Parish councils give reasons for and against an A27 consultation re-run

City members last week voted unanimously to support a re-run, which was recently suggested could be a possibility by transport secretary Chris Grayling.

The Observer has contacted every parish council in the Chichester district to ask if its members support or are against an all-new consultation, which would include previously dropped northern bypass options.

Here is the updated map of those who have responded, now showing that 14 are for, with eight against of the 22 who responded with a definite position.

The Observer incorrectly included Westbourne in support last week when it is strongly against a new consultation. We apologise for the error and the map has been altered to reflect the correct positions.

We also invited councils to say why its members were for or against, here is a summary of the responses:

SUPPORT

Birdham - “Birdham Parish Council have serious concerns that two of the seven options originally offered were discarded behind closed doors.

None of the options address either the Portfield Roundabout or the traffic lights at Oving Road.

Three of the options had negative effects on journey times to Chichester and two will do significant ecological harm to the Chichester Canal and the harbour. Upgrading will cause four years of hell both to the north and south of Chichester.”

Tangmere - Chairman Andrew Irwin said: “Tangmere supports a comprehensive and transparent consultation process that allows all options to be examined. The parish council particularly requests that any new consultation includes a promise to publish the results of the consultation, so all residents are able to see the outcome of the public consultation.”

Earnley - “Earnley Parish Council’s position is that it is far better to do nothing than to waste public money on any of the currently proposed ‘damaging short-term sticking plaster’ proposals. A long-term strategic solution is required and this should include the possibility of a northern route which would take away the 42 per cent ‘through traffic’ (Highways England’s own figures) and leave the existing road more than capable of handling the projected ‘local traffic’ without the need of further expenditure on it.”

Sidlesham - “The consultation should be re-done transparently with all options on the table. Options 1 to 5 will not work and, for the 27,000 residents on the Manhood Peninsula, will worsen an already extremely difficult traffic situation. No road is better than a bad road. There has been no explanation as to why the options north of Chichester were precluded from the consultation.”

Fishbourne - “We believe there is a need for an open and transparent rerun of the consultation that covers a complete range of options, invites local response at a formative stage and contributes to an integrated development programme for through and local roads.”

Oving - “Oving Parish Council have agreed that it supports an all new A27 consultation to include at least one of the options for a northern bypass. Andrew Tyrie now has to come off the fence and state his views. We now need Tyrie to make his views known.”

Others for: Selsey; Hunston; North Mundham; West Wittering; Donnington; Bignor; East Wittering & Bracklesham; Chichester City Council; Bosham.

AGAINST

Funtington - “Funtington Parish Council is strongly in favour of an improvement of the A27 bypass in the expectation that it will relieve the Fishbourne roundabout and render the A259 and the A27 more attractive than the B2178 and reduce traffic pressures in Funtington and East Ashling.

Westbourne - Chairman Richard Hitchcock said: “The re-opening of the enquiry would undoubtedly delay the start date, which, in the current climate, could possibly result in the current earmarked funds being used elsewhere. We are somewhat reluctant to jeopardise the improvements currently on offer in order to re-consider an option that is pretty unlikely to make it through. In other words, it is probably best to work with the five southern options that are currently on the table. On balance, Option 2 appears to be preferred.”

Milland - “The council is well aware of the grief caused by the status quo, however any opening of the debate will simply prolong the saga and entrench opinions even more firmly.”

Lavant - “CDC do not understand the scheme and after three years wish to argue a different point.”

Boxgrove - “This is a waste of public money and runs the risk of losing the funding. CDC have been present since 2014 at all the meetings with Highways England - how can they claim that the process has not been transparent?

Others against: Westhampnett, Heyshott, East Dean