Featherstone Make a Difference Forum
October 24, 2017, 08:26:45 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Supermarket

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Supermarket  (Read 11388 times)
rigger
Full Member
***
Posts: 17


« Reply #320 on: November 23, 2010, 10:48:10 pm »

was good to c the shop been used again. looked like plenty of people were inside when i went down to diy earlier on. for the upcoming supermarket, it is in the totally wrong place look at the traffic chaos been caused already, thats before it even opens. with the ammount of traffic in the town piling up and up and up and up, what the hell is gonna happen when it opens. it may still be quicker to nip to ponte, thanks wmdc for your truly unsurpassed pleasure you seem to be having at the moment in making the town suffer for trying to be different and making itself better. let me tell you all in your crushy jobs sat behind desks making decisions that affect all here. WE WILL NOT BE STEPPED ALL OVER AND YOU WILL BE HAVING SLEEPLESS NIGHTS WHEN THE INEVITABLE HAPPENS AND SOMEONE GETS KILLED. next you will be introducing a congestion charge  instead of a bypass.
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #321 on: November 25, 2010, 07:40:59 pm »

Today was the day WMDC planning met to consider the original amendment and possibly see sense to re-look at the mistake they have made? Results should be in by Monday unless you have a snout. Lips sealed
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #322 on: December 09, 2010, 07:47:54 pm »

WMDC today sent a student on placement out on to the business street of Featherstone armed with a clip board.
The student was asking questions about every company such as employees, type of business and anything above. When questioned why ask questions that WMDC all ready have information on as rate collectors, the response was interesting. The information is being gathered as part of a large planning application. When asked what application, the response was cannot comment.
Even more interesting is who will get the information? A supermarket could use the info greatly.
Don’t think he expected being told to **** off. Lips sealed
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #323 on: December 12, 2010, 09:30:00 pm »

Joanne Roney OBE
Chief Executive
Wakefield Council
Town Hall
Wood Street
WAKEFIELD
WF1 2HQ
 
12.12.2010
 
Ref: Road works commencing 15th November.
 
Dear Mrs Roney OBE

It has almost been a calendar month since I contacted you regards the grave concerns of the mistake that WMDC were making with the alterations to Wakefield and Pontefract road cross roads.
Although in the passing month I have attended meetings where every private and council individual agrees the whole thing is a mess I have not received from you any response.
Work still continues that is wrong and is still set to make the Pontefract Oriental junction a dream to pass through in comparison.
Should I be contacting someone else? Due to the seriousness of my complaint I assumed that you as head of the council would be the person ultimately responsible.

Regards
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #324 on: December 14, 2010, 08:54:37 pm »

 

 Wink
I hope that you are well. I am replying to your Email below to Joanne, who is currently away on leave. I did previously respond to your initial Email on Joanne’s behalf (on 24 November). From your correspondence below it suggests you didn’t receive this. I hope that wasn’t the case.

I am aware that there has been a meeting on site since your initial Email to discuss the road works at the Junction of Wakefield Road, Station Lane, Girnhill Lane etc. Some modifications have been made to the junction design including the pedestrian islands. My transportation team are now satisfied that we have the best layout that can be delivered at this location, given the constraints.. We will of course continue to monitor the situation, but at this stage we do not propose any further alterations.

I apologise for the delayed response.

Kind regards,

Andy Wallhead.

Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #325 on: December 14, 2010, 08:56:22 pm »

Dear Andrew
 
I thank you for your reply. Personally I am fine thanks and hope you are too whilst coping with all the cuts.
I am sure you wouldn't like me to mince my words as I am sure you know I will not.
I received your email. Sadly it did not answer a single question nor offered any "road" towards a solution to the highway disaster being built. the problem is still here and getting worse in the build up to the greatest Featherstone disaster since our pit shut.
I am not aware of any meeting on site nor any resulting alterations that have been agreed. Please can you inform me what they are? I am not a qualified expert but do have sufficient general knowledge to see what is wrong. if you had attended the last 4 Regeneration steering group meetings you would have heard unanimous agreement by non expert seniors. Surely this has to carry some weight?
In the last week alterations have been made but not to reverse the damage caused but to create more. Last week another lane disappeared on Pontefract road and the whole road moved over. The traffic light sequence also changed. this has resulted in the following;
 
1. Traffic is now queuing back to Purston and Purston Park regularly during every day.
2. traffic on Wakefield road is now backing up more often and with even longer queues.
3. Traffic coming down Station Lane and turning left now has less of a turn and cars parked where there have not been any for years.
 
