A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
Search representations
Results for Sidlesham Parish Council search
New searchComment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
Background
Representation ID: 6382
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
Although the A27 is the responsibility of National Highways, it appears the framing of the Local Plan before adoption and the introduction of the 2016 SPD has forced CDC into the position where it is held solely responsible, not just for junctions, but also for the actual roundabouts on the A27 at Chichester. This is not made clear (para 2.1) and the consequent ability of CDC to fund necessary improvements must now be carefully questioned
Although the A27 is the responsibility of National Highways, it appears the framing of the Local Plan before adoption and the introduction of the 2016 SPD has forced CDC into the position where it is held solely responsible, not just for junctions, but also for the actual roundabouts on the A27 at Chichester. This is not made clear (para 2.1) and the consequent ability of CDC to fund necessary improvements must now be carefully questioned
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
The 2016 Planning Obligations & Affordable Housing SPD
Representation ID: 6383
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
Nothing will come from engaging with National Highways as they regard CDC as solely responsible. In the interim costs will rise, requirements will change and the process will be unnecessarily protracted. Importantly this only covers the Fishbourne and Bognor roundabouts and does not address congestion at the Stockbridge and Whyke junctions. Sidlesham PC has written to our MP encouraging engagement with the SoS for Transport; the aim to bring the A27 at Chichester out of its uncommitted ‘pipeline’ ranking in RIS 4 (2030-35) back to RIS 3 (2025-30). CDC must demonstrate the same resolve
Nothing will come from engaging with National Highways as they regard CDC as solely responsible. In the interim costs will rise, requirements will change and the process will be unnecessarily protracted. Importantly this only covers the Fishbourne and Bognor roundabouts and does not address congestion at the Stockbridge and Whyke junctions. Sidlesham PC has written to our MP encouraging engagement with the SoS for Transport; the aim to bring the A27 at Chichester out of its uncommitted ‘pipeline’ ranking in RIS 4 (2030-35) back to RIS 3 (2025-30). CDC must demonstrate the same resolve
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
Updated technical evidence
Representation ID: 6386
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
National Highways cannot argue against the fact that the A27 at Chichester has been running at overcapacity for a number of years. The situation is getting worse. CDC cannot fund the critical mitigations on four roundabouts in this over capacity scenario: supporting 2.1 that the bypass is the responsibility of National Highways. Para 2.11, ‘Monitor and Manage’, to ‘try to provide additional reductions in trips on the network” is not an effective solution and, by only considering the Fishbourne and Bognor junctions, appears an open-ended endorsement of an unacceptable situation. The A27 at Chichester must be brought into RIS3.
National Highways cannot argue against the fact that the A27 at Chichester has been running at overcapacity for a number of years. The situation is getting worse. CDC cannot fund the critical mitigations on four roundabouts in this over capacity scenario: supporting 2.1 that the bypass is the responsibility of National Highways. Para 2.11, ‘Monitor and Manage’, to ‘try to provide additional reductions in trips on the network” is not an effective solution and, by only considering the Fishbourne and Bognor junctions, appears an open-ended endorsement of an unacceptable situation. The A27 at Chichester must be brought into RIS3.
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
Planning Contributions
Representation ID: 6388
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
It will take 7 years to even meet the cost (£27,068,915) of the “reduced mitigation package” (Para 4.9 - 3551 dwellings at 535/yr). During this time increasing traffic (4.2) and costs (4.5) will require continuously remodelled solutions, with the result that a moving financial target will never be reached and traffic conditions will continue to worsen. If National Highways cannot be satisfied the Plan will never be adopted and the District will be left open burgeoning speculative development.
It will take 7 years to even meet the cost (£27,068,915) of the “reduced mitigation package” (Para 4.9 - 3551 dwellings at 535/yr). During this time increasing traffic (4.2) and costs (4.5) will require continuously remodelled solutions, with the result that a moving financial target will never be reached and traffic conditions will continue to worsen. If National Highways cannot be satisfied the Plan will never be adopted and the District will be left open burgeoning speculative development.
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
The A27 Chichester Bypass infrastructure to be funded
Representation ID: 6389
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
The higher specification (para 4.2) is necessary as the original specification does not meet the capacity problems anticipated in the 2023 Transport Assessment modelling. Consequently the increased cost and lack of government funding will be covered by a reduced mitigation package focussing on improvements to the Fishbourne and Bognor junctions. This will only exacerbate the capacity and traffic flow problems at the Stockbridge and Whyke roundabouts where the only two roads (A286 & B2145) enter/leave the Manhood Peninsular and cross/join the A27 (para 4.13). These junctions cannot be ignored and improvements must be funded.
The higher specification (para 4.2) is necessary as the original specification does not meet the capacity problems anticipated in the 2023 Transport Assessment modelling. Consequently the increased cost and lack of government funding will be covered by a reduced mitigation package focussing on improvements to the Fishbourne and Bognor junctions. This will only exacerbate the capacity and traffic flow problems at the Stockbridge and Whyke roundabouts where the only two roads (A286 & B2145) enter/leave the Manhood Peninsular and cross/join the A27 (para 4.13). These junctions cannot be ignored and improvements must be funded.
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
The impact of development on the A27 Chichester Bypass
Representation ID: 6390
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
The A27 at Chichester is a strategic corridor (Para 4.13) and a distributor road for local traffic; with five junctions (two provide the only access to the Manhood Peninsular) and a set of traffic lights over a 3-mile stretch. Highways England (2017) and National Highways (2023) recognise the importance of relieving the congestion at these junctions and maintaining traffic flow, but they cannot be made the sole responsibility of CDC. To alleviate increasing congestion CDC must gain unequivocal support from its MP to raise the with the SoS the critical need to secure a scheme for Chichester in RIS 3.
The A27 at Chichester is a strategic corridor (Para 4.13) and a distributor road for local traffic; with five junctions (two provide the only access to the Manhood Peninsular) and a set of traffic lights over a 3-mile stretch. Highways England (2017) and National Highways (2023) recognise the importance of relieving the congestion at these junctions and maintaining traffic flow, but they cannot be made the sole responsibility of CDC. To alleviate increasing congestion CDC must gain unequivocal support from its MP to raise the with the SoS the critical need to secure a scheme for Chichester in RIS 3.
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
Index-linking Contributions
Representation ID: 6391
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
Paras 5.9 and 5.10 do not explain how the cost-impact of any future National Highways’ “requirements creep” will be met. Being effectively unrestricted, without any limits on National Highways, will place CDC in the invidious position of having to catch up and carry out future SPD reviews.
Paras 5.9 and 5.10 do not explain how the cost-impact of any future National Highways’ “requirements creep” will be met. Being effectively unrestricted, without any limits on National Highways, will place CDC in the invidious position of having to catch up and carry out future SPD reviews.
Comment
A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document - August 2023
Gypsy and Traveller pitches
Representation ID: 6392
Received: 02/11/2023
Respondent: Sidlesham Parish Council
Unlike 4.29 and 4.30 where either age of lack of parking mitigate against applying contributions, consideration should be given to any new Gypsy and Traveller pitches being treated in the same manner as any new development within the community.
Unlike 4.29 and 4.30 where either age of lack of parking mitigate against applying contributions, consideration should be given to any new Gypsy and Traveller pitches being treated in the same manner as any new development within the community.
