Representation by Olivia Ball
- Date submitted
- 1 November 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to the proposals. I believe that the DCO proposal represents a material change, and is now so different from the one consulted on, that it requires a reopening of the consultation: I would like my points raised to be put forward to the next stage and examination • During the informal consultation and the first round consultation Kent Street was recognised as ‘ a single track lane unsuitable for HGVs’, And in July 2021, James d’Alessandro wrote to a resident who was concerned about the use of Kent Street by construction traffic: “In January 2021, the Council responded to the Rampion 2 informal consultation process to the effect that Kent Street is not deemed appropriate for temporary construction access...” . Yet now we discover that Kent Street is expected to bear the significant burden of avoiding the AQMA in Cowfold, and also for some reason, reducing the impact on the much wider Wineham Lane. • The use of the western Oakendene compound was originally as a storage compound. Now it appears to be intended also as a huge car park from which many thousands of heavy and lighter vehicles will come and go. • The complicated traffic management plans and huge compound at the industrial estate, will cause far greater impacts on traffic flow than anything discussed during the consultation period • ‘No HGVs will go through the AQMA of Cowfold ‘has now become HGVs ‘from the Oakendene substation compound’ and ‘unless necessary’. The HGV claims made during the consultation were misleading as in fact there will be over 4000 HGVs going to the A281-there is no other way, and half the many thousands of private vehicles coming daily to the Oakendene compounds will come through the village. It is now apparent that there will be considerable construction traffic going through Cowfold, yet from FOI requests to the Parish Council it is clear that they believed they had been given assurances before the first consultation, that NO site traffic would pass through the village. This may explain their apparent decision not to oppose the proposals. • 8040 HGVs at Oakendene was the number presented during consultation. We have heard some people choosing to support the proposal as this did not seem like a large number of vehicles overall. Yet the DCO submission now appears to indicate that there will be nearly 21000 HGV movements in and out of the 2 compounds and 70000LGVs (possibly up to 7.5T) I would also like to request a site visit to Oakendene and a topic-specific hearing at the Village Hall in Cowfold to properly examine the consequences of the proposed substation and it impact on Cowfold, its community, businesses and environment.