(maximum of 40 minutes duration)
Minutes:
a) Question: Loss to this district of the A27 bypass improvement scheme
Mr Lloyd-Williams asked the Leader who was responsible for the catastrophic loss to this district of the £300m bypass project.
Response by Mr Dignum (Leader of the Council):
Mr Dignum responded that we would now need to consider an option which was within the cost envelope to the government. There needed to be consensus across the district. The northern route was ruled out as it did not involve improvement of the A27 junctions. We now needed to find the best way forward. We had lost our place in the government’s Road Investment Strategy 2021 but would need to find a place in the next tranche of funding.
b) Chichester Vision affected by the loss of A27 improvement scheme
Mrs Apel asked whether the Vision for Chichester and tourism would be negatively affected by the loss of the A27 bypass as traffic got worse with increased housing in the district.
Response by Mr Dignum (Leader of the Council):
Mr Dignum advised that he was working on Southern Gateway with certain assumptions about the A27 which would require revision. The Vision was not developed in sufficient detail that elements of it would go ahead or not. We would need to adjust our objectives according to what was available but it did not rule out either project.
c) Confidence in the A27 consultation process
Mr Brown asked whether we had been misled by Highways England and by the Minister for Transport. When we voted to request a re-run we did so knowing that we might not get the funding. Can we trust that process? We could have been told by the Minister that there would be no re-run of the consultation and not that the funding had been withdrawn entirely.
Response by Mr Dignum (Leader of the Council):
Before the Road Improvement Strategy (RIS) was announced in 2013 Highways England had put the northern route option on the table at meetings with West Sussex County Council and this council. The RIS then confined the work to these four junctions there was a campaign to present these to the public through maps which were picked up in The Observer. The Minister for Transport then announced that the northern route was off the table. He considered that there was no reason for the Secretary of State to withdraw the funding.
d) Use of the A272 as the future A27 bypass option
Mr Morley was concerned that the A272 should not become the future A27 bypass option. He requested the Leader to reassure residents in the A272 corridor and Midhurst Parish Council that this concern would be acknowledged at any future bypass considerations which took place.
Response by Mr Dignum (Leader of the Council):
Mr Dignum responded that it would certainly be taken into account by the district but he couldn’t speak for other consultees. Because nothing would be done for a number of years it was something we would have to live with. Communities had been very divided and we would need to bring them together.
e) A northern route in a future RIS
Mr Oakley asked whether, as the Secretary of State did not expressly include the northern options, on what basis the Leader believed the northern options would not be reconsidered. The Secretary of State has not ruled out any northern options in any subsequent road investment strategies in the future.
Response by Mr Dignum:
Mr Dignum responded that it was unlikely that the Secretary of State would change that strategy. The information was confined to the RIS and work to the four junctions and this was something that would need clarity in the future.
f) Question: Video recording of Sturt Avenue layout
Mr Macy asked whether it would have been useful to have a video recording of the site at Sturt Avenue.
Response:
Mrs Taylor noted his comments but said it was not usual to have a video recording of sites.