridiculous! We are trying as a country to bring in wildlife corridors and this will in effect damage an area of great importance in the ongoing conservation of such areas. There are important wetlands in the area which attract a huge variety of birds and this will scare them away during the construction and they will not then return. Sarah Collins
08 Dec 2022 13:38:00
This will not help wildlfe.
And we don,t need to be losesing wildlife tree,s.
So I would like you to have a rethink.
08 Dec 2022 13:55:00
Why is the proposed route not following or mirroring an existing route along Priory lane and Torrington lane to the A27 where a dual carriage way
08 Dec 2022 13:57:00
I strongly object to the building of the Arundel Bypass, apart from the many ecological disturbances which will occur, especially of rare bats and dormice and further damaging the countryside, the cost of it is huge and to my mind ridiculous, the A27 already bypasses Arundel to some extent ie it does not go through the town, whereas the A27 at Worthing goes through housing and is even more congested, also further west at Chichester the congestion is worse, all this will do, for all the money spent, is to cause further congestion at both these pinch points, causing even more frustration to motorists. I therefore cannot see the point of another bypass for Arundel whilst leaving even worse pinch points to suffer.
08 Dec 2022 14:41:00
More of our precious countryside & wild animals being destroyed just stop & think on it PLEASE
08 Dec 2022 14:43:00
Much more information about this proposal is needed, in regard to environmental impacts. I believe it’s in the wrong place and at the wrong time. Furthermore, it’s clear that, once there is a road through this outstanding woodland, large areas of housing will follow. Any development in this area is detrimental to wildlife habitat and vital floodplain, and further reduces ecological diversity and flood defence.
08 Dec 2022 15:57:00
It really defies belief that there is serious consideration being given to destroying more of the Sussex countryside when we are all now so concerned about the future of our country and planet, especially for future generations. I really cannot think where the driving force is coming from at this to happen.
I am a frequent driver around Arundel and am fully aware of the hold ups but we are looking to a future with less cars around Arundel, not providing a basis for more!
Like so many people I am tearing my hair out over this.
08 Dec 2022 16:40:00
This does not solve the problem but only makes things worse for the enviroment.
08 Dec 2022 16:43:00
There clearly needs to be more consultation before anything more goes forward with this bypass.
08 Dec 2022 18:10:00
Fully integrated and better public transport would mean this bypass isn’t needed at all. Let’s spend the money on that instead.
08 Dec 2022 18:46:00
Please think three times before cutting yet another road through the Sussex countryside. Woodland is on the decline and we need to preserve every tree in the county. Trees are the lungs of Nature and we ignore this fact at our peril. How can it be a good plan to add more traffic and pollution to an all ready climate under stress.
08 Dec 2022 19:04:00
This is the biggest waste of money and resources I have ever come across. No thought has gone into the damage it will cause to the countryside, fauna and the real reason why there are hold ups. Leave the existing road as it is and do away with roundabouts and traffic lights. From the West Country to Chichester, there are no roundabouts or traffic lights. Get to Chichester and thats where it starts, chaos. Just look at the mess the roads are in in and around Arundel. Where they allow heavy lorries on the current road system, they cant pass side by side in places. Let them spend their own money and see what they come up with, not our money.
08 Dec 2022 20:51:00
I object completely to this scheme. The scheme presented is outdated in its approach and fails to deliver any progress towards a sustainable future. The proposed 8km road will cut through critical wildlife corridors, damage important woodlands and move us in completely the wrong direction in terms of the climate and ecological emergencies. We urgently need to reduce travel by private car, not spend millions of pounds building more roads, which simply encourage more traffic.
08 Dec 2022 21:52:00
I object to this proposed development on the grounds that (a) building more roads encourages the use of private cars whereas, especially in an AONB, we should be encouraging public transport and enhancing our natural environment. And (b) the marked lack of detail provided which inhibits detailed comments. If the scheme is so important in the eyes of National Highways, they should be putting much more effort into determining what the adverse impacts might be and how they could be averted or ameliorated, and allowing these into the public domain for discussion.
08 Dec 2022 22:29:00
We must stop the use of so many cars: by providing a bypass from taxpayers’ money this is subsidizing more traffic. It is also damaging previously unspoilt areas of countryside, affecting many animal and plant populations. We are supposed to be reducing transport for the sake of the planet – not increasing it.
