It may not be the Silverstone racetrack, but barriers in a chicane on the road over the Colwall railway bridge are proving too tight a driving challenge, says a local campaign group.
Invoking the Freedom of Information Act, members of the Colwall Bridge Campaign Group have got their hands on Herefordshire Council’s plan for the temporary route over the bridge, and claim: “The trouble is the plan appears to be different to the actual layout on the bridge”.
“The most obvious difference is the dangerously sharp angle at the middle of the chicane.
“The barriers should be angled back 18 degrees, but in reality the angle is 30 degrees. The route is too tight”, said spokesman John Andrews.
To prove their point scientifically, the group made up a large set square to measure the angles.
“It was a bit Blue Peter-ish, but accurate. The set square fitted perfectly and provided proof beyond mathematical doubt. The angle is 30 degrees.
“The route is not as the consulting engineers designed it”, he said. Campaigners claim that a council engineer “was adamant that he wouldn’t change the route, and when he did look at the angle he said it looked like 30 degrees but it was 18 degrees”
“A case of looking like a duck and quacking like a duck, but being a turkey?” They also say that a council report says The original preliminary design has been adjusted and takes account of the actual size of the barriers.
But, say campaigners: “There is only one design. So what is this ‘preliminary design’? Perhaps a euphemism for a mistake? Is Herefordshire Council covering up?
“Inconsistency, inconsistency and more inconsistency. route than cannot be changed – then is. Barriers that start off infinitely narrow – and then grow. An angle that appears to be one size – but is actually another. Do they think we believe in fairies too?”
Herefordshire Council’s construction projects team leader Martin Jackson told the Journal: “The original preliminary design for the route over the bridge was prepared in November 2007.
“After installation the alignment of the route was checked by an engineer from the design team on two separate occasions. A third check was then made adopting a different methodology for the survey in order to eliminate, as far as possible, the potential for systematic errors.
“At all times the barriers have been found to be correctly aligned for guiding traffic safely over the bridge.
“The position of the barriers is essentially as expected and does guide traffic over the bridge supported on the strongest beams and most importantly not on the beams giving the council most concern.
“Moving the barriers and changing the angles of the safe route would take the traffic loading away from these beams and onto weaker beams. Such a move would potentially reduce the safety of the route.”
