top of page

Sinah Lane: Deputation Dave Parham


The initial revision of the Local Plan recognised the unique set of infrastructure constraints on Hayling Island and the need for a composite strategic Infrastructure Plan covering the whole Island.

In 2013, this was reinforced by the Inspectorate with the view that:

“I concur that growth on Hayling Island should be limited/restricted, to take account of flood risk, the need to minimise impacts on the natural environment of Chichester and Langstone harbours and access difficulties on the local road network at peak hours”. [Extract from paragraph 9 of the Inspectors Report]. 1


However, development continued unabated, and the plan for 660 houses increased to over 1100.

In 2017, HIIAG was formed to advise on all aspects of Infrastructure on the Island. Recognising the unique infrastructure issues on the Island, the decision was taken to undertake a separate TA for the Island’s road network.

The TA was completed in January 2019, however the HIIAG representatives were excluded from the process despite promises to include them at every stage and educate the group members on the modelling process. The TA was not accepted by the Council who required more detailed studies to be undertaken under the Satchwell Amendment. This resulted in a TA Addendum; HIIAG and the HI Councillors were again excluded from the process. The TA Addendum, on completion, was ‘called in’ for scrutiny. At no stage have the TA or the Addendum been subject to an independent analysis. At the meeting, the only independent expert, Professor Nick Hounsell, was given just 2 ½ minutes to present his findings. Nick is a resident and is an internationally-recognised expert in the field. His considerations have been provided to you in a separate document.

The Scrutiny Board identified areas requiring further work to be undertaken. However, the TA Addendum was signed off as “complete” on a technicality leaving the Board’s issues unresolved and the major deficiencies of the TA remaining.

The capability of the single access route (A3023 and bridge) is fixed as there are no economic options for expansion, and the plan for 1100 houses is not to be considered any way a limit. Therefore, our recommendation that a detailed flow/capacity analysis is essential as the only way to understand how many houses can be supported by the road infrastructure over time, and to assess the ramifications for the emergency services, police, public transport, Southern Water’s back-up service, and the Island’s economy.

As there is no intention to limit housing or leisure traffic, the scant infrastructure planning horizon of 15 years is not justifiable or sustainable.

The mitigation measures designed to smooth intra-Island traffic flows will cost millions. We should know exactly what the costs are, the funding sources and the implementation plan. These measures will further degrade the performance of the A3023, and the TA assertion that the mitigation measures reduce the impact to ‘under ‘severe’ is wrong. There is no published definition or calculation advice available so HBC cannot claim this – there is no proof !

Land on Sinah Lane Because of its position, the Sinah Lane site requires two separate pumping systems: one for waste water (sewage) and one for surface water (roads, gutters, etc.) These present single points of failure and a real risk of cross-pollution. The SW waste water system is a network of 15 electrically-powered pumping stations each with a small storage tank (16 with this application.) These all route through to the Stoke Station, which connects via a single pipe to Budds Farm. This network has no alternate route and must operate 24/7. Blockages are common (over 100 a year) and power outages, breakages and pump failures occur frequently.

The well-exercised back-up process is a stream of sewage lorries (up to 20 have been used) to pump out the contents of the affected stations and transport it to Budds Farm. This continues until the emergency is over. Unfettered road access is essential for this to work. Failure results in waste water flooding followed by harbour pollution events.

These proposals should be expanded to detail a contingency plan, back-up systems and alternate power sources. The risk here is not just to the local area but also to Langstone Harbour. The large above-ground SuDS lake discharges into the ancient deep ditch surface water network, and thence to Langstone Harbour. The process for monitoring the SuDS water quality and the maintenance of the whole route to the EA one-way valve to the harbour must be defined.

At this stage it is premature to take any decisions on this development until HBC and ESCP have resolved the outstanding issues.

Dave Parham Save Our Island Group


Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
No tags yet.
bottom of page