Representation by Andrew Porter
- Date submitted
- 6 November 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
In regard to DCO EN010117, I object to the adoption of the Oakendene site for Rampion 2's proposed substation, and related cable route, on the following grounds: > inadequate exploration and assessment of alternative sites > incomplete consultation on multiple aspects of the proposal The exploration and assessment of alternative sites has failed the public interest in the following ways: 1) No credible comparison of the environmental impacts of the two substation options was completed prior to Rampion's decision to choose Oakendene, with some surveys only being completed at the point of DCO submission. Given the Oakendene option requires a 5 kilometre longer cable route the public interest must be assured as to how the additional soil disturbance, tree and hedge loss entails less environmental damage overall. The proposed route bisects 22 established nightingale territories and crosses Priority Habitat (Unimproved Lowland Meadows) so it is not clear that this public interest threshold has been met. 2) The Oakendene proposal relies on Kent Street Lane for construction access for both the substation and cable route despite no Traffic Impact Assessment having been completed for Kent Street Lane. The use of Kent Street Lane for such a significant project is totally inappropriate and was recognised as such by Carter Jonas representatives. It is a restricted width, single track lane with only occasional parking spaces. Ditches close to the lane are hazardous for drivers without local knowledge - a loaded horse lorry ended on its side in a ditch when letting someone pass, fortunately no horses were killed. The lane has high amenity value to dog walkers, cyclists and horse-riders given the low and slow traffic volumes, and qualifies for Quiet Lane status (with support confirmed from our Horsham District Councillor and Cowfold Parish Council). It is used as a connecting route between multiple footpaths and bridleways enjoyed by local residents and visitors. The proposed site access bellmouth on Kent Street will cause a long and permanent scarring of what is a beautiful lane edged with mature oak trees and blackthorn hedging, home to a number of owls and buzzards, regularly seen flying over the lane. Yet no consideration was given to an alternative 70 acre parcel of land (just to the east), recently marketed for sale, which has full frontage along the A272 and would not cause the public loss that the use of Kent Street will entail. And likewise there's been no comparable assessment of the amenity loss of using Wineham Lane which supports two lanes of much faster traffic, hence much less amenity use, and has already been used for Rampion 1. The consultation was incomplete in many ways but failed specifically as follows: 1) The cable plan EN010117-000161-2 sheet 32 shows that Kings Lane / Moatfield Lane will be closed by Open Cut cable trench in two places (PROW-1de-47 and PROW-1de-45), despite Carter Jonas confirming by email in Sept 2022 that they had noted on file that the lane serves numerous dwellings and farming activities. There has been no consultation on the lane closure and no mention of it when residents were engaged in a Targeted Consultation in April 2023 requesting operational access along the lane post construction. To be clear, the lane is a cul-de-sac and so represents the only access to the highway for 10 properties. Households require continuous access to the highway, allowing children to attend school, workers driving to workplaces, some elderly receiving regular care and medical attention, a farming business including livestock, horses in livery requiring daily access along the lane for exercise on Buckhatch bridleway. It is inconceivable that Rampion would close the lane with two Open Cut trenches rather than using Trenchless crossings. 2) A supplementary Notice of Acceptance of a DCO re. Plot 32/13, to compulsorily acquire land of which ownership is currently unknown, was posted on a sign-post at the top of King's Lane during September 2023 without being included in any stage of consultation. This unnecessary and aggressive move, creating a potential ransom strip at the top of the lane, which threatens lane residents' unconditional right of access to the public highway is unjustified in the public interest and is totally inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the "Planning Act 2008 - Guidance related to procedures for the compulsory acquisition of land" as issued by Department for Communities and Local Govt, Sept 2013. I respectfully request the opportunity to raise these issues directly with the Planning Inspectorate in the relevant meetings.