Draft A27 Chichester Bypass Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) Version 2 - May 2024

Comment

Representation ID: 6540

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

As far as I can ascertain in this draft document there is no mention of industrial developments having any effect on traffic volumes on the A27. I would draw your attention to the recently agreed expansion at Rolls Royce at Westhampnett. This must increase both the number of HGV’s entering and exiting the site as well as additional employees who may not live in the Chichester area travelling to the expanded operation. May I suggest that this key element is included in any traffic projections for both employees and potential deliveries etc.

The council should ascertain the number of additional number of vehicle movements any proposed industrial developments will generate an add those to projected numbers.

Comment

Representation ID: 6541

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

Completed works to the Portfield and Oving Road junctions do not appear to have improved traffic flow to any great degree. This could be due to all improvements not being completed. However, the tenure of this document does not seem to suggest that there will be any ‘quick fixes’ to this whole issue. It could be construed that housing developments could be completed way before any A27 improvements are completed. It is difficult to comment on the other junctions – Fishbourne, Stockbridge, Wyke and Bognor as there are as far as I can ascertain there are no finalised plans to view. Due to the close proximity of housing to the Wyke and Stockbridge junctions it is difficult for the layman to comment on what might be envisaged. Previous documents on the subject have suggested that properties would have to be demolished. Is this still the case? There was thoughts on flyovers/donut roundabouts at some of the junctions. One has to assume that this has been now shelved? Is this the case? One could see improvements at Bognor and Fishbourne and nothing at Wyke and Stockbridge which would not improve the situation at all. In actual fact it would make it worse! It would lead to funnelling traffic in from both ends of junctions under consideration only for it to ‘jam’ in the middle. Is it envisaged that some dwellings would have to be demolished in these proposals?

The council along with WSCC and National Highways should with all speed publish all plans for all the proposed junction improvements along with all back up information justifying the proposals.

Comment

Representation ID: 6542

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

There has to be a concern that this document only majors on the situation within the Chichester District. As far as I can see there are no assumptions included for the amount of traffic that will be generated from neighbouring councils that will be using the A27 to either access new work spaces in Chichester or to travel to areas such as Portsmouth/Southampton/Brighton. Assuming also that people may want to go into the centre of Chichester. That currently from the Portfield junction is more than often subject to traffic jams! Also there appears to be no calculations made to the expected rise in traffic levels using the A27. I have to assume that these are included somewhere and have not been forgotten. The A27 is the main South Coast arterial road and as such will attract increased traffic level experientially. On this issue of the A27 being the main South Coast highway. It would be a concern that there is not as far as one can see from any documentation that is in the public domain any overall plan for the A27 from East of Worthing, through Arundel and to the West of Chichester. Unless there is and overall plan, all that will happen is that you will move traffic issues from one location to another as improvements happen (hopefully!). It also may be difficult to review any options with the potential change of government and priorities.

Comment

Representation ID: 6543

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

It is stated that the Oving and Portfield junction have been completed. As with any project there should be a review of whether the objectives were met. Has this been completed and if so will the results be published? As a comment I do use this section on a reasonably regular basis. If I can give a ‘worked’ example. If I have an appointment at St. Richards Hospital, a distance of around 4 miles I leave myself an hour for the journey to ensure I don’t miss the appointment! Not it must be said an improvement!

A review of whether the shutting of the Oving junction and improvements to The Portfield junction have actually improved traffic flow and management.

Comment

Representation ID: 6544

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

At the time of writing, we are in the throes of a General Election. The economic forecasts for certainly the next three years show slow growth for the UK. It would appear highly unlikely that there would be any significant government funding for this project. However, I would suggest that any monies raised by this housing levy will not address the issues of the A27 in the long-term.
By allowing development to the South of the A27 it is by default cutting that out as an option if, and it is a very big if, a decision is ever made and funds are made available for another by pass. The only option would be to the North of the existing A27. That will bring into play issues which will relate to SDNP and The Goodwood Estate. We are in effect left with trying to make an existing four lane by pass with numerous junctions work with traffic levels expected to increase considerably in the next few years. A ‘sticking plaster’ approach seems the most appropriate phrase to use!

Object

Representation ID: 6545

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

The assumption that is stated that the majority of the developments will be to the South of the A27 may be true currently. I would point out however that any developments that feed into the A27 will increase traffic numbers. I would point out again there is going to be an expansion at Rolls Royce plus there is a proposal for an industrial site at Temple Bar. Also, there is a proposed development in Boxgrove for over 20 houses. Although the north of the A27 is bounded by The Goodwood estate and SDNP that should not be a reason for exclusion. I would also point out that in this draft submission the Tangmere junction has been excluded. Is there any reason for this or is it considered to be able to handle the projected traffic levels?

