Dragon Interview: Lead Councillor Tom Hunt on Ash Road Bridge Delays

Published on: 11 Dec, 2024
Updated on: 11 Dec, 2024

Ash Road Bridge CGI

Publication of this interview was delayed by technical glitches when recording. Despite a second attempt, the interview had to be completed in written Q&A. The Dragon is grateful to Cllr Hunt’s forbearance and cooperation.

Last week Cllr Hunt apologised for errors in communication connected with the delayed opening of Ash road bridge.

At one stage it appeared that the bridge opening would be delayed while the planned closure of the level crossing at Ash Station continued, causing consternation among Ash residents.

Please watch the following interview which continues in written format below…

You have accepted responsibility and apologised as the lead councillor responsible for the project but will others below you, perhaps not publicly, also be held to account for the errors?

We will look at project procedures and address any shortcomings. It has been suggested that a lessons learned exercise is run by one of GBC’s Overview & Scrutiny committees once the project is complete, and I think this is a good idea.

Where did the breakdown in communications occur between the construction team VolkerFitzpatrick and the rest of the project? Why wasn’t there better coordination of the comms?

That’s something we will be looking into.

And once the error was realised why did it take so long, a week, before it was announced that the level crossing would not be closed before the bridge opened?

We took time to deconflate the two issues I described, and to ensure that our comms were accurate.

How was it that County Cllr Matt Furniss said that the permit to close the road and level crossing was “provisional”, something I believe you still dispute?

VolkerFitzpatrick, GBC’s contractor, had the necessary permits – the Traffic Regulation Orders – in place. We have e-mails confirming this. The confirmation of TRO mentions neither its alleged provisional status, nor any conditions attached to it.

GBC remains committed to working with the highways authority to open the Chester Bridge in the New Year in a safe and timely way, and we have applied for a new permit in order to ensure that there is absolutely no ambiguity around whether phase 5 can proceed.

We have been told that a possible reason for the delay to the opening is the presence of Japanese knotweed on site. Is that true?

Japanese Knotweed was found on site earlier in the year, and some knotweed was brought onto site by a sub-contractor in a consignment of structural fill material. All the identified knotweed has been removed by a licensed firm in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. The contractor continues to monitor for any further appearances as a precautionary measure.

The appearance of Japanese Knotweed on site has had no impact on the project timeline, nor on budget, nor on the safety or structural integrity of the bridge.

We have advised neighbouring landowners, and no further presence of Japanese Knotweed has been identified.

What happens if neighbours are affected by the weed and blame the bridge project?

Any affected neighbours should contact either their developer or the council, but given that we have taken such firm action to remove the contaminated soil, I think it would be unlikely for any local properties to be affected by knotweed as a result of this.

View from the still-to-be-opened bridge looking south…

What is happening about the footbridge? Isn’t it also required to improve pedestrian
convenience and safety?

The footbridge is a Network Rail responsibility. I understand that Network Rail is currently working on a feasibility study, which should complete around February.

GBC has budget set aside to take a design through the planning process.

Will pedestrians and cyclists be able to use the new bridge when open?

Yes, the west footpath over the new bridge is a shared footway/cycleway. The east footpath over the new bridge is a footway only.

…and the view from the bridge looking north. Images GBC

What extra value to the Ash community and users of the route will the bridge bring?

The bridge will improve safety for local residents and users of Ash railway station. It will also reduce traffic congestion (the level crossing is currently closed for up to 25 minutes in an hour, causing congestion and pollution), and will provide new connectivity for the new homes being developed in the area.

Like all modern public sector procurement contracts, the contractor has some social value obligations. VolkerFitzpatrick has delivered social value obligations worth £2.6m, calculated using a widely recognised social value Impact Evaluation Standard (IES). Activities include VolkerFitzpatrick:

Employing 17 local people currently on site (there have been up to 30 local people working
on site at different stages of the project);
Taking part in a local ‘Construct Fest’ at Surrey Sports Park for two years running. This event
offers students an insight into digital careers within the construction industry;
Helping prepare Ash Manor School students for job interviews; and
Giving four Ash Manor School students work experience on site.

And what do you say to those who say: “We didn’t want the extra houses nor the bridge with its associated problems, a bridge only built as a result of all the development in Ash.”?

I understand that the bridge isn’t universally popular, but I have met many residents of Ash who
welcome the bridge because it will reduce rat running, ease congestion and reduce pollution.