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.

A417 Missing Link

Received 02 September 2021
From Adam Dawson


This representation sets out why I am against the A417 Missing Link scheme. The overarching reasons are that this scheme does not appear to provide significant value for money. The negatives, such as cost, impacts on the environment and impacts on the government’s commitment to climate action. These do not seem to outweigh the benefits of reduced queuing time on a very small stretch (<5 km) of road. While safety is a concern, I am sure that there could be less expensive solutions to improve safety. This scheme has been in the pipeline for 20-30 years, and people in the area have managed to cope without significant impacts to the economy. It seems fool hardy to commission a scheme that will be under construction for a decade when people are starting to change the way they work and travel, potentially making this scheme redundant. Even a delay to assess these issues would be welcomed. In terms of the impact of the scheme itself, the EIA has concluded permanent significant adverse effects on landscape, biodiversity, cultural heritage, and noise, as well as not being able to rule out significant effects on nearby European habitat sites. I do not see the benefits of spending a huge amount of money to the detriment of a valuable area of environmental, cultural and economic significance, such as the Cotswold area of outstanding natural beauty, for such a limited gain.