Pallance road, northwood from google maps
© Google Maps/Streetview

Northwood Parish Council demands urgent road safety measures on Pallance Road

A letter urging ‘immediate safety measures’ be implemented on a busy Island road as a ‘matter of urgency’ has been sent to the Isle of Wight council.

Northwood Parish Council has written to County Hall leader Phil Jordan ‘on behalf of’ Pallance Road’s ‘residents and users’ with requests including a reduced speed limit, better safety signage and installed speed indicators.

Response to safety concerns ‘completely unacceptable’
The open letter, signed by chair of the parish council Councillor John Pullen and dated 3rd December, said Councillor Jordan’s response to a 4th July 2023 public meeting highlighting residents’ safety concerns was ‘completely unacceptable’.

Concerns included speeding vehicles, ‘oversized prohibited lorries’, dangerous incidents and ‘near misses’ involving young children.

One resident reportedly had her car door hit by a passing vehicle while she was putting her children into a car.

Staff shortages
According to the letter, Councillor Jordan’s response centred on the ‘prioritisation’ of the A3056 road in the east of the Island and ‘certain staff shortages’ including the transport programme manager, local transport planner, project manager and ‘other traffic personnel vacancies’.

The letter said,

“Forward planning should have resolved these issues before they had arisen.

“Although budget constraints can be a hard barrier to cross in the current financial climate, the safety of all residents, including children, is paramount at all times.

“Measures must be put in place immediately to resolve the obvious dangers brought to your attention and that of your highway colleagues.”

Stats for road usage
Northwood Parish Council also noted a number of statistics relating to Pallance Road and the disquiet among users and residents.

An ‘official traffic survey’ recorded more than 21,000 vehicles driving on the ‘minor residential road’ over a six and a half day period in July 2023.

Speeding traffic
Of the 21,000 recorded, more than 4,000 broke the road’s 30 mile per hour speed limit with some moving at over 60 miles per hour.

An October 2021 Northwood Parish Council questionnaire found 73 per cent of residents and users of the road did not feel safe as a pedestrian.

Opposition to housing development
As part of its objecting comment to a proposed 14 house development off Pallance Road, the parish council said safety measures mentioned in the letter to Councillor Jordan should be included in a legally binding agreement with the developer if the proposal goes ahead.

Councillor Jordan has been approached for comment.


This article is from the BBC’s LDRS (Local Democracy Reporter Service) scheme, which News OnTheWight is taking part in. Some alterations and additions may have been made by OnTheWight. Ed

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
1 Comment
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JamesP
14, January 2013 11:18 am

If 60% of the samples were unusable, at least that many need to be re-taken, surely, if only to fulfil the original brief? And if none of the samples (good or bad) was tested for asbestos, then the results are incomplete and inconclusive. As with children’s homework, it all needs to be done again, and properly this time!

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence…

James Luke
16, January 2013 11:39 am

The whole system seems to rely on trust with no independent oversight. A major multi-national that will make many millions of pounds in profit should this planning application go ahead. They are paying Consultants to prove that the development should go ahead. I believe this type of analysis should be conducted independently. To make matters worse, it is unclear what the punishment is if the planning application… Read more »

JILL RUSSELL
18, January 2013 1:10 pm

Historical research shows that the perimeter of the site where most of these boreholes will be taken follows the line of enclosure of the former oyster beds and before them the salterns. So whatever soil samples they get from these areas, they won’t provide any worthwhile information about the levels of contamination from the waste which was deposited from at least 1912 onwards (County Press records).

James Luke
6, April 2013 1:58 pm

ASBESTOS CONTAMINATION HAS NOW BEEN CONFIRMED AT THE ASPHALT PLANT SITE. After months or argument and objections concerning the risk of asbestos contamination at the site, the IWC Planning Department has just published the latest soil report. It states, “Asbestos containing materials were encountered within the near surface waste and capping material.” This is after months of denial by the Applicant and accusations of scaremongering by Councillors.… Read more »

wightywight
Reply to  James Luke
6, April 2013 5:14 pm

James Luke: What are the prospects now of the applicant offering to *clean up* the site by removing the ‘top soil’ – not sure how deep the “near surface waste and capping material”..is? Any ideas on that? Is it feasible to clean up a site such as this by digging the contamination out and taking away (to contaminate another site somewhere!!)the soil..? What might be likely costs… Read more »

James Luke
Reply to  wightywight
6, April 2013 10:22 pm

The soil contaminated with Asbestos was going to be excavated and used in the bunds. There are recommendations in the consultants report that any contaminated soil must be capped, all workers should be wearing protective gear, etc. I suspect that if you pay enough it’s possible to clean up most types of contamination. However, this is just one reason to object to this plant. In addition, there… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  James Luke
6, April 2013 10:35 pm

I’m wondering whether cleaning up asbestos outdoors may have implications for more than the protected workers doing the job – fibres floating off in the air, perhaps. Whereas indoors it’s a contained environment.