08 Dec 2022 22:31:00
I object to this bypass l. I’d like you to work with Sussex wildlife trust to consider their alternative route which has less of an impact to wildlife. Going ahead with this plan demonstrates your lack of commitment to wildlife, ecology, local needs and sustainability and to the local community. Doubtless this will pay lip service to the governments plans for nature whatever dark meaningless hole that is. But I’m also of the opinion that this will support big business in some way and as we have seen over the last 50 years, big business is utterly and totally single handed my responsible for planetary destruction, but why stop there when you can add to that and destroy Arundel too? Because that is what this road means to nature so I would urge you to think again. I, living reasonably local to the Arundel area and use that road often, oppose that bypass and request that you join forces for good and work something out with Sussex wildlife trust please.
09 Dec 2022 01:27:00
Sussex Wildlife Trust:
We agree that there are congestion issues around Arundel, we have always favoured a smaller intervention between the Ford Road roundabout and Crossbush Junction, along with far more investment into integrated sustainable travel options. More details here > https://www.arundelalternative...
I strongly object to this ridiculous scheme which would ruin one of the most beautiful areas of Sussex left to us the public, as well as damaging wild life.
09 Dec 2022 08:52:00
I object to this plan on ecological and environmental grounds: woodlands are essential for water management
criticaland wildlife which has been heavily impacted already.09 Dec 2022 11:18:00
It is unacceptable to propose further wholesale destruction of beautiful countrside and precious wildlife habitat for the some perceived minor benefits to humans. Investment should instead be made in walking, cycling and public transport infrastructure to reduce motor vehicle use and to enhance the environment for both humans and wildlife. The proposal for this damaging road scheme should be withdrawn.
09 Dec 2022 11:20:00
This is not needed and will destroy rare land such as Water Meadows in which Newts, Grass Snakes and other protected species live. Waterways will be polluted with overflow from the Bypass.
09 Dec 2022 12:50:00
We need more forward thinking solutions to reducing traffic and this doesn’t seem to offer anything new.
09 Dec 2022 14:39:00
I understood that a bridge was going to be constructed from the existing road and connecting slipway currently a dead end!, Why not?
09 Dec 2022 15:29:00
There is too much disregard to wildlife with all the developments happening at the moment, this is one of them. Stop destroying so much of the countryside. Where on earth can these homeless creatures go, nowhere they die.
09 Dec 2022 17:06:00
Surely it would make sense to follow a shorter route to utilise the existing road between Tortington and the A27, joining it in the vicinity of the old priory. This would involve much less in the way of local disruption and be far less of a blight on the local landscape. There is no need for such a long stretch of new road to disrupt such a large area.
09 Dec 2022 20:10:00
Although many areas need complete overhaul of their road systems we can only think of the bigger picture – Climate change- Destroying our countryside has become suicidal for for nature and mankind. Sadly we need to stop using our cars and walk , cycle or even go with a friend. We need to think differently- cycle lane need to be considered first as in Holland! Have the town planners visited the Netherlands to see their road structure yet? Please do- we need to learn another way fast .
10 Dec 2022 08:19:00
Transportation routes is a divisive topic. Is there available a Wildlife Trust’s proposal to tackle this at National and local (this bypass) please so I can make an informed decision on whether to drive my car daily, or do otherwise.
10 Dec 2022 08:45:00
Sussex Wildlife Trust:
Sussex Wildlife Trust has always favoured a smaller intervention between the Ford Road roundabout and Crossbush Junction, along with far more investment into integrated sustainable travel options. More detail here > https://www.arundelalternative...
More detail on sustainable transport policy can be found here: https://sussexwildlifetrust.or...
I write to express my wholehearted condemnation of the current proposals for the A27 Arundel Bypass. Almost none of the essential basic reasearch has been undertaken by the Planners, making it difficult to submit comments for the Consultation Process. Accordingly, the project should be halted until all the issues highlighted by Wildlife Organisations have been comprehensively answered. These especially include data relating to the impact on all Bat species present in the development zone and precisely what action will be taken to ensure these protected species are not endangered. The UK has the lowest level of bio-diversity in Europe, and the lack of research and clarification for this project currently suggests that it will only serve to make that dire situation worse. Please halt all applications for progress until all the outstanding questions have been answered.
10 Dec 2022 15:54:00
I completely oppose this proposal. Like many others who have commented, I believe we should not be spending any more time or money on building new roads, destroying habitats and countryside. We need to move towards a lower car use, more public transport society which protects and safeguards our environment. Highways should be repairing the disgraceful and dangerous condition of our existing roads, repairing potholes and maintaining surfaces. That is the best use of their time and public money. Our (your) future generations will not thank us for yet more habitat and green space destruction.
11 Dec 2022 12:03:00
Arundel is already by-passed so just improve on the existing. The area at risk of being lost forever (quite apart from being an outstandingly beautiful ancient sanctuary for endangered species), is also of great historical interest with Arundel being one of just 5 governing settlements (or ‘rapes’) established by William the conqueror.
