Ash Residents Express Doubts and Fears Over New Rail Bridge Plan

Published on: 22 Jun, 2019
Updated on: 27 Jun, 2019

By David Reading

Opinion is divided over the proposed new railway bridge at Ash, whether it will solve the area’s traffic problems or make matters worse, with extra expense to be suffered by council taxpayers.

Ash level crossing – photo David Reading

Many favour the project, but the two local resident associations have documented concerns. They say they are not trying to stop the bridge being built but just trying to determine if it is the most cost-effective way of alleviating traffic problems without moving such problems elsewhere.

Those supporting the project believe removal of the level crossing will alleviate the severe jams that build when the barrier is down. Such congestion would worsen with many hundreds of new homes planned in the area.

For traffic heading for Guildford, the bridge route would take vehicles from Ash Church Road (the A323), into Foreman Road, with a new roundabout roughly near access to the Ellsworth Park development.

The proposed route of the new Ash flyover or bridge. Image GBC.

Traffic would then cross the new bridge, through the new Copperwood development, joining the roundabout at the end of Ash Hill Road (the Dover Arms site). A separate footbridge for pedestrians and cyclists is planned.

Ash Residents Association (ASHRA) and Ash Green Residents’ Association (AGRA) are not satisfied with the answers they got during meetings with Guildford Borough Council.

In an effort to clarify the situation, the Dragon outlined issues causing concern and placed these before the council. Here are the answers:

Funding

The residents are worried that any funding shortfall could have to be paid by the council taxpayer?

The council says:

“The total estimated cost of delivering both the road bridge and the foot bridge is in the region of £20m. Homes England have confirmed their £10m grant award under the Housing Infrastructure Fund and we are currently working through the contract details with them.

“Network Rail has also confirmed a financial contribution of £2.5m towards the scheme.

“We are anticipating Section 106 receipts of around £7m to £8m, possibly higher, from local housing schemes, and have already secured significant bridge contributions from several developers, including Bewley Homes, Thakeham Homes and Copperwood Developments. (A Section 106 is a legal agreement between an applicant seeking planning permission and the local planning authority.)

“Should there ultimately be a funding shortfall for the bridge(s) this would be a matter for the council’s democratically elected councillors to make a decision on, but it is too early to say whether this will be the case at this time.”

Traffic problems

Residents are concerned there should be a holistic approach to the area’s traffic problems. They fear that although the bridge will serve its main purpose – the closure of the level crossing – it will have a knock-on effect elsewhere in the area.

Specific locations of concern include:

The A323. There are concerns that traffic coming from the Ash Church Road direction approaching the new Foreman Road roundabout will have to give way to traffic coming from the Ash Green direction. It is feared that rush-hour traffic will back up along the A323, to the Greyhound roundabout and beyond.

Grange Road. Here, traffic could increase considerably as drivers living on the new Ash Lodge Park Estate look for a short-cut to the new bridge, thus avoiding the junction at South Lane taking them on to the A323.

Ash Hill Road. Traffic approaching the “Dover Arms” roundabout will have difficulty finding a gap in the traffic to turn left. Although the current level crossing undoubtedly causes traffic problems, at least traffic turning left can find a gap easily when the gates are closed.

The council says it is well aware of these issues, adding:

“A Transport Assessment is being prepared by our consultants. It will fully consider the impacts of the proposed road bridge on the road network and will be submitted as a supporting document to the planning application itself.

“It would not be appropriate to discuss specific locations at this point. However, the Transport Assessment will be published at the same time as the other documents once a planning application has been formally submitted and any concerned residents will be able to read this and make observations at that time.”

Pollution and other environmental matters

Concerns about vehicle pollution are focused particularly on the roads around the local schools.

The council says:

“As well as the usual supporting information one would expect for a development of this nature, the application for the new road bridge will be accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES) produced in accordance with the 2017 Environmental Impact Assessment regulations.

“This will fully assess key issues, including: Landscape and Visual impact; Air Quality, Traffic; Noise and Vibration; Water Resources; Heritage; Ecology; and People and Communities. In addition, the application will be supported by a detailed Transport Assessment, based on well-established traffic modelling, to inform the actions that need to be taken.”

Affordable housing

The residents are concerned that if there is a shortfall in funding, this might impact on the local plan policy of providing 40 per cent of affordable housing within new developments.

The council says:

“We have undertaken various viability assessments and are confident contributions needed towards the bridge should not detrimentally impact on developers’ ability to provide affordable housing in accordance with the council’s policies. The Copperwood development on land to the south of Guildford Road will be delivering 35% of the total number of units in the form of affordable housing.

“This percentage is entirely consistent with the planning policy that was in place at the time their outline application was considered by the Planning Committee.”

Communication

There has been criticism that communication with the public has not been thorough. The council insists it is listening to local concerns and will seek to address these, wherever possible, in its formal planning applications that will follow this summer. The council adds:

“We would advise that the planning application(s) for both the road and footbridge will be widely publicised via both site and press notices, and also through individual letters to neighbouring properties. There will be ample opportunity given for any interested parties to make formal representations to the local planning authority at that time.

“The final decision on whether or not to grant planning permission will rest with the Planning Committee, which is made up of democratically elected councillors, rather than under delegated powers to officers.”

We welcome comments from our readers on the above issues.