Chidham and Hambrook

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 49

Received: 27/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Andrew Relf

Representation Summary:

For the A259 between Chidham and Fishbourne roundabout, the huge growth of 1000 houses in Fishbourne, Bosham and Chidham, amounts to 2000 additional cars using the A259. Allowing for about a one metre+ gap between them, 1000 cars need a stationery road space of about 6000 metres or Fishbourne roundabout to Chidham if lined up. No thought has been given to this problem in the planning strategy, exacerbated by the lack of an upgraded A27.

Full text:

Your policy DM8 states that any development must minimize and not create or add to problems of highway safety, congestion , air pollution or other damage.

I have been involved since the early 1980's in Sussex traffic issues, including the A27 Forum and I predicted that the BABA27 result would not be successful. The Conservative Government have not spent money in Sussex for decades and there has been little done since the Brighton Bypass. I believe from experience that there is a policy, or a non written agenda that money will not be spent on the south's transport infrastructure. It is time they were honest. London, Runcorn, the motorways and the north billions, the south nothing! This lack of investment brings the actual and proposed increase in housing and transport problems into sharp focus.

I have looked at the range and planning verbiage in the review, and it is so wide ranging that for any individual or Parish Council to assimilate and prepare a full response would be very difficult given the ridiculous time constraint. I can only give a snapshot of my thoughts, without any real evidence as back up. Given that you must have taken a very long time to write a wish list of properties to be built without much evidence either, this is may be acceptable.

The areas of objection for Fishbourne, Bosham and Chidham are considerable, but I will concentrate on the traffic and access problems set out by statements in the main Plan, and an assessment of the proposed Bethwines development.

I set out my reasoning herewith:-

2.5 The A27 does not serve communities west of Chichester unless they use the A259 as a feeder road. We all know about the congestion and danger of Fishbourne Roundabout now.

2.13 There are no major employers in Fishbourne making travel to work a necessity.

2.29 I have to ask what employment needs? What employment? Much of this document must be speculation and entirely subjective. There is no employment in Fishbourne, and no plans to provide it, and no one I know can see where the employment will be unless the new resident travels a considerable distance - using the A259 to access the A27.

Where are you going to create new open space? The open space currently exists as a buffer between villages but this report is actually planning to take it away. Views from Apuldram to the Cathedral, and the loss of the buffer zone west of Fishbourne. Your statement on the preservation of landscapes is therefore ridiculous set against the building of houses on current landscapes and views.

3.2 This is all speculative. Where is the evidence of local need, demography and transport. It is not set out in this document.

3.6 How can this conserve and enhance local distinctiveness? It is unsupported verbal junk. The impact of such huge traffic increases on the A259 cannot be over emphasized. This Local Plan report will seek to add to the problem already agreed from the increase of 1600 houses currently in the expansion development to the west of the City, and the proposed 100 houses and commercial development south of the A27.

3.7 Fishbourne is designated as a service village. The definition is that the village can provide a reasonable range of basic facilities, or have reasonable access to nearby facilities. Fishbourne has no facilities being wholly residential, in fact only two pubs and the Fishbourne Centre. Reasonable access - This is not so due to huge traffic problems currently on the A259 accessing the Fishbourne roundabout which will greatly deteriorate given the building scale. The 700 bus is excellent, but it is nationally accepted that unless a bus stop is within 400 metres of the house, residents will not use it. The 56 bus runs every one and a half hours up Salthill Road but will again still be out of reach of Bethwines residents. The railway provision is a halt, not a station, and only has one train an hour in each direction, and again is out of reach of Bethwines development.
We also need to add the destructive effects of pollution if we have miles of standing traffic in Fishbourne and on the A27 west of the city.

6.49 Development south of the A27 between Stockbridge and Fishbourne.

I am very aware of the history of Fishbourne roundabout, which was a disaster from its initial construction. It was proved then to the Agency that it was possible to negotiate the roundabout east/west at 70mph, and is still the same. The Highways Agency of course would not agree to their error despite proof, but they have left this over stretched and dangerous roundabout as their legacy to us.

Any attempt to add a further junction from a link road onto the current A27 Fishbourne roundabout must be rejected. There will still be huge obstruction to A259 eastbound gaining access onto the roundabout as it struggles now, but if an additional junction is given precedence over A259, entry to the roundabout will be even more clogged and more dangerous. Not only will Fishbourne traffic be required to give way to growing A27 westbound traffic, it will also have to give way to traffic from any proposed new link from the south. The only possible alternative to a grade separated junction is a signalized and re-created hamburger roundabout. We all know that signals will improve safety, but would never cure the future serious congestion. Even if the dangerous traffic problems on the roundabout are mitigated by signalisation, the congestion will remain heavy and excessive. The huge proposed increase in traffic along the corridor will make this junction unusable with consequences to surrounding minor roads such as Salthill Road, Clay Lane, Funtington Road and Hunters Race.

6.54 The development at Highgrove Farm, Bosham where 250 homes are planned will also reduce the strategic gap between Bosham and Fishbourne and impact upon the A259.


Bethwines development Traffic problems.

The previous application for Bethwines development submitted a transport plan that was frankly ludicrous. Such suggestions as car sharing and extensive use of cycling/walking would never work to reduce regular car use out of the village.

Public transport is not a viable option for the new estate unless a new bus route was created, or the 56 diverted, and I doubt that this is an option. The 700 bus route along the A259 is too distant.

Traffic will therefore have to access the new development via Blackboys Lane.

Blackboys Lane at the south end is narrow, with ditches either side and properties closely border the roadway. The exit onto the A259 is narrow with limited visibility, and an exit almost impossible with the proposed traffic flow. North of the railway crossing the road is open and wider, but leads to Clay Lane that is itself not satisfactory for this growth in car use. Road upgrades would be necessary and roads such as Halfrey Road would have a significant increase in rat run traffic .

