Clay Lane Collision – Resident Calls for Planning Rethink

Published on: 29 Jan, 2018
Updated on: 31 Jan, 2018

The two cars involved in the collision in Clay Lane yesterday – photos Steve Knight

One person was taken to hospital as a result of a two-car collision in Jacobs Well yesterday. Clay Lane was closed for several hours.

A police spokesperson said: “We were called to reports of a collision involving two vehicles on Clay Lane in Jacobs Well shortly before 9.30am yesterday (January 28).

“The road was closed from 9.40am with officers providing support to South East Ambulance Service attending those involved in the collision. One person was taken to hospital but did not suffer life-threatening injuries.

Local resident Steve Knight said: “This, to my knowledge, is the 16th accident over the past nine months.

“Yesterday’s accident was serious and Clay Lane remained closed for around four hours as police, ambulances and recovery people dealt with the carnage. The knock on effect was major congestion on surrounding roads (eg the A320 Woking Road) and it was just ‘fortunate’ that this latest crash happened on a Sunday morning – if it had been a weekday, most of Guildford would have been grid-locked.

The road remained blocked for four hours.

“As we are all aware this is a notorious piece of road as it is narrow, with tight bends and reverse camber and the issues multiply on wet and damp days (especially if vehicles are travelling at more than the 30 mph speed limit).

“Surrey County Council Highways Department are obviously aware of the dangers as there is a road weight restriction of 7.5tonnes to stop lorries and a new “Slow Down” solar sign has recently been installed.

“I hope the people taken away by ambulance yesterday were not seriously hurt (although one did not look good) but the bottom line is that we should be doing all we can to make this stretch of busy road safer.

“The residents of Jacobs Well therefore think that it is nothing short of madness to see that Chambers have a planning application lodged with GBC (17/P/02590) to change their skip repair base near the bend into a full blown bus maintenance depot and workshop, with nearly 30 Safeguard buses being based on the small and impractical Chambers site. This would mean buses pulling out and across traffic any hour of the day or night.

One person was taken to hospital but their injuries were not reported to be life-threatening.

“Clay Lane was never built for large vehicles or buses and as one of the policemen at the accident said yesterday “imagine two buses trying to pass on this bend – so dangerous” – a disaster waiting to happen? Especially if one of those buses was a school bus.

“The planning application comes up before the full council in February and I just hope that the Guildford Borough councillors see sense and reject this ridiculous planning application.

“It would be more practical to build a few houses on the site and let Safeguard move to somewhere more suitable (e.g. Burnt Common).”

Responses to Clay Lane Collision – Resident Calls for Planning Rethink

Jim Allen Reply

January 29, 2018 at 10:28 pm

16 in the past year since re-surfacing – plus 30 vehicles damaged or involved in accidents in the past 18 years (up to Jan 2017). The current provision is for ‘signs’ to improve the grip on this slippery road. For over six months now we have been campaigning for a ‘sticky surface’ (like coarse sandpaper) for this location. SCC seems to need fatalities before taking action. The community just want safety and cannot understand why it is being delayed.
Dave Middleton Reply

January 30, 2018 at 12:29 pm

Hundreds, if not thousands of motorists safely and competently negotiate this bend every day. The problem lies not with the road surface or layout, but with incompetent drivers who are incapable of controlling their vehicles, or are too busy fiddling with their stereo / mobile phone / satnav or other distraction, or are simply not concentrating of the task at hand of driving their car.

The same applies just along the road at the junction with Blanchards Hill. Sheer incompetence.
- Barrie Friend Reply
  
  October 16, 2023 at 9:15 am
  
  My concern is for bikes and pedestrians. That tiny bit of pavement on the bend and the wall behind it. I’m surprised no one has been killed
Jim Allen Reply

January 30, 2018 at 8:00 pm

Sadly all the time people blame it on the driver no sensible approach to dangerous roads will ever occur. Mr Middleton should know accidents at crossroads are a natural function of vehicles meeting at 90 degrees while accidents such as this are the result of adverse camber, poor choice of road surface and, occasionally, an oily, polished surface. It is noticeable yet another sign has been placed near this dangerous bend.

