Object
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 21270
Received: 12/03/2020
Respondent: Maureen & Richard Burr
Please consider my objections to the traffic management enhancements to the above development at Burgh Road Aylsham bringing 300 new house and a new school.
Currently, there is a non regulation width pedestrian path on one side only and the road is non regulation width also. It has a recently constructed downhill priority pinch point at the junction with Oakfield Road culminating in a final pinch point at the market place access between two historic roadside dwellings ....where the public transport buses are unable to smoothly negotiate without crossing into the oncoming traffic
The first proposal, to widen the road to regulation width will merely bring more traffic to the pinch point at the market place access. It already is a five point junction (considering the exit to the bank car park at that point) . As the boundaries are historic properties at this point and cannot be demolished this pinch point cannot be expanded. (Pinch point: buses require crossing onto oncoming traffic lane to turn left). The plan will exacerbate this already considerably busy junction.
The second proposal is to create a new 2 metre wide footpath where there currently is no footpath at all. In order to create this path you will need to demolish a boundary of mature dense tree line of oak, ash , lime and sycamore which belongs to locals . ‘up to the tarmac’ (is owned by locals) and was the subject of much correspondence with Broadland District Council and the Land Registry several years ago. Please do not consider the general rule that highways have one or more metres from the tarmac as their right of ownership ! (The owners) will resist any effort to execute this plan and make it a costly battle.
Can the traffic management team relook at this development with the possibility of MAKING BURGH ROAD A ONE WAY ROAD HEADING TOWARD THE A 140 negating the need for road widening or a new footpath.
For me, I naturally prefer the alternate site proposal close to the motel. Viewed from the air, the surrounding gardens are a welcome and necessary part of a healthy environment, “the lungs of Aylsham” and destroying trees in favour of traffic would be a controversial issue at a time when the health of our planet is such a “hot” subject.
P.S. 16.03.2020
With regard to traffic along Burgh Road and my proposal of a downhill (toward A140) one way system, I wish to make it clear that a one way system from Oakfield Road junction with Burgh Road as far as Foster Way junction with Burgh Road is the extent of my one way suggestion for traffic relief. It is the only section of the road that is non regulation width and therefore too narrow to allow comfortable two way traffic whilst still allowing two way access to the town car park at its market place end and two way access to both the newer and existing habitation at the petrol station and A140 end of Burgh Road.
Please consider my objections to the traffic management enhancements to the above development at Burgh Road Aylsham bringing 300 new house and a new school.
Currently, there is a non regulation width pedestrian path on one side only and the road is non regulation width also. It has a recently constructed downhill priority pinch point at the junction with Oakfield Road culminating in a final pinch point at the market place access between two historic roadside dwellings ....where the public transport buses are unable to smoothly negotiate without crossing into the oncoming traffic
The first proposal, to widen the road to regulation width will merely bring more traffic to the pinch point at the market place access. It already is a five point junction (considering the exit to the bank car park at that point) . As the boundaries are historic properties at this point and cannot be demolished this pinch point cannot be expanded. (Pinch point: buses require crossing onto oncoming traffic lane to turn left). The plan will exacerbate this already considerably busy junction.
The second proposal is to create a new 2 metre wide footpath where there currently is no footpath at all. In order to create this path you will need to demolish a boundary of mature dense tree line of oak, ash , lime and sycamore which belongs to locals . ‘up to the tarmac’ (is owned by locals) and was the subject of much correspondence with Broadland District Council and the Land Registry several years ago. Please do not consider the general rule that highways have one or more metres from the tarmac as their right of ownership ! (The owners) will resist any effort to execute this plan and make it a costly battle.
Can the traffic management team relook at this development with the possibility of MAKING BURGH ROAD A ONE WAY ROAD HEADING TOWARD THE A 140 negating the need for road widening or a new footpath.
For me, I naturally prefer the alternate site proposal close to the motel. Viewed from the air, the surrounding gardens are a welcome and necessary part of a healthy environment, “the lungs of Aylsham” and destroying trees in favour of traffic would be a controversial issue at a time when the health of our planet is such a “hot” subject.