Firms urged to join campaign for better A27 for Sussex

The A27

The A27

First published in News

BUSINESSES affected by road congestion are being urged to add their voices to a new campaign.

Organisers are calling on businesses affected by congestion to join the A27 Action group.

The new campaign is looking to push the case to the Government for improvements.

The group want major investment to make the A27 a dual carriageway across West Sussex, improve junctions at Chichester, Fontwell and Brighton, create a bypass at Arundel and make improvements to the Worthing – Lancing corridor and access around Newhaven.

Visit www.a27action.co.uk.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:42am Fri 25 Jul 14

fredaj says...

How are they being "urged"?
How are they being "urged"? fredaj
  • Score: 0

11:30am Fri 25 Jul 14

her professional says...

Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).
Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved). her professional
  • Score: -31

12:46pm Fri 25 Jul 14

spa301 says...

This is long overdue and would help business's, commuters and all drivers in general. Parts of this road truly are a nightmare and a viable East/West coastal route must be built.
This is long overdue and would help business's, commuters and all drivers in general. Parts of this road truly are a nightmare and a viable East/West coastal route must be built. spa301
  • Score: 25

1:14pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Summerland says...

her professional wrote:
Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).
Same old myths rolled out by the ant-roads lobby. New road capacity does NOT simply fill up with traffic. It creates benefits. New road capacity will generally reduce congestion and travel costs. Additional traffic may occur on the new route as less suitable roads are relieved from congestion. Hoping everyone will jump on a train or bike to travel across the country is just fantasy. Traffic reduction in large towns and cities is a completely different set of circumstances but why let details spoil the myths!
[quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).[/p][/quote]Same old myths rolled out by the ant-roads lobby. New road capacity does NOT simply fill up with traffic. It creates benefits. New road capacity will generally reduce congestion and travel costs. Additional traffic may occur on the new route as less suitable roads are relieved from congestion. Hoping everyone will jump on a train or bike to travel across the country is just fantasy. Traffic reduction in large towns and cities is a completely different set of circumstances but why let details spoil the myths! Summerland
  • Score: 14

1:20pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Number Six says...

"Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)."

And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?
"Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)." And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains? Number Six
  • Score: 17

1:33pm Fri 25 Jul 14

her professional says...

Summerland wrote:
her professional wrote:
Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).
Same old myths rolled out by the ant-roads lobby. New road capacity does NOT simply fill up with traffic. It creates benefits. New road capacity will generally reduce congestion and travel costs. Additional traffic may occur on the new route as less suitable roads are relieved from congestion. Hoping everyone will jump on a train or bike to travel across the country is just fantasy. Traffic reduction in large towns and cities is a completely different set of circumstances but why let details spoil the myths!
So the Old Shoreham Road, or the North & South Circulars have been relieved from congestion have they?
Of course "everyone" won't take to the trains (or bikes, although why you brought cycling into it I'm not sure, as it's not relevant when we are talking about long distance travel). The point is that there needs to be more effort to encourage people out of their cars into more sustainable and efficient modes of transport where possible, and an underfunded railway won't achieve this.
[quote][p][bold]Summerland[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).[/p][/quote]Same old myths rolled out by the ant-roads lobby. New road capacity does NOT simply fill up with traffic. It creates benefits. New road capacity will generally reduce congestion and travel costs. Additional traffic may occur on the new route as less suitable roads are relieved from congestion. Hoping everyone will jump on a train or bike to travel across the country is just fantasy. Traffic reduction in large towns and cities is a completely different set of circumstances but why let details spoil the myths![/p][/quote]So the Old Shoreham Road, or the North & South Circulars have been relieved from congestion have they? Of course "everyone" won't take to the trains (or bikes, although why you brought cycling into it I'm not sure, as it's not relevant when we are talking about long distance travel). The point is that there needs to be more effort to encourage people out of their cars into more sustainable and efficient modes of transport where possible, and an underfunded railway won't achieve this. her professional
  • Score: -17

1:33pm Fri 25 Jul 14

her professional says...

Number Six wrote:
"Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)."

And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?
They're called goods trains.
[quote][p][bold]Number Six[/bold] wrote: "Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)." And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?[/p][/quote]They're called goods trains. her professional
  • Score: -15

1:55pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Summerland says...

her professional wrote:
Number Six wrote:
"Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)."

