Object
Proposed Submission Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan
Representation ID: 24034
Received: 27/11/2018
Respondent: Mr Egmont Kock
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Legal Compliance and Soundness. The Statement of Community involvement makes clear that consultation must be open and robust. At item 5 2.2 "Consultation will seek to involve all parties who .... are affected by the outcome". This has not happened in my case. I heard about the plans by chance presumably because my farmhouse is based in the Parish of Iden. However, because my farm is accessed from the A268 opposite the entrance to the development I am directly affected. Nobody has consulted me about this which is surprising given the movement of heavy farm traffic opposite the proposed development entrance. This in fact involves traffic from two farms who share the same driveway/junction. The junction is dangerous enough as things stand with a blind rise masking vehicles travelling at speed from the North. The situation is compounded by low winter sun affecting sight lines towards the south.There have already been a number of near accidents at this spot and the PEA1 proposal heightens this risk, with implications for RDC liability in the event of a bad accident. The access proposals fail the "soundness" test because they are not justified. There are much less risky alternatives - see below.
Legal Compliance and Soundness. The Statement of Community involvement makes clear that consultation must be open and robust. At item 5 2.2 "Consultation will seek to involve all parties who .... are affected by the outcome". This has not happened in my case. I heard about the plans by chance presumably because my farmhouse is based in the Parish of Iden. However, because my farm is accessed from the A268 opposite the entrance to the development I am directly affected. Nobody has consulted me about this which is surprising given the movement of heavy farm traffic opposite the proposed development entrance. This in fact involves traffic from two farms who share the same driveway/junction. The junction is dangerous enough as things stand with a blind rise masking vehicles travelling at speed from the North. The situation is compounded by low winter sun affecting sight lines towards the south.There have already been a number of near accidents at this spot and the PEA1 proposal heightens this risk, with implications for RDC liability in the event of a bad accident. The access proposals fail the "soundness" test because they are not justified. There are much less risky alternatives - see below.