Representation by Darren Sanders
- Date submitted
- 19 February 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As a ward councillor for the proposed section through Milton Common and part of the Eastern Road, I object to the proposals as they will damage an area adjacent to a SSSI as well as the valuable Langstone Harbour. This is so important when determining planning applications in Portsmouth that, if they are permitted, mitigation payments are made. I do not understand why similar payments are not due to be made when this scheme will cause disruption to the same area. This environmental impact can only be worsened when the contaminants that lie under the Common are taken into consideration. Lead and other dangerous chemicals have lain dormant for decades, yet this scheme risks releasing these noxious gases and dangerous elements. This will have a negative impact on the amenity of those using the Common. I note section 3.8.1 of the scoping report indicates significant environmental impacts are, at least, possible. Approving this scheme will worsen air quality and increase air pollution at a time when the Government that is passing this to you is asking this city to improve the first and cut the second. It will do so not only through the environmental damage to Milton Common, but also the impact of the route through Furze Lane and Eastern Road. Residents around the former will be impacted by the proposed route, both due to the nature of the work and also the consequent loss of its only bus route. This must have a negative environmental impact. The Government's insistence on a Clean Air Zone for the western roads in the city puts increased pressure on the third road into the city, Eastern Road. Yet, if this plan goes ahead, it is threatening either closure of a stretch or a reduction to one lane. So we have a Government insisting that we cut air pollution and congestion one side of the city while at the same time allowing a scheme that will increase both on the other. This is madness. This disruption may be worthwhile if there was some clear environmental or social benefit for the city. With HS2, the consequent reduced reliance on domestic flights, increased capacity on existing routes and ability to level up the economy are easily understood. Here, there is no such social or environmental benefit. The power supply is not going to Portsmouth homes, there is no guarantee the electricity on the cable will come from renewable sources nor a guarantee that the project itself will be carbon neutral. Portsmouth is the host of something designed to benefit others while it suffers environmental damage and increased pollution and congestion at a time when the Government that she passed this to you wants it to cut both. I urge you to reject this plan because it will harm the amenity of residents in my ward and it will harm the lives of people across the city due to the increased air pollution and congestion it will cause, all for the benefit of others.