And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?
They're called goods trains.
"The point is that there needs to be more effort to encourage people out of their cars into more sustainable and efficient modes of transport where possible, and an underfunded railway won't achieve this."
Nothing wrong in that but expecting it to make any significant impact on traffic reduction on strategic roads is simply unrealistic. Roads carry 5 times more passenger traffic than railways, which are already overcrowded. Railways serve very distinct markets, and have little room for additional passengers and bus services cover no more than 23% of the road network and are generally slower than journeys by car.

As for fitting HGVs onto goods trains, how and where do all the goods get onto the trains and how do they then get off the trains to their destinations?
[quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Number Six[/bold] wrote: "Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)." And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?[/p][/quote]They're called goods trains.[/p][/quote]"The point is that there needs to be more effort to encourage people out of their cars into more sustainable and efficient modes of transport where possible, and an underfunded railway won't achieve this." Nothing wrong in that but expecting it to make any significant impact on traffic reduction on strategic roads is simply unrealistic. Roads carry 5 times more passenger traffic than railways, which are already overcrowded. Railways serve very distinct markets, and have little room for additional passengers and bus services cover no more than 23% of the road network and are generally slower than journeys by car. As for fitting HGVs onto goods trains, how and where do all the goods get onto the trains and how do they then get off the trains to their destinations? Summerland
  • Score: 10

2:07pm Fri 25 Jul 14

her professional says...

Summerland wrote:
her professional wrote:
Number Six wrote:
"Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)."

And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?
They're called goods trains.
"The point is that there needs to be more effort to encourage people out of their cars into more sustainable and efficient modes of transport where possible, and an underfunded railway won't achieve this."
Nothing wrong in that but expecting it to make any significant impact on traffic reduction on strategic roads is simply unrealistic. Roads carry 5 times more passenger traffic than railways, which are already overcrowded. Railways serve very distinct markets, and have little room for additional passengers and bus services cover no more than 23% of the road network and are generally slower than journeys by car.

As for fitting HGVs onto goods trains, how and where do all the goods get onto the trains and how do they then get off the trains to their destinations?
Let me have another go......SOME goods could be transported on their long distance sections by train. I have grasped the fact that a train can't deliver door to door, but it must be possible to reduce the amount of road traffic, LGV and private car, or at least stop never ending growth. Laying more and more Tarmac just isn't the answer, countryside is ruined, lives are blighted, and wildlife (not just some fluffy concept got up by the Greens, but essential to the balance and well being of the planet) will suffer, as it is already as habitats are grubbed out by farmers or concreted over or polluted. We simply can't keep going on as if it will all work out in the end.
[quote][p][bold]Summerland[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Number Six[/bold] wrote: "Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved)." And how do you propose to fit all those HGVs onto trains?[/p][/quote]They're called goods trains.[/p][/quote]"The point is that there needs to be more effort to encourage people out of their cars into more sustainable and efficient modes of transport where possible, and an underfunded railway won't achieve this." Nothing wrong in that but expecting it to make any significant impact on traffic reduction on strategic roads is simply unrealistic. Roads carry 5 times more passenger traffic than railways, which are already overcrowded. Railways serve very distinct markets, and have little room for additional passengers and bus services cover no more than 23% of the road network and are generally slower than journeys by car. As for fitting HGVs onto goods trains, how and where do all the goods get onto the trains and how do they then get off the trains to their destinations?[/p][/quote]Let me have another go......SOME goods could be transported on their long distance sections by train. I have grasped the fact that a train can't deliver door to door, but it must be possible to reduce the amount of road traffic, LGV and private car, or at least stop never ending growth. Laying more and more Tarmac just isn't the answer, countryside is ruined, lives are blighted, and wildlife (not just some fluffy concept got up by the Greens, but essential to the balance and well being of the planet) will suffer, as it is already as habitats are grubbed out by farmers or concreted over or polluted. We simply can't keep going on as if it will all work out in the end. her professional
  • Score: -14

4:20pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Mark63 says...

