View topic - Cobham

< return to MSA News


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 16 Mar 2010, 19:18 
Offline
Member

Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 01:36
Posts: 128
Location: Sussex/London SW11
Johnny wrote:

If I'm following this right, in a few weeks time the sliproads for the services will still be a farmer's field.


They still are, as far as I know (I haven't been that way recently, as it's easier for me to come off at Junction 9 and cut through Oxshott when travelling from Sussex to SW11). As this service area is being developed by the developer, rather than leased out by the Highways Agency, would the HA step in to rescue the project? Presumably not, whereas in the past, the HA/DoT would have given the contract to another company.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Mar 2010, 19:47 
Offline
Member & Site Owner
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2005, 16:28
Posts: 2194
Location: Fareham
I reckon it would come under paragraph 35 of the MSA policy ("Change of use of redundant roadside facilities"), which says that the Highways Agency should close the sliproads of any closed services and then attempt to impose planning regulations which stop the land being used for anything other than an MSA or whatever it was before. Both of these shouldn't take long at Cobham!

The Highways Agency would want to stay as far away from the commercial sector as possible. Just managing the Dartford Crossing is enough for them!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Mar 2010, 12:42 
Offline
Member

Joined: 11 Jan 2006, 17:51
Posts: 252
Location: Coventry
Johnny wrote:
The draft orders for Cobham have now been published, meaning that in a few weeks the sliproads for the services will officially be part of the motorway network.

If I'm following this right, in a few weeks time the sliproads for the services will still be a farmer's field.

Does this mean you will be legally allowed to drive through the field and any fences?

_________________
End of.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Mar 2010, 15:34 
Offline
Member & Site Owner
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2005, 16:28
Posts: 2194
Location: Fareham
I think it's more a case of not being able to walk or stop along there. Should make construction interesting!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2010, 19:34 
Offline
Member & Site Owner
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2005, 16:28
Posts: 2194
Location: Fareham
Surrey Herald
Quote:
Cobham M25 services plan will cause disruption

CONSTRUCTION details for the motorway service station on land near Cobham have been approved despite fears it could lead to months of disruption for people living nearby.

Shouts of ‘this is a stitch-up’ and ‘it’s a real disgrace’ were heard from the public gallery as Elmbridge Councillors approved the plans during a four-hour meeting on Wednesday evening.

Councillors for Cobham and Downside, John Butcher and Dorothy Mitchell fought to have the plans thrown out but they were outnumbered by councillors who followed officers’ recommendations to approve them.

Developer Swayfields has already secured permission to build the service station near junction 10 of the M25, which will include a petrol station, hotel, shops and 721 parking spaces.

The plans were formally approved by the then Secretary of State John Prescott in 2005 in the face of stiff opposition from Elmbridge Borough Council and residents living nearby.

At Wednesday’s west area planning sub-committee, councillors were tasked with deciding whether or not to approve the developer’s construction methods, including how it planned to transport materials to the site.

The most controversial aspect of the scheme was the proposal to use Horsley Road for six weeks as the site is prepared for the construction project. A row broke out when Cllr Butcher argued that use of local roads had been refused in the secretary of state’s decision.

Committee chairman Ben White told members to consider the planning officers’ interpretation of the decision – that use of local roads was only prohibited once the motorway service station was built.

Ian Cave, who lives in Horsley Road, said he was extremely worried by the decision to approve the plan. He said children who were pupils at St Matthew’s Infant School in Horsley Road would be put at risk because of the lorries. They are talking about a constant stream of lorries. If you go down there in the morning at 9am, the road is chock-a-block with cars and, of course, once you get the lorries down there, anything could happen.”

Two further applications relating to the site were discussed during the meeting on Wednesday.

Councillors considered the plans submitted to Surrey County Council to move 700,000 tonnes of soil from the site to nearby Chasemore Farm, in Cobham. The group also looked at another application which had been submitted to the Highways Agency, showing that the site developer planned to realign the M25 for the duration of the construction.

Cllr Butcher said he believed this could lead to lane closures and traffic congestion, which would push M25 users onto local roads. Although it was unable to refuse the plans, Elmbridge was allowed to make suggestions for any improvements that councillors would like.

Cllr Butcher, who wrote a 27-page report detailing several problems with the applications, was applauded when he suggested the whole thing should be sent to the new Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles, for review.

He said: “Unless a public inquiry is held, there will remain concern that insufficient regard is being given to the interests of local residents and road users who would be inconvenienced if the M25 is closed entirely at any time, or any part or it is closed other than between 10pm and 5.30am.”

David Tipping, who recently stepped down from the council, said the decision should not have been made without a further site visit.

He said two of the councillors voting on the application were new to the council, Keith Egan and Kay Hughes, and that they had never seen the site. Mr Tipping and Cllr Butcher had asked for a site visit in April but it was never arranged. He said: “I think the whole thing has gone really sour.”
The resident's argument sounds really thin to me. Apparently the local roads are "chock-a-block", so putting construction lorries on them would be bad for the children. Erm... :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2010, 23:28 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2005, 17:34
Posts: 787
Replace "Cobham" there with "Gloucestershire Gateway" and youve got another article on your hands. No real problems have been given, just a lot of scaremongering and they appear to have forgotten about the benefits.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2010, 16:42 
Offline
Member & Site Owner
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2005, 16:28
Posts: 2194
Location: Fareham
Get Surrey report on how detrimental the services will be

I must admit I thought they'd got used to the plans, but I suppose with all the delays they see an opportunity to overthrow them. I'd be really surprised and disappointed if they got their way.

Seeing as the Highways Agency have already said there's a need for more services on that section of road, what that article needs is them to stop distancing themselves from the idea and point out why a new service area is needed (as in any new MSA here, not this specific plan). They'd do it if this was about one of their road schemes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jul 2010, 21:47 
Offline
Member

Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 01:36
Posts: 128
Location: Sussex/London SW11
There is a sign up after Junction 10 going anti-clockwise, which states that roadworks will start on 16th August for 30 weeks. Is this the start of the slip road work?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2010, 14:13 
Offline
Member & Site Owner
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2005, 16:28
Posts: 2194
Location: Fareham
That'll be it, the Highways Agency said it would start late summer and run into next year. These roadworks better go flawlessly, or I think the people of Surrey really will start hunting Extra down with pitchforks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Aug 2010, 23:09 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2005, 17:34
Posts: 787
I don't think people would notice if there were queues on the M25 caused by roadworks.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Return to MSA News



You are welcome to join in with the discussion - please log in or register (it's free, quick and easy).

Share this: