Subject: Formal Objection to A134 Road Closure on Grounds of Public Safety 

To:

West Suffolk Council
West Suffolk House, Western Way, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 3YU

Hopkins Homes
Blenheim House, Newmarket Road, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 3SB

Suffolk County Council Highways Department
Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich, IP1 2BX

The Health & Safety Executive
Redgrave Court, Merton Road, Bootle, Merseyside, L20 7HS

Dr. Peter Prinsley, MP for Bury St Edmunds
House of Commons
London, SW1A 0AA

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to formally object to the planned closure of the A134 Sicklesmere Road in Bury St Edmunds, which is set to commence in February 2025 for eight consecutive weekends. As a resident of one of the many villages south of Bury St Edmunds that rely on this vital route, I am deeply concerned about the severe and disproportionate impact this closure will have on public safety, emergency response times, and vulnerable residents.

Health & Safety Concerns

Emergency Services Access: The closure will significantly delay ambulances, fire engines, and police vehicles responding to emergencies. The designated diversion via Long Melford, Haverhill, and back to Bury along the A143 is over 40 miles long and is quite clearly not a serious proposal for an alternative route. This unacceptable delay could put lives at risk, particularly for those requiring urgent medical care at West Suffolk Hospital—the primary healthcare facility for a vast number of residents south of Bury, not to mention the large town of Sudbury and surrounding villages.

 

Above: Linkwood Road, Rougham. The main "rat run" left remaining into Bury from the southern villages that will be cut off by the closure. 

Traffic Congestion and Unsafe Alternative Routes: The diversion route is not a viable alternative due to its length, and many motorists will likely attempt to use minor, single-track roads instead. These roads are not designed to accommodate high volumes of traffic, increasing the likelihood of accidents and creating a serious hazard for pedestrians and cyclists. The potential for gridlock and road safety incidents is significant. The A134 end of Low Green, Nowton, and Rushbrooke Lane are both being closed, but this only exacerbates the issue by forcing traffic on even longer rat runs such as Bells Lane in Stanningfield, and the by road from the A134 running across to Blackthorpe/Rougham, both of which are single track roads with extremely limited passing space

 

Above: Bells Lane, Hawstead. The second available option for traffic attempting an alternative route into Bury St Edmunds.

 

 

Public Transport Disruption: Many residents, particularly the elderly, disabled individuals, and those without private transport, rely on local bus services for essential travel to GP surgeries, pharmacies, and the hospital. If these services are cancelled due to the road closure, vulnerable groups will be disproportionately affected, violating the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010.

Potential Legal and Procedural Failures

Lack of Reasonable Alternative Routes: The imposed diversion is unsustainable and does not account for the needs of the tens of thousands of residents affected. No effort has been made to establish a temporary alternative route or phased closure plan that minimizes disruption.

Failure to Consider Vulnerable Groups: Suffolk County Council has a legal duty under the Equality Act 2010 to assess and mitigate the disproportionate impact on individuals with disabilities, the elderly, and those dependent on public transport. The failure to provide an accessible and viable alternative for these groups may constitute an unlawful breach of this duty.

Inadequate Consultation and Impact Assessment: There has been insufficient transparency and consultation with residents and local businesses regarding this decision. A closure of this magnitude should be subject to a full public consultation and independent impact assessment, ensuring that all risks and alternatives have been properly considered.

Urgent Request for Action

Given these substantial concerns, I request the following urgent actions:

Immediate review of the closure plan, considering alternative solutions such as a phased closure, temporary access routes, or a shuttle service for affected residents. As the road is open during the week (albeit with temporary traffic lights in place), why can this not be the case during weekends?

Full disclosure of risk assessments and public sector equality impact assessments conducted before approving the road closure.

A commitment from Suffolk County Council to ensure emergency services are not hindered by this closure and a guarantee that essential public transport links will be maintained.

Consideration of a legal review and potential injunction if the concerns regarding public safety and accessibility are not adequately addressed.
This road closure is not merely an inconvenience—it poses a direct threat to public safety and disproportionately impacts vulnerable members of our community, not to mention many thousands of people effectively cut off from Bury St Edmunds. I urge you to reconsider this decision and implement an alternative solution. 

I look forward to your prompt response addressing these urgent concerns.