Are we still talking about this? Just make it happen PLEASE! Its a dead link in the chain of a modern road network. Even Cornwall is ahead of the A27 now.... Ridiculous tail backs and funnelling of traffic down toi 1 lane too many times. This is the age of the car, not the carthorse.... !
Are we still talking about this? Just make it happen PLEASE! Its a dead link in the chain of a modern road network. Even Cornwall is ahead of the A27 now.... Ridiculous tail backs and funnelling of traffic down toi 1 lane too many times. This is the age of the car, not the carthorse.... ! Mark63
  • Score: 19

4:40pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Made In Sussex says...

her professional wrote:
Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).
The existing bypasses are only less successful because they are piecemeal solutions which start and end in single lane bottlenecks. Isnt this initiative looking at a bigger connected up solutio across the whole region!? Cars also generate more polution when stopping and starting and idling in traffic jams caused by the existing riad system. How much land will actually be lost by the proposed changes, not much I think you will find. Proposing railways to be a solution is bonkers if you had actually of had to travel this route on a daily basis. Please remember also that future cars will be less polluting.
[quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).[/p][/quote]The existing bypasses are only less successful because they are piecemeal solutions which start and end in single lane bottlenecks. Isnt this initiative looking at a bigger connected up solutio across the whole region!? Cars also generate more polution when stopping and starting and idling in traffic jams caused by the existing riad system. How much land will actually be lost by the proposed changes, not much I think you will find. Proposing railways to be a solution is bonkers if you had actually of had to travel this route on a daily basis. Please remember also that future cars will be less polluting. Made In Sussex
  • Score: 20

4:40pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Made In Sussex says...

her professional wrote:
Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).
The existing bypasses are only less successful because they are piecemeal solutions which start and end in single lane bottlenecks. Isnt this initiative looking at a bigger connected up solutio across the whole region!? Cars also generate more polution when stopping and starting and idling in traffic jams caused by the existing riad system. How much land will actually be lost by the proposed changes, not much I think you will find. Proposing railways to be a solution is bonkers if you had actually of had to travel this route on a daily basis. Please remember also that future cars will be less polluting.
[quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).[/p][/quote]The existing bypasses are only less successful because they are piecemeal solutions which start and end in single lane bottlenecks. Isnt this initiative looking at a bigger connected up solutio across the whole region!? Cars also generate more polution when stopping and starting and idling in traffic jams caused by the existing riad system. How much land will actually be lost by the proposed changes, not much I think you will find. Proposing railways to be a solution is bonkers if you had actually of had to travel this route on a daily basis. Please remember also that future cars will be less polluting. Made In Sussex
  • Score: 11

5:17pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Summerland says...

her professional says
"Let me have another go......SOME goods could be transported on their long distance sections by train. I have grasped the fact that a train can't deliver door to door, but it must be possible to reduce the amount of road traffic, LGV and private car, or at least stop never ending growth. Laying more and more Tarmac just isn't the answer, countryside is ruined, lives are blighted, and wildlife (not just some fluffy concept got up by the Greens, but essential to the balance and well being of the planet) will suffer, as it is already as habitats are grubbed out by farmers or concreted over or polluted. We simply can't keep going on as if it will all work out in the end."
Yes, some goods could go by rail, but the impact is likely to be tiny. The 'tarmac everything' myth is also untrue. All main roads occupy about 0.4% of the surface area of GB and the Highway’s Agency trunk roads only 0.16%. Connecting up the A27 will take up very little land. Far more lives are blighted by the congestion, injuries and fatalities on the existing inadequate roads than are affected by new ones. Reducing traffic and pollution is part of the challenge, but ruling out new roads because of emotive myths goes nowhere.
her professional says "Let me have another go......SOME goods could be transported on their long distance sections by train. I have grasped the fact that a train can't deliver door to door, but it must be possible to reduce the amount of road traffic, LGV and private car, or at least stop never ending growth. Laying more and more Tarmac just isn't the answer, countryside is ruined, lives are blighted, and wildlife (not just some fluffy concept got up by the Greens, but essential to the balance and well being of the planet) will suffer, as it is already as habitats are grubbed out by farmers or concreted over or polluted. We simply can't keep going on as if it will all work out in the end." Yes, some goods could go by rail, but the impact is likely to be tiny. The 'tarmac everything' myth is also untrue. All main roads occupy about 0.4% of the surface area of GB and the Highway’s Agency trunk roads only 0.16%. Connecting up the A27 will take up very little land. Far more lives are blighted by the congestion, injuries and fatalities on the existing inadequate roads than are affected by new ones. Reducing traffic and pollution is part of the challenge, but ruling out new roads because of emotive myths goes nowhere. Summerland
  • Score: 13

7:38pm Fri 25 Jul 14

calro75 says...