It is well documented how road building proliferates more traffic; the current situation of congestion would be back where it is within 5 years.
11 Dec 2022 13:02:00
I strongly object to the Arundel Bypass proposal. The indicted route crosses a large tract of unspoilt countryside that is home to the largest number of bat species in the country. Disturbing their environment by constructing the road and its subsequent traffic would devastate these species which need dark, quiet and plenty of insect life to survive.
National Highways have not provided any evidence of the effectiveness of the mitigations they propose nor have they undertaken a detailed ecological survey to find out what they are dealing with in this area. This is essential information upon which to base their ‘mitigations’. Without it the wrong mitigations could cause more damage than benefit to the many bat species resident here.
The Government is ignoring its own biodiversity targets by placing this road across critical wildlife corridors and will also degrade important woodlands and historic trees.
Building any road increases traffic along it and in the area surrounding it. This does not help the Government reach the legal target of net-zero carbon by 2050. Most of the traffic using the current A27 is local traffic so could be transferred to walking, cycling or public transport.
This scheme should be stopped right now!
Yours sincerely,
Elizabeth Hart
11 Dec 2022 16:04:00
Proposal is scantily written not to assess the wildlife corridors. ( especially of bechstein bats. ) Country side here is crucial to maintain the ecologically rich sites South to the sea.
11 Dec 2022 20:37:00
As a local resident and listening to local expert opinion, it seems this has not been well thought out and that the valuable local wildlife and ecology system is to be literally bulldozed through and this part of the valuable and delicate ecosystem will be lost for ever quite unnecessarily.
12 Dec 2022 13:31:00
I am writing to you in the hope that it will be possible for you to intervene in some way concerning the proposed Arundel Bypass.
I hope that the serious opposition to the proposed “Grey Route” Arundel Bypass will be responded to. Those who oppose these destructive plans have very valid reasons for doing so.
The precious and unique beauty of the countryside lying in the pathway of the Bypass is too important in terms of its biodiversity and the cultural heritage of Sussex to be surrendered for the convenience of motorists- it is imperative that a less destructive alternative to these plans is found. The loss of bird, insect and wild mammal habitats is not something which it will be possible to replace- these are long established natural homes. Small pockets of ancient woodland, hedgerows and wild flowers once destroyed are also not replaceable. The loss of this wild flora and fauna, once the Bypass is built will not be reversible.
The United Kingdom is one of the most nature depleted and built up countries in the world- we must learn to treasure our valuable and unique wildlife and natural environments. Climate change is a growing and immediate danger- set to worsten. This summer we saw our hottest summer on record, the high temperatures brought terrible destruction. One of the ways to address climate change is to protect nature. Our natural environment has also been proven to have a positive effect on our wellbeing.
The creation of the Arundel Bypass will incur an enormous carbon footprint and will encourage more vehicles, it is not efficient in any way concerning traffic congestion.
In terms of the areas which will be destroyed by the Arundel Bypass, it will have a lasting, detrimental effect on the lives of the people who live in that specific area. Please do not take this destructive action, any benefits which the Arundel Bypass may have will not be worth it in terms of the cost to the villages and countryside which will be touched in such a negative way.
It is true to say that more congestion will be caused by the creation of the Arundel Bypass- Worthing, Chichester, villages and towns between will all be overloaded by traffic- the plans for the Arundel Bypass do not demonstrate forward thinking.
The cost of building the Arundel Bypass will also be a horrific waste of public money- it is at present, estimated that the Bypass will cost £1.2billion. I object to the tax I pay being spent in this manner and would prefer it to be used more efficiently, in areas where there is greater need.
The plans for the Arundel Bypass propose a direct contradiction to the government’s claim to be aiming for net zero objectives.
Please take into account the many objections which your organisation is receiving.
Isabel Owen
12 Dec 2022 19:56:00
I strongly object to the proposed Arundel Bypass. It contradicts everything that is Environmentally and morally right of how we should be preserving and upholding our ancient forests and green spaces. This is a damaging project that will destroy wildlife and the fragile eco system. We are loosing too much of our Countryside and habitats to building (homes & roads). It’s time to think outside the box and consider ways to reduce cars; and think of alternative ways of transport. Adding more roads equal more cars and pollution. We, the Public understand the point of protecting wildlife, it’s about time the GOvernment did and scrap these destructive schemes. You can’t re create what is lost. The Countryside is vital to all of us and part of who we are as a Nation.
15 Dec 2022 19:02:00