All 3 point are of concern. Item no 3 is dangerous. I have travelled this road daily for over 20 years. when I turn left now my old habit of keeping away from the kerb have been put in to shock because there is a car parked where I used to drive. There are no road signs stating that there has been an alteration to a major junction. Is this legal? Yesterday I witnessed a 40ft HGV loaded with concrete beams turning left and wide. he braked sharply to a halt as he could not make his turn because of a parked car in the way of the old turning circle. then it got interestingly funny but serious. the car could not move because of the queue behind him. the car driver politely stuck his arm out of the window and pointed to the new road markings. The HGV driver stuck his head out and looked around on the road surface. Realising the road had moved the HGV driver apologised to the car driver. He then shunted his 40ft vehicle about to make his turn. Of course whilst this is going on no one is going anywhere regardless of the traffic lights going from red to green like a disco.
 
I personally will not delivery anything after 2pm because of the travel time involved to drive a couple of miles. whilst out on the road I tried last week to drive down Girnhill lane. I came to a stop outside the new entrance as a 40ft HGV was attempting to manover in to the site. The only way to do this was by going over the curb and up the grass banking. I and others have told many at WMDC about this problem. surely it cannot be forgotten about?
 
To be very straight Andrew the highways are making a mockery of anything called "progress". the fact is this is dangerous. This issue is not going to go away especially after reading a document today from Planning regards the highways that I hope to have a copy of shortly. Andrew you are the "regeneration man". Please do not let this madness continue. Do what you have to. Go to press, take the glory, what ever it takes but please do not let this one chance to make a difference pass by.
 
I apologise for my passion in words. Words are all the tools I have.
 
Regards
 Wink
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
Kim685
Full Member
***
Posts: 287



« Reply #326 on: December 14, 2010, 11:58:16 pm »

Why do highways always think changes are for the better? Why change something that has worked well in the past? Take the roundabout at the chinese in Ponte, it worked ok the way it was before the traffic lights were installed, there were no long queues of traffic like there are now. I know the crossroads at the bottom of Station Lane were not ideal, but that was down to the volume of traffic, not the design. The only real solution for Feath is a bypass. The present alterations are just madness. I am not a car driver but even I can see that this design will never work and will just cause more queues and gridlocks and quite possibly something more serious.
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged

Forkhandles
Full Member
***
Posts: 648


« Reply #327 on: December 15, 2010, 10:58:39 am »

You quite right kim,your comments make sense Grin
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #328 on: December 15, 2010, 07:47:03 pm »

Why do highways always think changes are for the better? Why change something that has worked well in the past? Take the roundabout at the chinese in Ponte, it worked ok the way it was before the traffic lights were installed, there were no long queues of traffic like there are now. I know the crossroads at the bottom of Station Lane were not ideal, but that was down to the volume of traffic, not the design. The only real solution for Feath is a bypass. The present alterations are just madness. I am not a car driver but even I can see that this design will never work and will just cause more queues and gridlocks and quite possibly something more serious.

Good points but... Grin
Why when there is a chance to make a difference is it wasted?
The new layout has taken away 2 lanes. Over used before that will see twice more vehicles with in 3 years.

Yes we need a bypass. A bypass past WMDC nutters. Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #329 on: December 16, 2010, 08:50:01 pm »

