A27 Arundel Bypass

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by jackal »

Consultation starts 22 Aug. Details from the RIS summary of assumptions:
A27 Arundel: new dual carriageway bypass, subject to consultation with the National Parks Authority, local authorities and the publication of this and alternative options
Committed - new
Autumn Statement 2014 (Feasibility Study)
£100-250m
More from HE: http://roads.highways.gov.uk/projects/a ... provement/
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Berk »

jackal wrote:Consultation starts 22 Aug. Details from the RIS summary of assumptions:
A27 Arundel: new dual carriageway bypass, subject to consultation with the National Parks Authority, local authorities and the publication of this and alternative options
Committed - new
Autumn Statement 2014 (Feasibility Study)
£100-250m
More from HE: http://roads.highways.gov.uk/projects/a ... provement/
I think my eyes need checking - I read that as 'construction starts on 22. Aug'... :shock:
Lil
Member
Posts: 466
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 23:15

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Lil »

I received a letter last week saying that Lancing-Worthing consultation due to start tomorrow (July 19th)
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Berk »

Hope that everything can keep (and stay) crossed, so it doesn't die an early death like Chichester. To be fair, though, the road layout is somewhat easier than Chichester. And anyone who is familiar with the area knows how awful the traffic situation is.

Letting A27 traffic continue through the underpass (as originally planned) will be a massive relief - people will ask why they'd not thought of doing it sooner.
BOH
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 14:19

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by BOH »

So why was the original bypass never completed and the A27 dual-carriageway strangely finishing at a nice GSJ at Crossbush rather than continuing on across open fields to join up the other side of Arundel? Was there a damn good reason for having started the scheme and not completing it?
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Johnathan404 »

BOH wrote:Was there a damn good reason for having started the scheme and not completing it?
It was hardly "started"; the Crossbush Bypass included a junction layout that would make extending it easy. This was expected to happen about six years later.

That said, having the westbound carriageway narrow to a single lane was pretty short-sighted.
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
Lil
Member
Posts: 466
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 23:15

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Lil »

I don't believe it's been announced the Crossbush junction wouldn't be used, in fact it's almost certain it would, how else do you route the A27.

The issue is more the other side at Binsted and Binsted woods which has lead to some suggesting the new A27 bypass heads west from Crossbush towards the current bypass at the bridge over the River Arun and then upgrade online from there.

The reason for the cancellation was the New Deal for Transport in 1997 I believe.

Which is what did for the Polegate bypass as well.

The narrowing westbound as per the original layout was indeed ridiculous, the queues can be bad these days but having everything go down to one lane westbound before the junction at Crossbush was appalling.
Benny
Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 18:04

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Benny »

I lived near Crossbush in the 90s and we were told the farmer kept upping the price he wanted for the land and because he had 'connections' he could get away with it. Of course that could probably just be gossip but he wasn't a popular man.

I will not hold my breath. That road has needed to be D2 since I was at primary school and I'm almost 35. I will be impressed if its done before 2025.
Living my life on the edge......of two counties!

Formerly known as Roverman

Still driving a British built car, made in a former Rover factory......
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16908
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Chris5156 »

roverman wrote:I lived near Crossbush in the 90s and we were told the farmer kept upping the price he wanted for the land and because he had 'connections' he could get away with it. Of course that could probably just be gossip but he wasn't a popular man.
Land needed for a road scheme would be bought through a Compulsory Purchase Order and the farmer would get market value for it. I don't think haggling is part of the process!

There are other stories like this one - the farm in the middle of the M62 is the classic one, where the urban myth persists that the farmer refused to sell - but they tend to be nonsense.
BOH
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 14:19

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by BOH »

Chris5156 wrote:
roverman wrote:I lived near Crossbush in the 90s and we were told the farmer kept upping the price he wanted for the land and because he had 'connections' he could get away with it. Of course that could probably just be gossip but he wasn't a popular man.
Land needed for a road scheme would be bought through a Compulsory Purchase Order and the farmer would get market value for it. I don't think haggling is part of the process!

There are other stories like this one - the farm in the middle of the M62 is the classic one, where the urban myth persists that the farmer refused to sell - but they tend to be nonsense.
Think you are right - the M62 being built with each carriageway around the farm was to do with geological conditions there. As in the ground was too steep to fit all 6 lanes together. It is true the farmer was refusing to sell but the compulsory purchase was avoided by the geological conditions making it not necessary.
doofer
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 12:26

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by doofer »

It's all a bit pointless when Grayling and his pal Lord March of Goodwood have already prevented the Chichester northern bypass from happening any time soon.

Any further congestion removal along the A27 will just stuff more and more traffic into the already congested Chichester southern bypass, making it even worse.
doofer
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 12:26

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by doofer »

Looking on Google Earth, there's a straight line that was once cleared through the woodland on the western approach to Arundel. It looks like it would have been part of a straight line from the end of the existing dual carriageway to the stump of the junction at Crossbush. Does anyone know if this was cleared in preparation for this road when it was previously planned? It looks like a perfect route, except for the fact that it bumps into Dukes Close and the rest of a housing estate there.

