Representation by Havant Borough Council (Havant Borough Council)
- Date submitted
- 18 February 2020
- Submitted by
- Local authorities
Following the Planning Inspectorate’s acceptance of an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) for Aquind Interconnector, Havant Borough Council (HBC) is a host Borough requests to be registered as an Interested Party at the Examination. Havant Borough Council is not a unitary authority and therefore a number of matters, such as Highways, Transport and Archaeology fall within the remit of Hampshire County Council (HCC). This letter provides a summary of the main aspects of the proposal which HBC is presently able to confirm that it agrees and/or disagrees, together with an appropriate explanation, in accordance with the Planning Inspectorate Advice Note 8.3. The response below is an initial response as the Council is currently reviewing the detailed documentation submitted with the DCO application and therefore the Council reserves the right to make further written representations during the examination should it be required. The issues raised will be the subject of detailed written representations and a Local Impact Report which will be submitted during the examination process. Site selection HBC has considered the Environmental Statement Chapter 2 – Consideration of alternatives chapter, following concerns raised in our PIER response. HBC outlined to the applicant that there would also appear to be opportunities to take the cable off the highway and these should be given serious consideration by the applicant, with evidence provided if these are not considered acceptable. Paragraph 2.6.3, considers the proposed West Waterlooville Alternative Route, which would enable the cabling to avoid pinch points of the highway network around Waterlooville. The following paragraphs which have discounted this option, does not give any compelling advice that this option has been seriously considered by the applicant, no evidence has been provided of correspondence with Berewood, who are the landowners of the West of Waterlooville Major Development Area (MDA). Neither has this been supplemented with any information regarding the delivery programme for works for the MDA. As such HBC have concerns as to whether this alternative routing has been seriously considered. Alternative Countryside Routes HBC and Winchester City Council (WCC) also suggested a proposed alternative countryside route. The applicant has provided information in paragraphs 2.6.4-2.6.4.5 inclusive. It is acknowledged that designations do exist across the countryside route, however this proposed alterative appears to have been ruled out without full reference or sufficient information, in the form of appropriate mapping of constraints, which would enable the cabling across the countryside to avoid the constraints that have been highlighted, and in addition avoid the MDA, which is a further issue that has been highlighted. Noise, Vibration and air quality HBC acknowledges Chapters 23, and 24 which relate to this subject matter. HBC acknowledges that the impact would be temporary, whoever adequate measures need to be secured in the proposed CEMP. We will be providing a more detailed response on this points in the Local Impact Report (LIR). Socio-Economics Chapter 25 of the Environmental Statement considers the socio-economic impacts of the development. HBC raised concerns about potential effects on community resources, amenity, and accessibility, and businesses which may suffer disruption during the Construction Stage. It is noted that the applicant proposes to control such matter through the Onshore Outline Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). HBC would request that discussions regarding programming should be proactively held with the Highway Authority, local business groups and local Councillors to ensure that road space conflicts are managed, and to utilise extensive local knowledge. This will ensure that any proposed traffic management systems and diversion routes are appropriate, access is a fundamental issue that would need resolving, to ensure that the construction phase does not significantly adversely impact on the viability of businesses and residents during this period. In conclusion, mitigation and, where necessary, compensation, is the only way, in HBC’s view, that many of the issues can be addressed. HBC continues to discuss the proposals, but as highlighted in this representation there remain issues where greater clarity and detail is required.