I wonder if any who blame it on the driver have ever driven on black ice or on a skidpan. Perhaps any commenting and blaming drivers they should take an advanced driving test first. They then could perhaps understand the difference between having the space to control a sliding vehicle and the reason a vehicle slides in the first place.
Dave Middleton Reply

January 31, 2018 at 6:33 pm

I disagree with virtually everything Jim Allen says in his reply to my comment.

Collisions at crossroads arise as a result of driver error or incompetence; not the existence of the crossroads.

An adverse camber does not cause collisions; the inability of the driver to recognise the feature and adapt their driving causes the collision.

I have driven on “black ice”, compacted and frozen snow, flooded roads and roads contaminated with oil, mud, cattle dung, farmyard slurry and other substances. I have also driven on unmade roads and gravelled tracks.
By concentrating on what I’m doing, recognising and, often anticipating, hazards and adapting my driving to deal with them, I avoid losing control of my vehicle and being involved in a collision.

Coating the bend in question with ShellGrip, or another treatment that improves the friction coefficient or “grip” between tyres and the road surface at this junction, will simply lead to drivers travelling faster around it and their vehicles losing traction at a higher speed, which will in all probability lead to a more serious collision; still due to driver error.

Obviously, I was not present at the collision reported in this article, but looking at the pictures and from knowledge of the bend, I’d be prepared to hazard an educated guess that either the car travelling toward Burpham ran wide on the bend, or the car travelling towards Jacobs Well cut the apex of the bend, with the result that they collided. Speed may well have been a factor, but again I say that driver error will most likely have been the principal cause.
Paul Robinson Reply

February 1, 2018 at 1:16 am

It is not often I disagree with Jim Allen, but on this occasion I do. Dave Middleton is right in everything he says.
John Perkins Reply

February 1, 2018 at 10:01 am

Really? Always the result of driver incompetence or error?

When brakes fail or a wheel falls off and the driver is unable to safely deal with the situation then that’s mere inexperience. Of course, the root cause must be mechanical negligence, incompetence or error, but it’s hardly the fault of the driver. When control is lost because a vehicle hits an unsafe piece of road, say a pothole in the dark, then that’s surely negligence by a third party or simply misfortune. When a driver suffers a sudden failure, for example a heart attack, no level of competence or diligence will help.

I do agree that drivers travel faster when they feel safer. However, one logical conclusion from that is to make driving less safe. According to the old joke a large spike in the centre of the steering wheel should do the trick.

People make mistakes and there’s consensus that it’s better to try to mitigate the consequences.
- Paul Robinson Reply
  
  February 2, 2018 at 6:07 pm
  
  How often do brakes fail and how many times do you see a car at the side of the road with a wheel missing these days? Last one I saw a Morris 1000 with a king pin failure.
Paul Bishop Reply

February 2, 2018 at 8:22 am

I agree wholeheartedly with Dave Middleton. I drive this piece of road very regularly in many weather conditions, in many different vehicles and the only times I’ve had any near misses have been due to the incompetence of other drivers, pulling out of the crossroads without looking, not sticking to their side of the road around the bends and general excess speed.

To blame the suitability of the road is frankly ridiculous. Drivers need to adapt and drive to the road. No car driven at a sensible speed will have any issues with grip along this road.

I wonder if there are any stats on the cause of the crashes? Mobile phone use, excess speed, lack of attention. A sticky surface will just encourage more excess speed. The crashes will still happen, just at faster speed.
Liz Critchfield Reply

February 2, 2018 at 1:30 pm

Proverbs 16:18
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.
Frank Phillipson Reply

February 2, 2018 at 8:46 pm

Driver error and inattention is the most common contributory factor in UK road accidents, according to new statistics from the Department for Transport, while speed-related causes contribute to just 14 per cent of all prangs.

The DfT stats attribute 68 per cent of all road accidents to a failure to look, while in the majority (32 per cent) of fatal accidents loss of control is reported as the contributory factor.

Exceeding the speed limit is a contributory factor in five per cent of all accidents; driving too fast for conditions accounts for nine per cent. This makes exceeding the speed limit the sixth most common contributory factor.