The following scheme was proposed when it was learnt that the bridge over the railway on the B3000 was to be replaced.
Godalming Cycle Campaign, on behalf of the Waverley Cycle Forum, consider replacement of the B3000 Railway Bridge to be an opportunity to improve conditions for cyclists as well as pedestrians in both Guildford and Waverley Boroughs.
We believe the new cycling policy of the County Council demands a new and imaginative approach to cycle planning and, therefore, welcome widening proposals to benefit cyclists and pedestrians in crossing over the bridge. At the same time, we request that serious consideration be given to creating a new path – parallel with the railway track – under the bridge. By widening the span of the bridge, cycle paths on both sides of the track are possible, as illustrated on the attached plan.
On the eastern side, the cycle track could start in Summers Road and would have to skirt round the transmitter before going under the B3000 and joining the shared use cycle path to the east of Honey Brothers. Extending the span of the bridge in this direction may cause issues because of the steepness of the ramp to the bridge; in addition, there would be a number of tight turns which would need to be carefully considered.
The western path would start from Birch Road and continue next to the railway under the B3000 and past the Brethren Church and into Quadrum Industrial Park from which it would be possible to continue into Guildford. This would provide a direct link between Farncombe Railway Station and Quadrum Industrial Park.
We accept that funding for a complete route would be difficult to find at present. However, widening the span in after the bridge has been replaced would be prohibitively expensive. Should the business parks on the A3100 expand then a path linking them to Farncombe Station could help reduce the increase in motor traffic.
The reply from Surrey CC
Thank you for your message.
The proposals we're looking at for this bridge may involve some widening of the existing abutments but there are no plans to entirely remove the abutments. A scheme such as the one you are proposing would involve entirely removing the existing abutments to ground level and would be very considerably more extensive and expensive than the options currently under consideration.
We will make every effort to gain funding to improve facilities for cyclist and pedestrians over the bridge but the new route you suggest is not something I can consider within the limited timescale and funding constraints that I have to work with on this project..