Ensure that ALL developments that are in the A27 ‘corridor’ are included in any future submission. Also due to the Strategic Housing Development at Tangmere. The Tangmere roundabout junction and the A285 junction must be included in future planning considerations.

Comment

Representation ID: 6546

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

It is stated that the local Plan will deliver up to 2029 an additional 7,388 dwellings. Although there are mention of various other ‘windfall developments’ this is the only definite number included in this draft. One has to assume that this will not fall but potentially increase. I can find nothing in this draft that indicates what this will mean in terms of additional vehicle movements in the area. Pre covid the statistics indicate that there were in the UK an average of 953 vehicle movement per household in the UK. This number did drop during and after covid. It is a reasonable assumption to make that the numbers will now be up to or exceeding pre covid levels. Therefore, with the additional dwelling this will be: 7,388 x 953 = 7,040,764 additional vehicle movements from the increased housing alone. This does not take into account additional vehicle movements for service vehicles, couriers, post, refuse collection, visitors etc. It does not include the additional movements for vehicles entering and exiting new industrial premises. One could conjecture that the number of additional vehicle movement in the area are approaching 8,000,000 per annum. That is nearly 22,000 additional movements a day. I am afraid that the calculations made in the documentation very hard to believe and are not a true reflection of the situation.

That all calculations contained in this draft be reviewed by an independent traffic and housing expert(s) to ensure that the assumptions and hence the numbers are ‘fit for purpose’.

Object

Representation ID: 6547

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

Given the submission made in 3.6 with regard to the number of additional vehicle movements of 22,000 per day. Any mitigating measure within the monetary constraints identified in this report will fail to address the issues. I cannot support this in any way without being made aware of the background data used to support the assumptions made. There appears to be some gaps in the assumptions made. I refer again to the lack of any data for ‘industrial’ developments and associated traffic.

I repeat that any assumptions on traffic numbers should be assessed by an independent consultant. In addition, the effect on A27 traffic levels of developments outside of the CDC area such as Arun. One has to assume that they will be using the A27 around Chichester. It appears for free!!!!

Comment

Representation ID: 6548

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

It has to be of concern that in this section there is doubt cast over whether previous numbers as they relate to the yet to be approved Strategic Housing plan. One can only assume that the numbers will not be going down! Therefore, one has to question whether any assumptions made in this document are valid given the uncertainty over future house numbers.

It is difficult to see how this document can be valid until the ‘plan’ is approved. This could be into 2025.

Object

Representation ID: 6549

Received: 04/06/2024

Respondent: Cassons Restaurant

As there is no mention in this draft of the environmental issues that will arise due to the increase in dwellings. I feel that I must draw your attention to a document presented by City Councillor Sarah Sharp to the Chichester City Council Planning and Conservation Committee on 18th August 2022 with regard to Reducing the Speed on the A27 around Chichester. It stated that the principal reasons to look at reducing the speed are linked to
• Noise reduction
• Traffic Smoothing
• Safety concerns
• Increasing population living near the road
• Reducing fuel consumption to reduce climate change
• Driver calming
• New exit from Shopwyke Lakes.
I do not intend to repeat this report here but would suggest that this report is considered in the light of this draft document. I would be particularly concerned with regard to noise and air pollution. Having had a planning application for housing turned down in February 2024 due to noise is obvious that the council is aware of the problem for new housing but seems to ignore existing housing and their occupants. Not being a noise/air pollution expert, it would appear that any increase in the level of traffic will lead to an increase in both air pollution on the A27 but also on access roads where standing traffic at peak times is an issue. Also has the option of a 50mph limit been considered in this draft document as a mitigating measure? It is also noted that traffic modelling for the A27 shows that there will be an increase of 24% by 2035. Has this modelling been included in the proposed mitigation proposals? A study also shows that the A27 around Chichester is the 12th most congested road in England. Of the 11 most congested roads above the A27 in this ranking all bar one is in Greater London! On average the study suggests there is an average delay currently of 4.5 minutes for every mile travelled. It also appears that 2/3rds of the traffic using the A27 currently is through traffic.

• What measures are the council considering for existing properties close to the A27 for mitigating measures from increased noise/air pollution?
• Are the council concerned about the potential health risks to those residents living in close proximity to the A27?
• Has the imposition of a 50mph limit on the affected stretch of the A27 from say Tangmere to Fishbourne been considered as a mitigation option?
• No decisions should be made on any mitigating measures until a full investigation is made to ‘at risk’ dwellings that will be affected by the existing and projected traffic levels.