The views expressed in this page do not represent those of the Planning Inspectorate. This page consists of content submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the public and other interested parties, giving their views of this proposal.

M25 junction 10/A3 Wisley interchange improvement

Received 05 September 2019
From Emily Inge


My husband and I are the freehold owners and occupiers of [Redacted] which will be affected by the proposed works.. The proposed works include stopping up the sole vehicular access to our property, and building a new access road. Our concerns include but are not limited to: • Safety of the junction between ‘new’ Elm Lane and Old Lane • Exacerbation of lewd and antisocial behaviour on ‘old’ Elm Lane (concerns shared by SCC and SWT) o Inclusion of old Elm Lane in the DCO boundary was urged by residents so it could be returned to nature and thereby dissuade such behaviour in this unlit dead end. HE instead propose to keep it open for occasional maintenance access to drainage attenuation ponds • Noise, light and air pollution during the construction phase, and completed scheme. This pollution will be exacerbated by: o Construction phase: night works and construction compound location on the former Wisley Airfield adjacent to Orchard Cottage, Blenheim Cottage and Meadows with works vehicles passing and turning by properties, and o Final scheme: environmental mitigation including 4 hectares of clearance and 7.3 hectares intense selective thinning in the narrow section of woodland between Elm Corner and the A3 with no detail provided on mitigation • Loss of habitat for dormice and other protected species located in sites proposed for construction • Disparity in design detail between information in documents and information provided by project team • Widening of a section of Elm Lane which does not require it • Continuity of vehicular access to properties at all times with minimal disruption to residents • A new elevated section of road over the A3 is not the most appropriate design solution due to the impacts on nearby residents and the SPA, where surveys show dormice and other rare and protected species are detected. Alternative design solutions are available which will reduce the impact and these should be explored further • We request engagement with residents regarding remedial accommodation works and reinstatement of boundary features following the acquisition of land, including the owner having the requisite level of input and control over building materials, timing of works, revised boundary treatments/features, etc. • We request engagement with residents or making available information regarding mitigation for air, noise and light during the construction phase and final scheme • We request that Highways England should work with property owners and residents to ensure that the necessary commitments are entered into in advance of the appointment of contractors and commencement of the works I hereby request to be registered as an Interested Party, so that we may contribute in the examination process regarding the Order. The above summarises our concerns in respect of Highways England’s proposals and we reserve the right to add to these representations through formal written representations or attendance at the hearing and the presentation of oral evidence.