James Luke
Reply to  tryme
6, April 2013 10:52 pm

Excavating soil contaminated with asbestos immediately adjacent to a public footpath used by runners, cyclists and walkers must be a risk to the public.

tryme
Reply to  James Luke
6, April 2013 5:47 pm

Congratulations James Luke, on getting this far through sheer determination.

James Luke
Reply to  tryme
6, April 2013 5:57 pm

I can’t take any credit for this – the credit goes to Harvey and others who have tirelessly pursued this issue.

Personally, I feel that the Council Officers should have been doing this work!!

My thanks go out to my friends and colleagues in WRAP who have done the real work!

Bystander
Reply to  James Luke
6, April 2013 6:31 pm

@James Luke The treacherous Councillors should hopefully just have time for their swan-song of now accusing the Planning Department of scaremongering before they are unceremoniously dumped in the forthcoming elections.

retiredhack
Reply to  James Luke
6, April 2013 6:33 pm

@James Luke: James (or anyone), can you point me in the direction of (documented) claims by councillors of scaremongering? (I don’t doubt you for a moment that it’s occurred, it’s just that now would be a good time to remind them of what they said.)

James Luke
Reply to  retiredhack
6, April 2013 8:00 pm

Here’s an IWRadio article on the subject =>
http://www.iwradio.co.uk/articles/2012-10-01-anti-asphalt-plant-campaigners-scaremongering

Here’s the OnTheWight article on the subject =>
http://onthewight.com/2012/10/23/david-pughs-anti-asphalt-plant-scaremongering-claim-challenged/

Councillor Pugh highlights a photo image posted on the WRAP web site as an example of scaremongering but then generalises his comment referring to “aspects like that”.

Black Dog
6, April 2013 4:05 pm

James Luke, I take my hat off to you and others for pursuing this matter. The Applicant, The HSE, The Planning Department, Councillors Pugh and Brown – Not fit for purpose This entire application stinks of corruption and must be halted. In fact if the Applicant took the honorable way out and abandoned the PFI contract it would do the Island a big favour. Let us face… Read more »

tryme
6, April 2013 11:17 pm

Re-reading the details at the top of the topic again, about borehole readings, it is breathtaking the applicant thought they could get away with what they supplied. Dozey old Isle of Wight, they’ll never notice… They weren’t reckoning on James Luke et al!

James Luke
Reply to  tryme
6, April 2013 11:30 pm

Harvey and others are the ones to congratulate! Surprisingly, I believe that WRAP’s assessment was that the latest boreholes were still not adequate for a proper assessment. We did not believe that either the number of the position of the boreholes was sufficient to properly evaluate the site …. yet they still turned up contamination. Similar objections are being raised on the air quality assessment. WRAP are… Read more »

tryme
Reply to  James Luke
7, April 2013 12:13 am

Yes, it’s extraordinary that WRAP have had to become experts on this because IWC aren’t doing the job themselves. I can only speculate to myself why this would be so…

Black Dog
Reply to  tryme
7, April 2013 9:47 am

If regime change is is delivered on May 2nd this entire mess will be dealt with swiftly.

By voting in candidates who actually care and represent their wards before party politics, we can take back control from these despots, over inflated directors and officers.

Make your votes count by voting anything other than Conservative

downwind resident
Reply to  James Luke
7, April 2013 1:02 pm

Would that be the same Council Officer who instructed the Regulatory Committee, to ignore the fact that the proposed asphalt plant will be emitting hazardous particulate contamination, at the hearing for the Environmental Permitby Eurovia recently?
Has the statutory ambient air quality survey of the Medina Valley been undertaken yet and if so by whom?
Certainly not the Council officers!

Black Dog
Reply to  downwind resident
7, April 2013 1:31 pm

There are very many unanswered questions regarding this and other contracts this regime has signed the Island up for. If the Independents can prove (with the help of ordinary council workers) wrong-doings, I am absolutely certain that they will pursue any and all legal remedies available to them – No one should be excluded Councillors, Directors (past and present) managers and the companies themselves. So if it… Read more »