Yes what an awful road to drive on.constant traffic jams, last year my partner came to pick me up having been in France. What should have been a 1 hour journey took 5. How ridiculous.
Yes what an awful road to drive on.constant traffic jams, last year my partner came to pick me up having been in France. What should have been a 1 hour journey took 5. How ridiculous. calro75
  • Score: 9

8:18am Sat 26 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

A common theme with increasing road capacity is that nothing is actually done to reduce demand, rather the only solution offered is a vastly expensive scheme.

There will always be a need for goods and people to travel, but most journeys could be designed out. For example, we now live in an age with tremendous technology that allows immersive interaction with people on the other side of the globe.
A common theme with increasing road capacity is that nothing is actually done to reduce demand, rather the only solution offered is a vastly expensive scheme. There will always be a need for goods and people to travel, but most journeys could be designed out. For example, we now live in an age with tremendous technology that allows immersive interaction with people on the other side of the globe. HJarrs
  • Score: 0

7:40pm Sun 27 Jul 14

whatevernext2013 says...

HJarrs wrote:
A common theme with increasing road capacity is that nothing is actually done to reduce demand, rather the only solution offered is a vastly expensive scheme.

There will always be a need for goods and people to travel, but most journeys could be designed out. For example, we now live in an age with tremendous technology that allows immersive interaction with people on the other side of the globe.
WTF ARE YOU ON ???????????????
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: A common theme with increasing road capacity is that nothing is actually done to reduce demand, rather the only solution offered is a vastly expensive scheme. There will always be a need for goods and people to travel, but most journeys could be designed out. For example, we now live in an age with tremendous technology that allows immersive interaction with people on the other side of the globe.[/p][/quote]WTF ARE YOU ON ??????????????? whatevernext2013
  • Score: 0

7:53pm Sun 27 Jul 14

whatevernext2013 says...

her professional wrote:
Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines.
Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).
THE CONGESTION CHARGE HAS ONLY RUN PEOPLE OUT OF LONDON ,AND SMALL AND LARGE COMPANIES HAS SUFFERED ,AS TO TRAIN TRAVEL I NEED TO GET TO EDENBRIDGE FROM BRIGHTON ,ONLY 35 MILES I LOOKED AT THE TRAIN AND IT TAKES 3 AND A HALF HOURS BUT IN A CAR IT TOOK 45 MINS ,NOW IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO DO ALL DAY BECAUSE YOUR ON BENEFITS WELL THAT S OK ,BUT AS I HAVE A JOB TO DO AND TIME IS MONEY I WILL USE MY CAR
[quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: Will they never learn. Dual carriageway = more traffic, more pollution and even worse congestion at the various points where the motorway runs out. Spend the money on improving the hopeless East and West Coastway rail lines. Remember how the Brighton Bypass was going to end congestion in Brighton, or the M25 being the answer to jams on the North and South circulars? The only "improvement" comes when cars are controlled or discouraged - look at how much more pleasant central London is since the congestion charge ( nb no Greens involved).[/p][/quote]THE CONGESTION CHARGE HAS ONLY RUN PEOPLE OUT OF LONDON ,AND SMALL AND LARGE COMPANIES HAS SUFFERED ,AS TO TRAIN TRAVEL I NEED TO GET TO EDENBRIDGE FROM BRIGHTON ,ONLY 35 MILES I LOOKED AT THE TRAIN AND IT TAKES 3 AND A HALF HOURS BUT IN A CAR IT TOOK 45 MINS ,NOW IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO DO ALL DAY BECAUSE YOUR ON BENEFITS WELL THAT S OK ,BUT AS I HAVE A JOB TO DO AND TIME IS MONEY I WILL USE MY CAR whatevernext2013
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree