Nick's formal response to the A27 Arundel Bypass further consultation

Arundel & South Downs MP Nick Herbert has submitted his formal response to the A27 Arundel Bypass further consultation. It reads;

I am strongly in favour of a proper offline, dual carriageway bypass which would deal with congestion at Arundel and take traffic away from the South Downs National Park. As MP for Arundel & South Downs for almost 15 years I have consistently made the case for this, as did both of my predecessors. I campaigned for the bypass to be put back into the roads programme and welcome its inclusion in the Government’s national infrastructure programme with funding from RIS1.

A bypass was first proposed in 1985, and was subsequently included in the Government’s main roads programme in 1996, only to be shelved by a Labour government in 1997. In this time, we have seen a rise in traffic using the A27, the majority of the route of which is already dualled, including either side of Arundel. The serious bottlenecks at Arundel cause long delays at peak times and encourage traffic to rat-run through the historic town and the South Downs National Park.

Pressures on this road will only increase as more houses are built in West Sussex. Without a bypass there will be 28,000 more vehicles a day through the National Park at Arundel, and 23,000 more vehicles a day through the South Downs. Doing nothing is no longer an option.

My preference is for the Magenta route, which has also been supported by Arundel Town Council, Arun District Council and West Sussex County Council. I regret the impact on some properties in the village of Binsted and on the edge of Walberton, but I believe no other route is viable, that an offline bypass is essential, and that it will be of overall benefit to the South Downs and the National Park.

The Magenta route will reduce traffic in the Park by up to 84 per cent at Arundel and 27 per cent through the Downs. Less than three quarters of a kilometre will go through the South Downs National Park, whereas an online route would go through 2 kilometres of Park. The existing A27 already goes through the Park via the Arundel relief road. An online route would mean a two-thirds increase in traffic going through the Park, whereas Magenta would mean more than a four-fifths decrease.

I am therefore strongly opposed to both the Beige and Cyan routes. An online route would not be a bypass at all. It would sever Arundel unacceptably and affect between 120 and 142 properties – at least four times as many as Magenta. The Beige option would still result in traffic holdups and would not provide sufficient capacity in the long-term.

The Grey route would miss the National Park altogether, but it would be the most expensive and affect too many properties at Walberton. Although the Crimson route would affect the fewest number of properties, it would go through more of the National Park and ‘ancient’ woodland than any other.

A dual carriageway bypass will save commuters using the A27 at Arundel twice a day between an hour and an hour-and-a-half of journey time every week. These are significant time savings.

However, a bypass is not a matter for Arundel or its proximate villages alone; nor will the benefits be confined to residents of the Town and commuters. An offline bypass will effectively be a National Park relief road, reducing traffic in the Park and in downland villages such as Storrington which currently has one of the worst levels of air pollution in the country.

The Arundel bypass is an infrastructure project of national significance. It will be an important step towards the full dualling of the A27 in West Sussex, and it will support economic development in the region. My judgement is that the vast majority of my constituents want an offline bypass and believe that it is long overdue. It should proceed without further delay.