LAF 10/29
SLAF
PO Box 872
Ipswich
Suffolk
IP1 9JW
Tel: 01473 264759
Fax: 01473 216877
Email:
Web:
Your Ref:
Our Ref:
Date:7 July 2010
Suffolk Local Access ForumTitle:Ipswich Chord – SLAF response
Meeting Date:4 November 2010
Author/Contact:David Falk
Venue:Kesgrave Community Centre, Twelve Acre Approach, Kesgrave, Ipswich, IP5 1JF
Penny Carter
Consultation Manager
Network Rail
Square One
4 Travis Street
Manchester
M1 2NY
SLAF
Suffolk Local Access Forum
Dear Ms Carter
Re: Felixstowe to Nuneaton: Ipswich Chord
Consultation under section 42(d) of the planning Act 2008
Regarding the above consultation, the Suffolk Local Access Forum(SLAF), in principle, supports this project.
However, the Forum does have serious concerns regarding how the consultation has been handled and the lack of information relating to the protection of Public Rights of Way along the River Gipping corridor.
England's 81 Local Access Forums (LAF’s) were introduced by s.94 and s.95 of the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act 2000 to protect and enhance the Rights of Waynetwork. Their main function is to advise the appointing authority (the local highway authority or national park authority) on improving public access to land for the purposes of open-air recreation and the enjoyment of the area. Forums are statutory bodies that must be consulted when a proposed development effects or severs an existing or potential Right of Way.
As promoter, Network Rail has a legal requirement when applying for a Development Consent Order to consult those that have an interest in the land or those that will be affected by the scheme. SLAFare most concerned that they were not consulted on this issue and their view is that Network Rail has been remiss in this matter. Had it not been for one SLAF member raising the issue the opportunity to respond to this proposal would have been lost.
SLAF’s main concern is the maintenance and improvement of the Gipping Valley Path and existing cycle track both during and after construction. The existing route is an important walking and safe cycling route between Ipswichurban and rural areas. It linksMorrison’s retail area and the Boss Hall employment area, and provides a recreational route to the countryside. Any planned diversion of the path and cycle route, required during construction, must offer the same safe standard of surface and path width. Closure of the route cannot be accepted under any circumstances.
During the past ten years the County Council, Ipswich Borough Council, The Environment Agency and Sustrans have held discussions to re-engineer the crossing of the Norwich Line Sluice flood defences to be Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) compliant. Unfortunately, Network Rail, who have been central to these discussions, have refused to grant consent for any improvements at the bridge. SLAF would expect in light of the importance of the Chord that Network Rail would work with all of the above to achieve this necessary improvement.
I trust these views and concerns will be considered when taking the development forward and responded too.
Yours sincerely
Bryan Collen
Suffolk Local Access ForumChair
END
Providingindependent advice on access to the countryside in Suffolk