Mr Ian Thompson
Service Director, Planning, Transportation and Highways
Newton Bar,
Leeds Road,
Wakefield
WF1 2TX
3rd December 2010
Dear Sir,
Planning application 10/02751/SUB01
As you will be aware I was the only objector except for Wakefield MDC Highways department to planning application (08/02751/FUL) **** of neighbourhood food store together with associated landscaping and highway works Junction off Girnhill Lane / Wakefield Road, Featherstone West Yorkshire. You should not have approved the application without full Highway’s approval along with appropriate drawings, yet you allowed this to happen? Why when it is standard practice within the authority to satisfy the planner prior to the application going before the planning committee?  Now you have a situation where the applicant has appealed conditions and won, and yet had you refused the application on Highway grounds, and then the applicant took it to appeal, then the Planning Inspector would more than likely to have refused the application until a scheme satisfied the Highways department.            Notwithstanding your email to me on the 18th October 2010, with what I would class as an improper response.        I did not accept the contents and therefore I need to comment on the proposed application 10/02751/SUB01.  Once again I wish to put on record as I did in 2008, that the current application is unsafe as far as road safety on both the A645 Pontefract and Wakefield road and Girnhill Lane where safety is a priority and should not be compromised until it is completed and a safe standard up to standard of the Department of Transport.     
Why in this instance are you not using the same officer who approved (08/02751/FUL)?
The following are my comments:-
1.   The single access from Pontefract Road is unsafe inasmuch as, any car turning into the site when the bollards are up will create a danger and will cause confusion when the car tries to reverse out on to the main road, it would be better to eliminate it to save any confusion.            Drawing number 01 revision W refers.
2.   The delivery lorry access and egress from Girnhill Lane is far from adequate, even though the access has been widened right up to the existing house 5 Girnhill Lane, the access is too tight, without the lorry going onto the opposite side of Girnhill Lane as my attached illustration shows, note the turning curve and if you notice the lorry goes tight up to the kerb line leaving no room for error.
3.   When the delivery lorry has to reverse in between the cars to access the loading bay is also extremely tight and leaves no room for error, your Highways dept are aware of this.
4.   When the lorry is to egress the site there are numerous problems:-
A          What happens when a lorry it to egress the site meets another lorry entering the site?       This will mean one of them having to reverse creating a safety hazard.
B          There is NO visibility splay to the south of the gas sub station owing to the very high brick wall creating a danger for both the driver whose vision is impaired without going into the centre of Girnhill Lane and also pedestrians alike.
5.   Drawing number 01 revision W, the traffic islands appear to be sub standard as there are already problems with the new island locations, noticeable when turning right out of the right hand Lane from Station Lane towards Wakefield.     Because of the island locations, there will be problems turning right into Girnhill Lane from Wakefield; it will stop all traffic to Pontefract?    It is also possible to widen the A645 as indicated on the attached drawing.
As you will be aware, the stumbling block is number 5 Girnhill Lane and Lidl ought to buy this from ASDA, and re design the site to make it safe for all concerned, otherwise road safety will be compromised.
If Lidl then own the site, I have provided a draft layout with a one way lorry delivery access and car parking for 89 cars, which ought to satisfy both Lidl and the owners of 54 Pontefract Road who will have car access.    I am sure that The Traffic Management Plan proposed could accommodate my idea?           I think it appropriate that your Chief Executive and the Legal Department should be aware as well as the planning and highways committee.
When I sent my objection / proposal in November 2008, I copied in all of the Planning and Highways Committee by email.  They chose to ignore both the Wakefield MDC Highways Department and myself; I do hope that the current Committee will not do the same. To reiterate my comments it is important that they take heed or pay the consequences.
Yours sincerely
Brian Clayton
C.c. Planning and Highways Committee, Chief Executive, Legal Services Featherstone District Councillors
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #330 on: December 16, 2010, 08:56:17 pm »

They say patience is a virtue. The reply from the post above by Ian Thompson the head of WMDC planning and highways was worth the wait.

The reply you are about to read is a cracker and now opens many doors. Basically if you’re a big enough company and have some cash you can build what you like and create as much mess as you wish and the authority will turn a blind eye especially when the authority is the contractor.

Good enough for a front page. Wonder what the Pont and Cas will not do.



Dear Mr Clayton
 
Further to your email of the 1 December 2010 regarding the above application I can confirm that your comments were made known to the Planning and Highways Committee when they considered the application to vary a condition regarding the footpath width at the corner of Station Lane/Wakefield Road/Pontefract Road, Featherstone.  The condition had originally imposed as a result of the permission granted in 2 April 2009 for the new Lidl Food Store in Featherstone.  At the time of the original application Members were aware of your comments regarding highway matters but nevertheless were of the opinion that the regeneration benefits of the proposed supermarket (now being developed) outweighed the highways concerns for Featherstone.
 
Ian Thomson
Service Director, Planning, