With reference to David Blackford’s letter published September 7, it is arguably safe to assume that his opinion (to which he is entitled) is not based on fact, especially relative to WSCC’s initiative to engage a new consultant.
Let us not forget that the attribute for through traffic used in the consultation was 20 per cent, when Highways England’s own data in mid-2016 stated 42 per cent and
I hear the latest stat is 46 per cent.
Now add the additional traffic movements from CDC’s local plan for the housing developments, factor in the engagement of a new consultant who I would fully expect to be tasked to consult on integrated traffic movements with a clear focus on public health.
The resulting output would deliver options that the public would more readily accept, with confidence that when money is spent, it will deliver a solution that is best for Chichester district.
It should also be pointed out that central government’s policy has moved on from that which existed in the Highways England RIS1 (Road Investment Strategy) in that air quality now has a much higher focus as a result of the High Court judgement.
This is evident from the joint Chris Grayling/Michael Gove publication after the aforementioned judgement.
The letter also states that (a) the A27 Working Group comprises mostly campaigners for the northern option, (b) option 2 was the most popular choice.
Having attended the WSCC Build a Better A27 meetings, the group were working together to agreed pledges.
His assertion on (a) lacks factual foundation.
On (b), let us not forget that 47 per cent voted for no option in the consultation.
This was the foundation for Louise Goldsmith’s initiative, for which she has to be complimented.
We should have confidence in our new MP, Gillian Keegan, to take forward the very real concerns of her constituency to both Chris Grayling and Michael Gove and hence get the additional time for the WSCC initiative to conclude.