Representation by Mary Clare H Martin
- Date submitted
- 3 September 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Concerns and objections:1) Impact on individuals, properties and communities 2) Impact on landscape and environment, air quality, increased noise and light pollution, carbon emissions. 3) Failure to consult adequately, to implement local preferences, and to consult key stakeholders. 4) Weak rationale, poor value for money, economic benefits low, improved safety not guaranteed. 5) Inappropriate use of resources in a climate emergency. 6) Potential flooding and congestion in villages during road-building 7) Potential infringement of the Equality Act 2010 and the Human Rights Act. 8) Problematic first iteration of Project Speed. National Highways apparently infringing their licence. Impact on individuals and properties, affecting livelihoods and quality of life (e.g. Kirkby Thore, Sandford). My ninety year old parents (REDACTED) , in a beautiful field which will be destroyed by a new dual carriageway, a new junction (Langrigg), an access road, sink ponds and an additional road north-west of the house. (Sec 5 of 6, MapsDCO-000490-2.5 General Arrangement Drawings Scheme 06 Appleby to Brough.pdf ). Increased noise pollution, due to construction works, possibly at night, increased speed limit, more and faster traffic. Reduced air quality/increased light pollution . A total change from Spring 2020 preferred route, never properly explained, endangering the living conditions of elderly and vulnerable people. Cost of route design to taxpayer: running south of current A66, involves additional junctions, slip and access roads (and safety risks), and sink ponds . Route south was justified because the north is an AONB, but the minutes (PINS sec 51, 17 March 2022) admit the initial AONB boundary was arbitrary. The Appleby-Brough and Temple Sowerby sections account for 50% of the costs of the route. The BCR is unacceptably low (0.92). Poor quality of consultation and information: significant alternatives (northern route, Appleby-Brough: upgrades to single carriageway) never offered to public, despite support of elected representatives and local people for the northern route (survey, Warcop/Musgrave parish councils, Nov-Dec 2020: change.org petition (914 signatures). Friends of the Lake District recommended upgrade to single carriageway and challenged arguments that dualling is safer but not consulted. Secretive additional supplementary consultations Jan-March 2022: targeting specific residents when compounds (for example) are a general issue. Unclear information, March 2021 (home visit); Feb/March 2022, told schedule of commitment to look at Langrigg Junction but outcomes worse than in March. Unclear dates for appointment April 2022. Poor justification: Improved safety not assured, despite public perceptions (Combined Modelling and Appraisal Report). Mainly justified by greater connectivity for business (national not local). Economic benefits minuscule. Ugly roadworks will erode attractiveness as a tourist destination. Climate emergency and environment: destruction of beautiful landscapes (eg Langrigg). Unacceptable carbon emissions. Limited photomontages to show theoretical impact on landscape. Scheme contradicts government policy prioritising rail and river. Infringement of Equality Act 2010/Human Rights Act . Discrimination against elderly non-computer literate couple, unable to access information (eg DCO documents). Not informed of route change after consultation ended, problems accessing paper copies to register for examination, minimal information sent. Unable to enjoy property in peace.