Devon County Highways, as the Local Highways Authority, the LHA, has taken 4 years to produce a response to Aggregate Industries’ planning application to quarry Straitgate Farm. It needn’t have bothered. It answers nothing.
…in order to assess the potential highway safety impacts the MPA needs to have reliable information on existing and potential agricultural crossings of the Exeter Road and, in particular how this would be controlled in the future in the interests of highway safety.
Reliable information on the impact of agricultural crossings has not been provided. EDDC objected.
On 12 August 2021, the same case officer wrote to the LHA:
I’d be really grateful if you could take onboard the comments from East Devon DC in your response – especially as AI still seem to be leaving the real impact of the quarry/cattle crossing/farm viability to us to consider with no real evidence that they wont be causing problems down the line – except their say-so.
Does the LHA answer this? No.
The case officer also wrote:
The other (late) issue I have been presented with is the tree officer saying that the road access sections don’t include the trees he was concerned about and he still isn’t convinced that the gravel path won’t impact on the third party tree. Given that AI will need our agreement to do any works in the highway verge I’m assuming that the control would be with us and we wouldn’t permit any construction that could impact on that tree or they will probably sue us? So we do have the control? I just need you to confirm that and I will go back to AI and tell them that (and explain in my report).
Does the LHA answer this? No.
The case officer also wrote:
The SAG are chasing about why we didn’t think the Vectos access through Little Straitgate was a less damaging alternative (in terms of hedgerow/tree loss). My recollection was that it was in the wrong place in terms of highway safety but if there’s any chance of clarifying that in your final response it would help me to deal with that point?
Does the LHA answer this? No.
In 2018, Vectos transport consultants put forward an alternative site access to Devon County Council. As it turns out, this alternative had already been considered behind the scenes by Aggregate Industries. Vectos said the alternative site access:
...would remove many of the local concerns and provide comparative advantages, which include… Improved safety for children waiting for school buses at Birdcage Lane/Toadpit Lane junction… Removal of threat of injunction and legal action against Council from the neighbouring landowner whose property would be damaged… [whilst] Visibility for right-turning quarry traffic exiting at this widened junction would not be significantly different to the visibility at the Exeter Road/Birdcage Lane junction.
Aggregate Industries has failed to include a comparison of environmental effects for this alternative in its Environmental Statement. Planning guidance says:
...where alternatives have been considered, paragraph 2 of Schedule 4 [of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations] requires the applicant to include in their Environmental Statement a description of the reasonable alternatives studied (for example in terms of development design, technology, location, size and scale) and an indication of the main reasons for selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of the environmental effects. Paragraph: 041 Reference ID: 4-041-20170728
So, how could Devon County Council, without a "comparison of the environmental effects", lawfully conclude that the development would be acceptable?
The LHA's response is remiss in other areas too. On traffic surveys, the LHA reports:
...the LHA does not dispute the number of vehicle movements as described in the TA.
The LHA ignores the fact that the traffic counts are now more than 3 years old.
On cumulative impact of permitted development, the LHA reports:
The LHA agrees with the number of sites and residential units, plus care home that have been evaluated in the TA.
This ignores all the development that has occurred since 2018.
On collision data, the LHA reports:
The LHA agrees with the collision data put forward in the TA and does not disagree with its conclusions.
This is despite the collision data only covering up to 2016, and only covering a short stretch of the road – conveniently ignoring a recorded fatality. The LHA's conclusion is also surprising, because although Aggregate Industries’ Transport Assessment claims:
No collisions involving HGV’s have occurred within the three year period and none have been attributed to excessive speed.
the case officer – knowing there have been accidents on the B3174, including HGVs, many reported on this blog – asked the LHA to:
check that the basic information on accident data is in fact correct
The LHA couldn't even be bothered to do that.
 |
 |
 |
