Gaul Road Junction No Further Delays !

December 19, 2017 by Councillor Steve Count 4 Comments

I am concerned at the latest application from Cannon Kirk; to do with drainage of the site on Gaul Road. It appears innocent enough, sort out drainage so that the remaining houses can be built. However in their “Planning statement” the commitment to sort out the road and the junction with the bypass is listed as jobs 13th and 14th after 12 other pieces of work connected to the drainage issue. I cannot believe that those 12 jobs are seriously affected by completing the works that are required now. I have therefore put in an objection (See below) and will do my utmost to move this forward.

Dear Sirs

I wish to object on the grounds of phasing. Under the document “Planning Statement” the phasing of works identifies at 13th and 14th in a long list.

13. Construct the proposed Junction on the A141 (approved under application ref: F/YR16/0275/F)
14. Construct Gaul Road widening (approved under application ref: F/YR16/0275/F)

Pushing the time for delivery back further and introducing 12 new reasons if accepted for further delay. The delivery of this junction improvement is clearly behind schedule. There have been a plethora of accidents at this junction including the loss of a life since it was first anticipated Cannon Kirk would deliver the safety improvements required. Cannon Kirk have steadfastly used the planning system to delay and avoid the completion of this junction at every opportunity. There is no reason that these works should be delayed further for the delivery of flooding infrastructure on nearby fields. If the phasing for the delivery of the road improvements and signalised junction are moved to one and two in the phasing, or left out of this application and dealt with immediately as planned I will remove my objection. I have ticked policy/precedent and local services although there is not a clearly identifiable partner for the following reasons.

Policy – This seeks to delay earlier identified agreements with policy in earlier approvals.

Precedent- Allowing this sets a clear precedent that developers can continue to dictate to the district how they wish to operate rather than the other way around.

Local services- The local road infrastructure affected by the existing development has not yet been delivered.

Should this planning approval be granted I believe Cannon Kirk would be able to refer to it to contest any further attempts to speed up delivery of the junction improvements. For example, “We have not completed 1 to 12 yet, which FDC accepted as necessary before delivering improvements” also “We cannot continue 1 to 12 due to weather and ground conditions being unfavourable which has a knock-on impact on the timing of the delivery of junction improvements, as agreed by FDC when they approved this application”.

If un-amended as suggested I will not accept approval by officers and will insist on this being referred to committee.

Regards Councillor Steve Count