Representation by Angus Charles Goswell
- Date submitted
- 17 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
My concerns purely relate to the proposed access road through Pebmarsh to reach the Twinstead site. Supported by extensive documentation to/with National Grid, it is clearly apparent: 1. There is no logic to the proposal to destroy the environment/high quality farming land by building a relief road. 2. National Grid consulted initially with a different geographic area before deciding to enact their relief road proposal. 3. They have only recently contacted those impacted by their latest proposal. Most residents impacted by their plans had no idea whatsoever what was being proposed until last September. National Grid have confirmed in writing they failed to send any related information to the majority of impacted parties prior to this date. 4. They have refused on multiple occasions to meet or communicate with me despite frequent written and telephone attempts requesting consultation. 5. The potential impacts on our home are devastating. Their refusal to consult is shocking, highly disappointing and I am advised in breach of their legal obligations under s 47 2008 Planning Consultation Act. 6. They have met selectively with some locals (on more than one occasion) , albeit refuse to explain why they were prepared to meet with only a few residents and not others, showing clear procedural bias. 7. They eventually agreed to meet albeit only after they had submitted the planning consent order which is clearly too late and reinforces their obvious refusal to meaningfully consult which is , as they have confirmed in writing, a breach of the law. The refusal to respond to correspondence and refusal to meet prior to submitting their application can only be construed as an absolute refusal to listen to the views of the local people whose lives they will be directly affecting for 4 + years - total corporate arrogance. 8. During the eventual meeting they refused to provide any evidence of the rationale for the relief road - either its location ( they are a number of shorter more obvious direct and cheaper routes) or why they cannot use the existing road infrastructure with minor alterations. Their argument was based solely that the completely different geographic area's roads they had initially reviewed were not suitable - a different location ! 9. Following an onsite inspection post the meeting their own surveyor has now recognised that the proposed crossing at Oak Road will result in a highly dangerous road junction that could easily cause death when fast moving cars with limited pre-vision along Oak road meet very large lorries crossing the road at sub 10 miles an hour. We have repeatedly made these representations to National Grid in writing but been totally ignored prior to the application being made. 10. All National Grid's publicity and documents refer to the road as "temporary" whereas they have now finally accepted that this is grossly misleading as they are in fact requesting the right to have the so called temporary road permanently. This will have a major impact on locals and resulting house values. 11. We have asked on multiple occasions for them to advise on both the size and frequency of traffic movements if the road proceeds. In respect of size, their own surveyor has confirmed they are unable to do so as they currently do not actually know - this raises serious questions as to how they can have concluded that they need a relief road if they don't actually even know what size vehicles will be using it. In respect of frequency, their traffic statement makes reference ( albeit it was prepared before they had even contemplated the current proposed route) that it will be required 7 days a week from 7.30 am to 7 pm - these hours are totally inappropriate in a currently very quiet and peaceful rural location. National Grid , despite repeated written and verbal requests, have refused to advise the proposed hours of use. 12. Similarly, if it proceeds we have repeatedly asked what security they propose for the road to avoid the widespread associated problems of joyriding and other inappropriate behaviour. We have received no response. There is no logic in building the relief road at all. The impact on local residents and the local environment will be devastating. National Grid's behaviour makes it patently clear that they have had no real desire to actually consult and have now submitted their application having refused to speak with some residents and ignore the wishes of the majority. I am advised that their behaviour makes the process highly liable to legal judicial review .