Sarah Blakeston, of Eastgate South, Driffield, writes . . .
I reply to the letter from Driffield ward councillors of December 28. I can't think that anyone would disagree with the headline of the letter that 'Driffield wants to see site re-used to improve town' - but surely there has to be an absolute conditi
on that part of the price paid for the improvement is not public safety.
The proposal to put a supermarket on the cattle market site has been categorically condemned by the traffic management office of the Humberside Police due to road safety issues on the primary access route to the cattle market (down Albion Street and along Eastgate South).
In a letter to the ERYC planning committee, the Humberside Police state that it 'does not support this proposal on the grounds of public safety'.
Exact details of the police findings and fears in the letter have been kept from Driffield residents - in fact it seems that contents were initially even kept from the Driffield ward councillors by the ERYC planning committee since Felicity Temple was seen to be furious at the planning committee meeting, on December 6, that she had not been made aware of the report.
Now aware of it, though, the ward councillors choose to skirt over it (now pandering to the ERYC party line?) and simply say in their letter that they 'asked the committee . . . to address concerns over issues such as road safety on Eastgate'.
I will be astonished to see how the committee can satisfactorily address issues regarding a route that the police have stated is 'wholly unsuitable for use by HGV/LGV traffic' and HGV/LGVs on this route would represent an unnecessary and unacceptable risk to pedestrians, cyclists and residents'.
Anyone living on or travelling along Albion Street/ Eastgate South will have experienced the many danger points that will be exacerbated by increased LGV/HGV supermarket traffic. Such as:
- Regular gridlock on the corner of Middle Street South and Albion Street around the petrol station.
- Dangerous manoeuvring of traffic necessary to avoid lorries delivering to Costcutter or Farmways.
- The kink in the road outside Farmways which forces larger vehicles either into oncoming traffic or on to the path (the metal barrier around the pathside was permanently removed some years ago due to regularly being hit by traffic.
- The sharp corner of Albion Street and Eastgate South where the traffic police noted during their survey that 'each time a bus or LGV negotiated the bend, the front of the vehicle crossed the centre white lines and/or the rear offside wheel(s) of the vehicle/ trailer drove up the curb and mounted the footpath, sometimes to a depth of as much as one and half feet!'
- The narrowing and bend in the road outside the Mariners' pub (Dunns Lane) - a well used crossing place - where, whenever any vehicle is parked on one side of the road, two-way traffic is impossible and there is a blind spot both for vehicles approaching and leaving Galloway Lane
.
Whilstever the ward councillors and planning committee fail to be open and honest about the immense safety issues on the roads surrounding the cattle market and try to fob us off with patronisingly inane remarks such as 'it's the same route that was used by livestock trucks' and 'although it brings challenges, we know it worked' then it is clear that they cannot bring themselves to confront the safety dilemma and ensure an acceptable solution is delivered before any supermarket plan is approved (even if that solution is a scrapping of the supermarket proposal).
So, when the first pedestrian is crushed on the pavement, or the first cyclist is flattened, or there is the first head-on collision as HGV traffic forces its way along too narrow Victorian streets, what will the ward councillors and planning committee say then?
Perhaps - 'Oh well, never mind, at least we saw the site re-used'.
The current proposals are unacceptable and unworkable and I think the constant delays to the development of the site are being been caused by the ERYC trying to pander to the developer's wish for the maximum profit a supermarket will bring them - but imposing on us a completely unsuitable development is irresponsible and a neglect of duty.
Yes, I would love to see the cattle market site developed.
I would love Driffield centre to be revitalised and improved - but not at the cost of anyone's life.
If any individual at ERYC is prepared to accept that cost, then they have every right to stand up and be counted for having that view - so long as they are also prepared to ultimately be held to account for their decision.