The junction of Clay Lane and Salthill Road, and Salthill Road and the Funtington Road would need an assessment using current models to establish the correct junction control. The Funtington Road/Salthill junction has very poor visibility. The narrow Clay Lane throughout it's length to Fishbourne Road East, that is a 20mph residential road would also need to be upgraded including pavements and/or cycle routes.

It is inevitable that Salthill Road, Hunters Race and Clay Lane would become a popular route out of the area. It is over stretched now with the road surface deteriorating quickly especially in Lavant.


The A27 and A259

There has been no time to establish current traffic flows on the A259, but as we all know, the congestion to Fishbourne Roundabout is often back to The Woolpack, and encourages the use of Salthill Road out of the village. The A27 daily has six miles of standing traffic eastbound in two lanes to Fishbourne roundabout

The transport corridor is not effective now let alone with the 2250 houses you are suggesting along the corridor between Chichester and Southbourne. 2250 houses mean 4500 cars, established by a study of Flavian Fields development at Fishbourne. This showed that there were two cars per household, 35% of adult residents in the Flavian Fields development do not work, that means that 65% do work and have to travel to employment outside of the village, and must apply equally to Chidham, Bosham and Southbourne. This also takes no account of the fact that mothers will transport their children to school by car. These schools will be outside of the villages due to an already full Fishbourne and Bosham School and the only secondary school at Southbourne being further away than Chichester schools. It has been established that Fishbourne already has the highest car dependency in Chichester District.

Specifically for the A259 between Chidham and Fishbourne roundabout, the huge growth of 1000 houses in Fishbourne, Bosham and Chidham, amounts to 2000 additional cars that will use the A259. I would anticipate that these villages will use Chichester for employment, schools, access to the A27 and facilities. The 1250 houses in Southbourne will further complicate the numbers, but some will probably travel westbound for services.

National statistics reveal that at least half of those additional cars from our villages will use the A259 the only feeder road for travel at peak time to work. The average length of a family car is now 4.8 metres. Allowing for about a one metre+ gap between them, 1000 cars need a stationery road space of about 6000 metres or Fishbourne roundabout to Chidham if lined up. That is a staggering fact, and no thought has been given to this problem in the planning strategy, exacerbated by the lack of an upgraded A27.

This must now be a factor in responding to the Government's demand for housing in this narrow area as I repeat your policy DM 8

'any development must minimize and not create or add to problems of highway safety, congestion , air pollution or other damage.'

This policy cannot be fulfilled!!

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 837

Received: 02/02/2019

Respondent: Dr Lesley Bromley

Representation Summary:

This land is at or below the 5 metre contour and is at risk of flooding as a consequence of sea level rise from global climate change.

This development along with others on the lower coastal plane will exceed the capacity of the A259

Full text:

This land is at or below the 5 meter contor and is at risk of flooding as a consequence of sea level rise from global climate change.

This development along with others on the lower coastal plane will exceed the capacity of the A259

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1206

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Jane Towers

Representation Summary:

Complete ambiguity re a replacement school. WSCC WILL NOT support a school in Bosham and Chidham. Primary school places = 210 children per 1000 homes.
Bosham & Chdiham would therefore need 155 places not 420 two schools would provide.
AONB restrictions limit available land which will lead to greater density than is recommended or desired.
Loss of pasture, fields, woods, hedgerows, important views

Unacceptable to use Grade 1 and 2 agricultural land

Full text:

Projections for the number of homes taken from the HELAA are inconsistent. The CDC suggested number of 30 -35 houses per hectare and 80% of undevelopable gives a total of 360-420. The numbers given by CDC are higher as they are given by the proposer and not CDC. This will result in sites previously rejected as outside the settlement boundary, impact on AONB and limited access having to be considered.
Apart from the main A259 there is only one road that can serve as access, Broad Rd which already has restrictions due to visibility. The junction onto the A259 is already dangerous.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1419

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Councillor Simon Oakley

Representation Summary:

Consideration should be given to including a reference (also in Policy AL10) for the need to take into account any future potential new access onto the A27.

Full text:

Consideration should be given to including a reference (also in Policy AL10) for the need to take into account any future potential new access onto the A27.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1600

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Robert Probee

Representation Summary:

There is only one bus service.

Full text:

There is only one bus service.

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1732

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Zoe Neal

Representation Summary:

I object to AL7 in line with the points made from

Chichester Harbour AONB
Chichester Harbour Trust
Chidham and Hambrook Parish Council

Full text:

I object to AL7 in line with the points made from

Chichester Harbour AONB
Chichester Harbour Trust
Chidham and Hambrook Parish Council

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1802

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Harbour Villages Lib Dems Campaign Team

Representation Summary:

6.66 to 6.70 AL10

We support the moving of the primary School to a location in the north of Hambrook.
500 houses is too much on this location and the numbers need to be reduced in consultation with the Parish Council. An allocation of 250 is more acceptable.
No more development should be undertaken on the land west of Broad Road.

Full text:

6.66 to 6.70 AL10

We support the moving of the primary School to a location in the north of Hambrook.
500 houses is too much on this location and the numbers need to be reduced in consultation with the Parish Council. An allocation of 250 is more acceptable.
No more development should be undertaken on the land west of Broad Road.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 3092

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Representation Summary:

Page 118, 6.70 Chidham & Hambrook:
Given that Chichester Harbour is part of Chidham, in terms of the sentence structure protecting the views and setting of Chichester Harbour should come before the South Downs.

Full text:

See attachment