Bank at Ash Lane

Thursday last week action and drama came to the streets of Randwick. I only picked up a load of messages after getting back from work that evening and then ended up in many phone calls myself. I understand that due to the quick thinking of one local resident in particular the bank beside the road was not dug out - I am told that some 15 residents turned out at various times to help try and stop the action - certainly Parish Chair Richard Huxford was very active all day in seeking to clarify the situation and prevent actions that seem not to have had permission.

Photos; the bank in question marked out for removal by contractors

So what is this all about? I understand the contractor and resident wanting the bank removed said that they had paperwork that allowed them to remove the bank near the entrance to Ash Lane. However when the paperwork was requested they were unable to produce it but still considered they had been given permission. The contractor was there much of day with a digger and Stroud District Compliance Officers were excellent in that they turned up immediately and were back and forth on the scene trying to clarify the situation.

Why this bank? It is suggested that Highways have said that removing the bank would improve safety at the Ash Lane junction. This safety measure has been much discussed relating to a planning application for an additional house at Ash Lane. There has been very strong opposition from locals to the plan - not so much for the house but for measures like the digging out the bank. Indeed I have to agree and wrote my own letter of objection to the bank removal earlier in the year.

Bank removal would increase speed A number of local residents note, and I agree with them, that the cutting away the bank will lead to a perception that the road is wider and will also give longer views: this will lead to increased speeds and consequently more dangers. The junction is not good at present but cars slow considerably at that point (maybe not enough but increasing views will only make it worse). I am told there have been no accidents there and, if they were to occur, then cars are generally traveling at lower speeds so would cause less damage.

Bank removal not attractive? Residents are also concerned that any replacement of the bank would look ugly: stone gabions have been discussed in the past although I understand these were discounted as they needed planning applications. This work on Thursday day was only meant to be a 'shaving' of the bank although looking at the white lines it looked very severe. It will certainly change the look of the entrance road to the village in a way that in my view reduces the attractiveness of that part of the village. The banks removal could also lead to more likely landslips from the field above: indeed the removal of trees recently from the bank was meant to be due to it being 'unstable' - something many local residents have disputed saying that the trees held the bank in place.

Concerns contractor would return? Some residents were concerned that the contractor would return the following day and start removing the bank. However it seems the Compliance Officers were able to make the position clear and several people including myself left urgent messages at Highways. I also contacted the Cabinet member, Stan Waddington who was helpful in ensuring a message from him was also left - plus I let our local County Councillor Len Tomlins know as this is a County Council matter more so than a District.

Where are we now? It is clear that Stroud District Council knew nothing of the proposed works - however it was Highways land and the nature of works meant apparently that no planning permission would be needed. I am not yet clear how the confusion has arisen so that the resident and contractor believed they had permission to remove part of the bank. It does seems to be the case that Highways have not objected to some shaving back of a section of the bank as long as the is gradient maintained, and the grass bank is reinstated. But Highways do not appear to have given permission for the work to happen: indeed I understand that normally Highways would do it themselves and bill the customer rather than letting them proceed doing the works.

Consultation? It is noted that Highways would not normally expect to carry out any public consultation on minor changes. To me this is wrong in most cases but particularly in the light of the number of key letters and objections to the previous proposed work on the bank. Some 40% of public space is roads and it seems they can get away with almost anything - witness in my view the ugly and unneccessary road paint applied recently in the area - like for example the centre of Randwick village and outside Whiteshill School. Anyhow in the light of the strong feelings around this case in Ash Lane I have written to Highways and Stroud District Council urging that consultation needs to take place and requested that myself, the Parish Council, residents and others are able to make representations. I have not heard back yet but understand a site meeting is planned.

I have not seen the plans for the work but as noted I have seen the white lines marked out on the bank - still there today and just visible in the photos - it maybe that some attractive plan can be found but I would like to reiterate my concerns that any improvements of visibility on that stretch will lead to traffic traveling faster. Indeed if anything I would be arguing for the road to be made to look more narrow - this would in my view be far more useful as a traffic calming measure.

Do leave comments on this site or email me if you have any queries. I hope this is a useful summary as I've had three further people contact me over the weekend asking for an update.