Online Representation

Personal Details:  Please Note the Council Publishes the Name and Address of all people who comment on a Planning Application. 

Forename: Andrew
Surname: Ross
Address: 6 Erewash street, NG17 8AN

Opinion:

Overview View: OBJECT

Comment:

Comment:Re: Objection to Proposed McDonald’s Development [Insert Planning Application Number, if available]
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of a McDonald's restaurant and drive-through in our local area. While I understand the need for economic development, this proposal raises several serious concerns regarding traffic safety, residential disruption, and community impact.
1. Traffic Safety and Accident History
The application fails to acknowledge prior serious incidents in the immediate vicinity, including a fatality on the nearby bridge and a major collision at the T-junction with Lindley’s Lane, which required the fire brigade to remove an occupant from their vehicle. These events demonstrate the existing dangers on local roads, which would only be exacerbated by increased traffic volumes associated with a drive-through fast-food outlet.
2. Inadequate Car Parking
Although a smaller car park has been approved, it is worth noting that it still needs to be closed during delivery operations to allow access and egress for large vehicles. This poses a significant operational and safety issue, potentially leading to overspill parking and congestion on nearby streets.
3. Night-Time Deliveries and Residential Proximity
Given the close proximity of residential properties, night-time deliveries would be entirely inappropriate and would cause unacceptable noise and disruption to local residents. Restrictions on delivery times must be clearly defined and enforced, if the development is approved, although ideally the location should be reconsidered entirely.
4. Drive-Through Booth Placement
The current location of the first drive-through booth is far too close to residential properties. This is likely to cause a significant increase in noise pollution, including car engine idling, speaker announcements, and customer activity. I strongly request that this booth be relocated further from any homes if the proposal is to proceed.
5. Access and Road Use Issues
•
The un-named road adjacent to the site has a no-parking limitation, yet the proposal doesn't adequately consider how traffic, especially lorries, will navigate this area without causing obstruction.
•
Lorries entering the site must move into the middle of the road, posing a hazard to oncoming vehicles and pedestrians.
6. Impact on Community Hub
The nearby Asfield evergreen community hub currently has no dedicated parking and relies on the main road. Introducing a high-traffic junction near this location would significantly endanger road users and undermine the functionality and safety of a facility that is arguably of greater community benefit than a McDonald's outlet.
7. Wvern Club Site – No Consideration
The proposal makes no mention of future plans or integration with the now-derelict site of the former Wvern Club, directly across the road. This is a significant oversight in the planning context and could have implications for cumulative traffic and land use impact.
8. Questionable Traffic Survey Accuracy
Several real-world traffic patterns appear to be missing from the submitted traffic survey:
•
My partner commutes to work daily at 16:00, including Saturdays—this regular movement was not recorded.
•
On Saturday 1st July, at 10:30 I took my daughter to her weekly dance class, returning around 13:30. I this too was not captured.
•
At similar times, my partner also leaves to take her mother shopping each week.
These omissions, while perhaps minor individually, collectively cast serious doubt on the overall reliability of the traffic data.
Additionally, during my own brief count outside Aldi, I observed 27 vehicles in just 20 minutes, suggesting an hourly rate of over 80 vehicles—far exceeding the reported figure of 40. These discrepancies raise further questions about the validity of assumptions used in traffic impact assessments.
In light of the above concerns, I respectfully request that this application be reconsidered or declined. The cumulative effect on road safety, noise, traffic
congestion, and disruption to local life and services makes this proposal highly unsuitable for the area.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours faithfully, Andrew Ross.