Labour realises the damage town’s bypass would cause

We are glad Labour have taken note of the widespread concern about this scheme. Sadly it is unlikely the issues can be resolved.

The ‘preferred route’ for the bypass, now Option A, would seriously harm the Arun valley and the setting of Arundel, ruin Tortington village and cut through the National Park at Tortington Common.

Alternative routes for the western half of the Bypass (known as Option B), at present being further considered by the A27 Feasibility Study, would damage Binsted Woods (all in the National Park) and ruin Binsted village (partly in the National Park), with its beautiful setting and 10 listed buildings.

There have been several versions of Option B. A version of Option B entirely outside the National Park, through southern Binsted and north Walberton, was leaked from the A27 Feasibility Study last August and ABNC ran a campaign against it.

Now the study, whose three reports were published in March, has mixed together descriptions of two new Option Bs, hoping the lack of clarity will prevent more campaigning.

One is within the National Park woodland at Binsted, and the other avoids the National Park for part of its length by going through southern Binsted, then up the middle of the village through the Strawberry Fair field (where we fundraise for our 12th-century church each year) and Binsted Nursery.

Both have a T junction/roundabout near Binsted Lane, or a flyover junction at Avisford.

These junctions and the north part of both routes are in the National Park and highly damaging to Binsted Woods.

The only way for Labour to ‘resolve’ these issues is by changing the criteria for road improvements at Arundel, ie the demand for 70 mph and dualling.

That way a third alternative could be found in an online or near-online improvement. Meanwhile, all houses near any of the bypass options remain blighted. When will the study learn that an offline bypass is not feasible?

Emma Tristram, Secretary, Arundel Bypass Neighbourhood Committee