Inspector's Schedule of Modifications
Search representations
Results for Mr Philip Robinson CBE search
New searchObject
Inspector's Schedule of Modifications
MM84 (Main)
Representation ID: 327
Received: 12/10/2024
Respondent: Mr Philip Robinson CBE
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The word “policy” is not specific re the actual Policy it refers to; this should be stated to be The National Planning Policy Framework.
The Recorded loss data should include loss, harm and additionally harm to the setting of all affected designated and all non- designated heritage assets listed on all relevant Local Authority Lists (ie the Tendring and Essex County Council List in addition to the currently stated Colchester List).
Update the Monitoring Indicator of this SA Objective (no9) as follows:
All permissions granted which affect, destroy or , harm the setting, of a designated or non-designated heritage asset and/or archaeological sites are in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Record the loss, harm or, harm to the setting of Listed buildings Grade 1 and Grade11+, Scheduled Monuments and nationally important archaeological sites and non-designated heritage assets on the Colchester Local List, the Tendring Local List and the Essex County Council LocalList.
The word “policy” is not specific re the actual Policy it refers to; this should be stated to be The National Planning Policy Framework.
The Recorded loss data should include loss, harm and additionally harm to the setting of all affected designated and all non- designated heritage assets listed on all relevant Local Authority Lists (ie the Tendring and Essex County Council List in addition to the currently stated Colchester List).
Object
Inspector's Schedule of Modifications
MM63 (Main)
Representation ID: 328
Received: 13/10/2024
Respondent: Mr Philip Robinson CBE
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Modelling, with its high degree of uncertainty (due to the unproven novel plans for travel behaviours) could result in the access road from the Tye Road roundabout into the Southern Community being opened unnecessarily. This would expose the adjacent major school complex to a high traffic flow alongside its boundary, contrary to the planned vehicle free zone around it.
It would be preferable to gate this access road for emergency vehicles only initially, and only open it to general traffic if regular traffic surveys at the Southern Community Link Road junction on the A133 roundabout prove its need.
The suggested modification is to restate the second point on p.104 as:
“Subject to regular survey of the traffic volumes on the junctions that access the “Link Road”, the Garden Community must aim to restrict vehicular connectivity between individual junctions of the “Link Road”, except for public transport and emergency vehicles, apart from the ‘Link Road’ itself”.
Modelling of predicted travel volumes in advance will have a high level of uncertainty, due to the novel plans for modal shifts in travel behaviour. However, since there will be an access road at the outset from Tye Road Roundabout into the Southern Community provided for emergency vehicles there is the opportunity to restrict this as a gated access point at the start of the housing developments. Then the actual traffic density at the A133/A1331roundabout can be regularly monitored as the housing occupancies grow and the “reality” will determine when, or indeed if, the additional access is needed.
The proposed access to the Southern Community to the Tye Road roundabout is likely to pass immediately adjacent to the major school complex (located in the south of the Northern Community).This aspires to have a vehicle free zone around it (MM40 refers). Therefore it is important that this potentially high traffic flow is not allowed next to the schools in advance of actual (rather than simulated) evidence justifying its need.