Lidsing Garden Community SPD

Comment

Representation ID: 852

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: James Carr

I would like to provide my feedback as follows on the Lidsing Development:

Without doubt, the first part of the development should ensure the traffic plan is established and finalised to include the build of the additional junction from the M2 motorway. The junction appears to have been pushed back to a later phase and is not clear at all when this will be completed.

The initial presentation discussion included the pressure that Bredhurst village would be under from not only the current levels of traffic, but with the additional lorries and construction vehicles that will need to access the new development. Currently, there is no clear plan of how vehicles and machinery will access the new development, how this will be managed or the impact on the AONB during the build. Additionally, the weight of the future traffic once the houses are sold will also be via the current road structure if the junction is not in place at the start of the project.

The impact on Bredhurst is going to be immense for the above reasons, if the junction is not in place at the start of the development. The works that will need to be carried out, will be major works. Agreement and pricing need to be confirmed at the start of the project to ensure the developers have plans in place and the means to build the motorway junction.

The impact on residents and wildlife by pollution from additional vehicles alone is going to be awful and the road structure is not adequate to provide daily access for large vehicles and machinery.

The road closure plan for Bredhurst originally included several options to protect Bredhurst village as much as possible and included mitigating road layouts to stop pollution to the existing houses, ancient woodland and wildlife.

The options included the closure of Forge Lane and Dunn Street to stop the increase of traffic through the village and steer the traffic via the new motorway junction. I cannot see this being an option if the junction is not there!

The option to close Dunn Street in conjunction with Forge Lane to vehicles is a good idea and should go ahead, but if Forge Lane is closed and Dunn Street remains open, the road will become untenable at peak times.

The traffic that would usually divert via Forge Lane will be pushed to travel via Dunn Street instead. I cannot see any benefit to the village by doing this. Diverting the busses via Forge Lane only, just ensures that the Dunn Street hamlet is more isolated.

There are many roadside houses in Dunn Street, and we will be affected not only by pollution and noise but will also have issues using driveways. Currently, we personally see each other or customers from the driveway for safety as vehicles are a continuous flow at peak times and impossible to always reverse onto the driveway due to the pressure of traffic behind you.

If Dunn Street remains open and Forge Lane is closed, there needs to be more traffic control at the restriction in Dunn Street to ensure the area is safe i.e. traffic lights, as drivers when frustrated by higher traffic levels, they try to push through and become very angry.

We have been made aware that if the option to close Dunn Street proceeded, provision was being made for agricultural vehicles to still access via Dunn Street, and we would ask that if this happens, provision is also made for the residents that live in the Dunn Street hamlet for access via here too using ANPR or a similar system.

I am very disappointed not only by the development being given the go ahead but also by the fact that the mitigation for residents is also being removed.

Simply, I feel that there has been no consideration for residents in the current SPD outline.

Comment noted.
The SPD sets out additional guidance on the approach to transport assessment and mitigation (Chapter 7.3) with further detail provided in the accompanying Transport Annex. More detailed assessment of transport impacts and the design of transport mitigation measures will need to be set out as part of the formulation and consideration of future planning applications.
The SPD takes forward the requirements of Policy LPRSP4(B) of the Local Plan Review which established the necessary scope of infrastructure.
Figure 41 at Section D of the SPD replicates the required phasing of development and associated infrastructure.
Infrastructure will be secured through the use of planning conditions and legal agreements, as part of the consideration and determination of future planning applications.