I don't know if these houses are pre- or post-1990s, but I suppose it's even possible that they could have been earmarked for demolition if they existed back then.

It would be a long route around if selective demolition of houses around this area wasn't an option. The dual carriageway coming in from the east also sets a trajectory towards these same houses.
BOH
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 14:19

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by BOH »

doofer wrote:It's all a bit pointless when Grayling and his pal Lord March of Goodwood have already prevented the Chichester northern bypass from happening any time soon.

Any further congestion removal along the A27 will just stuff more and more traffic into the already congested Chichester southern bypass, making it even worse.
Although that is the precise reason that is always trotted out to do nothing...."no point unless all stretches are upgraded at the same time because that just moves the traffic jam". If a start isn't even made unless ALL stretches are done then nothing ever will be done. At the very least is it will speed up traffic and remove congestion in the Arundel area.

Quite a few road schemes have been successfully been done piecemail - the one that immediately springs to mind is the A34 from M3 at Winchester to the M40 north of Oxford. First the Oxford by-pass was done in the 1960s, then various open country stretches were on-line dualled plus by-passes of places like Abingdon and Sutton Scotney. In the 1980s the hills over the Chilterns were dualled and finally, Newbury was bypassed in the 1990s and the M4 interchange was then made into a proper GSJ. Not an ideal way of creating a strategic trunk route....but the A34 is now (finally) an uninterrupted N-S GSJ route in the middle of the southern UK.

Why not the same for the A27? - if it is the only way to improve this road then we should do it bit by bit....
doofer
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 12:26

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by doofer »

Yes, you're right - I'm just bitter, after seeing what a complete waste of everyone's time and effort the consultation was for the Chichester bypass. I really get the feeling that asking Joe Public is more about ticking the "Consultation" box than actually listening to any of the answers. In the case of Chichester, they didn't get the answer they wanted so Grayling just took away his ball and stormed off in a huff when people were starting to understand how corrupt the whole process was starting to look.

In fact throwing more traffic at Chichester would force our almighty rulers to put a proper bypass back on the table. Additionally, a further increase in traffic should be enough to rule out all the various online options that wouldn't inconvenience his lordship in having a bypass anywhere near his precious estate.
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Johnathan404 »

Chris5156 wrote:Land needed for a road scheme would be bought through a Compulsory Purchase Order and the farmer would get market value for it. I don't think haggling is part of the process!
While you're probably right in the case of the A27, for full accuracy I'd add that there is a debate about how much a field is worth, and if the farmer wants to have that debate it can drag the project out and push the costs up.
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Reading »

now all we need is for someone to find another Roman villa slap bang on the proposed route as it starts and we get to wait another 20 years
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by Reading »

doofer wrote:Looking on Google Earth, there's a straight line that was once cleared through the woodland on the western approach to Arundel. It looks like it would have been part of a straight line from the end of the existing dual carriageway to the stump of the junction at Crossbush. Does anyone know if this was cleared in preparation for this road when it was previously planned? It looks like a perfect route, except for the fact that it bumps into Dukes Close and the rest of a housing estate there.

I don't know if these houses are pre- or post-1990s, but I suppose it's even possible that they could have been earmarked for demolition if they existed back then.

It would be a long route around if selective demolition of houses around this area wasn't an option. The dual carriageway coming in from the east also sets a trajectory towards these same houses.
sorry just a firebreak for electricity wires - https://goo.gl/maps/9iGAR2MPXxF2
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by jackal »

The 2015 feasibility study recommended two offline routes, one through the park, and a longer one to avoid it. An online route and one closer to the town limit were rejected.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... report.pdf
WHBM
Member
Posts: 9707
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 18:01
Location: London

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by WHBM »

Chris5156 wrote:Land needed for a road scheme would be bought through a Compulsory Purchase Order and the farmer would get market value for it. I don't think haggling is part of the process!
Almost. Although a CPO can of course be obtained, they are a particular expense, and can even impact on the construction schedule, especially if there is a legal challenge. Therefore if someone declines the original offer, up to a certain point it can be worthwhile to pay an increased amount just to get things agreed.

On the other hand, some of the initially offered amounts can appear decidedly niggardly, and there are some cases where the project seems to be taking advantage of the system. Old, poor quality housing in inner cities used to be a particular target for this, and Comprehensive Development Areas can be worse offenders than road projects - the compensation not enabling the owner to get anything equivalent. Small privately-owned shops are also commonly stiffed. District Surveyors using "Market value" is not only subjective, but can get caught by rapidly rising prices between the agreement and the person pushed out actually managing to make the transaction for something else.
doofer
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 12:26

Re: A27 Arundel Bypass

Post by doofer »

Reading wrote:
doofer wrote:
sorry just a firebreak for electricity wires - https://goo.gl/maps/9iGAR2MPXxF2
Aha - thank you, thought it looked a bit too straight.

The end of the dual at Crossbush roundabout really does look like it's swerving with a purpose, like someone had an actual plan at the time it was built, perhaps a few more houses are in the way now. With a bit of a wiggle it could go along the back of Stewards Rise and Birch Close
Post Reply