FUNDING for the Studley bypass is a complicated issue, so I can understand why my statement (Advertiser, April 18: "Cash shock hits bypass") was misunderstood by Alan Harrison of the Western Bypass Action Group.
My comments referred to the letter quoted at the beginning of the article. This letter, about the Trunk Road Improvement Programme, from the Government Office West to the West Midlands Local Government Association (dated 28/03/01), states the Studley bypass "is on a non-core route to be detrunked" and as such, it can't be added to the Government's targeted programme for trunk road improvements and so "the Government expects it to be taken forward as part of the county council's local transport plan".
This confirms that the door is closed as far as trunk road funding is concerned.
Obviously, there are ways of funding the bypass through the local transport plan.
However, this scheme is very expensive and Warwickshire County Council has already stated "we are concerned about our ability to fund such a scheme through borrowing from the usual sources" and says it could lead to funding from "county's resources or higher council tax".
The Public Funding Initiative (PFI) is also being investigated but is often difficult to procure when the scheme is contentious.
Despite these funding problems, SERRAG continues to support the need for a bypass but it cannot support Option 2, which affects many hundreds of people when there is an alternative (Option 3a modified) which affects very few but gives relief to those communities along the A435.
Brian Danks
Chairman
SERRAG
Sambourne
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article