So is this to be the Third Battle of Hastings?

Not if Swampy groups have their way!

Green groups challenge new Hastings road plan

Environment groups have condemned East Sussex County Council's plan to build a Bexhill to Hastings link road, claiming it is little different to part of the controversial Hastings Western bypass rejected by ministers in 2001.

East Sussex County Council is consulting on six alternative alignments for the link road which, it says, will relieve traffic congestion on the existing A259 Bexhill Road, facilitate development and create jobs. The project is backed by the district councils, the Highways Agency, local businesses and MPs.

East Sussex Transport 2000 representative Derrick Coffee said the organisation would boycott the consultation. He claimed that, whichever route was chosen, the road would be environmentally damaging whilst the economic impacts of the road were not guaranteed. Friends of the Earth campaigner Mike Turner said the link road could lead to pressure for the controversial Hastings Eastern bypass to be resurrected.

The six routes vary in cost from £50m to £145m and vary in length between 5.1km and 6.9km. East Sussex says that the orange route, costing £50m, is similar to the Western bypass route rejected by the Government. The brown, orange, purple and pink routes all cross the Combe Haven SSSI. The red route is the most costly, with much of the road being built in deep cuttings and tunnels to avoid the main Combe Haven valley.

However for what it's worth!

East Sussex County Council is currently consulting on route options for the Bexhill to Hastings link road, aka son of the rejected Hastings western bypass. Like the bypass, all the options would horribly damage the fantastic countryside between the two towns.

To see the ESCC consultation newspaper, go to www.eastsussex.gov.uk/bexhillconsultation/default.asp <http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/bexhillconsultation/default.asp>

East Sussex Transport 2000 is boycotting the consultation - for their reasons, see the press release below. But probably most groups who oppose the link road will be participating.

My suggestion if you are against the link road is - do something!

You could write to East Sussex County Council. They want responses by 12 March to the following address (no stamp needed):

East Sussex County Council

Transport and Environment Ref D3

Freepost (LW43)

LEWES

BN7 1BR

You could also write to the Government Office for the South East. The best people to write to are:

Andy Roberts, Transport Director - aroberts.gose@go-regions.gsi.gov.uk <mailto:aroberts.gose@go-regions.gsi.gov.uk>

Lee Sambrook, Transport East Team Leader - lsambrook.gose@go-regions.gsi.gov.uk <mailto:lsambrook.gose@go-regions.gsi.gov.uk>

EAST SUSSEX TRANSPORT 2000 – PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE USE – FRIDAY 13 FEBRUARY 2004

Local group boycotts sham link road consultation

‘The public consultation on future travel options for Bexhill and Hastings is a sham and so we are boycotting it’ say local transport group East Sussex Transport 2000.

The consultation is a sham because –

· Only roadbuilding is being offered as a solution – alternatives to driving plus effective incentives to use these should have been offered. The consultation wrongly ignores these ways to reduce traffic levels.

· East Sussex County Council is not being honest about the economic and environmental impacts of a Bexhill to Hastings link road. The economic benefits are far from guaranteed and, as found by the Access to Hastings multi-modal transport study, the road could have adverse effects on the most deprived wards of Hastings. The claim in the consultation newspaper that a link road could be built ‘without cost to the surrounding countryside’ is patent nonsense.

· None of the road options could be built without contradicting the Government’s own environmental policies and several options would never be approved on grounds of cost and/or unacceptable environmental damage.

· The consultation period is four weeks. Not only is this inadequate, Government policy recommends 12 weeks of consultation.

None of the many studies of transport in Hastings and Bexhill has looked seriously at cutting congestion and improving the towns’ environments by controlling traffic and providing much better alternatives to the car – this should now be done.

Speaking for the group, Derrick Coffee said:

‘This consultation is not fit for purpose. It simply reflects the County Council’s blind determination to build an expensive and damaging link road scheme that will shackle alternatives for decades to come.

‘There are many examples of good practice where measures to promote walking, cycling and public transport have been highly successful, making important contributions to traffic reduction and improving quality of life for communities in the UK. We want Hastings and Bexhill to enjoy first-rate transport that benefits all sections of the communities, not an offer of a destructive and irrelevant road scheme with a vague promise of a few extra buses and the odd pedestrian crossing bolted on.’

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And More

For your info, on 3 March the Times newspaper had a story on the Bexhill to Hastings link road. An expanded version of this is on the Times Online website, the text of which is below - the website also has a map.

Article on Times Online website at www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,172-1023427,00.html <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,172-1023427,00.html>

3 March 2004

Road U-turn as rejected plans resurface under new names

By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent

Road building schemes that were rejected by the Government as too damaging to the environment are being resurrected and put back on the agenda under different names.

Countryside campaigners celebrated in 2001 when Stephen Byers, then the Transport Secretary, rejected the Hastings western bypass because it would cut through areas of “designated high environmental value”.

Now a key section of the bypass is being promoted again by East Sussex County Council as the “Bexhill to Hastings link road”. However, most of the options being considered still cut through Combe Haven site of special scientific interest. The site includes reedbeds and ancient woodland which are home to breeding birds and rare species of butterfly and dragonfly.

The proposed road scheme is one of several that have been dusted off and repackaged. The A36 Salisbury bypass was cancelled by Labour after it won power in 1997 because it would have crossed water meadows painted by Constable. Part of the original route has now been retitled the “Harnham relief road and Brunel link” and has been granted provisional funding.

A new version of the A27 “Acle straight” dual carriageway in Norfolk, which was rejected in 1996 because of the adverse impact on the Broads National Park, is being reconsidered by the Highways Agency. Even the Arundel bypass, which was rejected by ministers only last July after dozens of protesters built treehouses on the route, is being studied again by officials.

The environmental groups that thought they had won the war against these roads now admit that they may have succeeded only in delaying them.

The roads were originally proposed to accommodate increased traffic, which has become worse since they were rejected. Traffic has grown by a third in some areas since 1997 and there are an extra three million cars on the roads.

Last year the Government abandoned its target of reducing congestion and announced that it would grow by up to a fifth by 2011. With countrywide congestion tolls ruled out for ten years, the Department for Transport believes that new roads are the only realistic way of coping.

Bob Wilkins, director of transport for East Sussex, said that trains were not a viable alternative to the link road. “The sheer volume of traffic means that even if 1 per cent of drivers shifted to trains, that would represent a 13 per cent increase in rail travel. Also, trains simply do not provide the flexibility people need for their journeys.”

Mr Wilkins admitted that the link road could eventually be extended to cover the full route of the original bypass. “If the Government decided it had made a mistake in 2001 and it wished to promote a trunk road bypass round Hastings and Bexhill, then no doubt they would make use of the link road,” he said. “I don’t think anything is ever ruled out for ever.”

Colin Murray, of East Sussex Transport 2000, said: “We thought we had beaten the bypass but now history looks like repeating itself as farce. If the link road goes ahead it would be a betrayal of the Government’s original decision.”

WAYS AHEAD

· Orange route: follows path of rejected bypass. Short and cheap at £50 million

· Purple route: releases land for new housing in north Bexhill. Cost: £55 million

· Red route: avoids main valley. Most expensive and least likely at £145 million

· Blue route: preserves head of main valley: £60 million

· Pink route: closest to built-up areas but longest at 4.3 miles and least useful for traffic: £85 million

· Brown route: avoids main part of valley but still crosses it at points: £50 million.

Many thanks to Colin for the above.