Disability campaigner threatens legal action over 'inaccessible' stepped footbridge

Doug Paulley uses a wheelchair. He lives in the area around Kennington, in Kent, where two new housing developments are rising—Conningbrook Lakes and Crown Hill View. To connect these estates, a railway crossing is needed. For years, the plan was straightforward: build a ramped footbridge that anyone could use, regardless of mobility. Then the money ran out.

In December, Kent County Council approved a cheaper alternative: a stepped footbridge costing £3 million instead of the £6.3 million required for a fully accessible design. The decision came after Network Rail and the developers funding the project—Quinn Estates and Redrow—said they couldn't afford the ramp. Developer contributions were capped at £4 million when Ashford Borough Council approved the Crown Hill View estate. The council's own papers acknowledged that additional funding from the authority or Network Rail to cover the shortfall "is not available." The choice, they wrote, was between a stepped bridge or no bridge at all.

Paulley sees this as a choice that was never really made—it was imposed. The new footbridge will have roughly 100 steps. It will replace Cradle Bridge Crossing, which is level and accessible. A second crossing, Bolleaux Crossing several hundred metres away, will close permanently. For wheelchair users, people on mobility scooters, and parents pushing prams, reaching shops, schools, and services will now require a one-mile detour along the A2070 Willesborough Road, a busy main road.

In early March, with the public consultation period closing, Paulley announced he would file a formal objection. He is being represented by Kate Egerton, a human rights solicitor at Leigh Day. "A stepped footbridge with no ramps is not an accessible solution," Egerton said, "and we say does not comply with the council's legal duties." She was referring to the Equality Act 2010, which requires local authorities not to discriminate in the provision of public services and facilities. Paulley's objection, if filed before the deadline, should trigger a public inquiry. If the Planning Inspectorate approves the diversion anyway, he has signaled he is prepared to mount a legal challenge.

Paulley's statement to the press was direct: "It's shocking that in 2026 we are still seeing new public infrastructure being built with disabled people effectively disregarded." He framed the issue not as a budget problem but as a failure of duty. Public footpaths, he argued, must be accessible to disabled people. The diversion would force wheelchair users onto long and inconvenient detours just to reach everyday services.

Ashford Borough Council and Network Rail have offered their own reasoning. ABC noted that the existing pedestrian crossing already has several steps, so a stepped solution is safer than none. Quinn Estates, in earlier statements, described the new bridge as a "groundbreaking" and cost-effective solution that improves public safety. Network Rail explained that the length of ramp required to make the bridge accessible would double the construction cost.

But the math tells a different story. When Kennington Community Council requested a cost breakdown, it revealed the gap: £6.3 million for full accessibility, £4 million in available developer funding, £2.3 million missing. KCC's position was that the shortfall could not be filled. No one disputed that a ramped bridge was the preferred solution. They simply said it was unaffordable.

Construction is scheduled to begin in spring 2027. The first phase of Conningbrook Lakes, with 300 homes, is already complete. The second phase of 170 properties has been approved. Crown Hill View could eventually house 725 homes, along with a primary school, a Co-op store, and a new home for Ashford Town Bowls Club. The footbridge is infrastructure meant to serve these communities. The question now is whether it will serve all of them, or only those who can climb stairs.