SITE NAME TYPE HERE

 

Trial Ground - Planning Meeting 27.06.2018 – Speech by Clive Sills

Councillors
Clive Sills opposite the development and entrance.
I submit that despite the advice paper that the entrance to the new development has been approved and therefore not open to discussion actually it needs discussion.
It is viewed from the developer’s perspective not the neighbours. Despite the developer’s submission that the agricultural entrance was used as the basis for the new road this is seriously stretching credibility. The entrance to the development is 12 m, some 40 feet south of the tractor entrance.
Also, highways department analysed the development side of the road ignoring the impact on others. The plans don’t show our location. There is more mention of dormice than neighbours.
The side of the road opposite the proposed development is about 200 m long, it has one residential entry, yet the developers use this position to place their new road. With a clean sheet of paper to produce the development why exit opposite us?
Just for the record, elsewhere in the village, a development on Newtown Road, the length of the road facing the development is much shorter. There are eight residential entrances to the development, but the entry road is opposite the only piece of blank wall.
This junction is both wrong and dangerous. The traffic splitter solution has benefits, taming northbound traffic but it is too close to the residential exit. It seriously jeopardises vehicles exiting our location.
We have no footpath, and therefore have to creep onto the highway. At present southbound oncoming vehicles move to the centre of the road to evade exiting vehicles, this will not be possible in the future as they will have to get in lane before the traffic splitter.
It is inexcusable to build a junction that is not safe for all users. The road is used by large modern tractors, huge lorries with trailers going to the abattoir, crazy motorcyclists and cyclists.
The new junction will be a dangerous one as the sightline, is no more than 7 m, this is too short a distance for passing vehicles slow down. The carriageway is too narrow to allow a cyclist and a motor vehicle to pass together.
There are solutions, one would be to move the new road at least 10 m north, little chance.
The second solution and hardly radical, would be to create a footpath wide area of say 6 m on both sides of our egress.
Not said (Preferably move the splitter 3 m further south. This would give acceptable sightlines, pedestrian access to the new splitter and prevent pedestrians leaving our properties running across three lanes to get to a footpath).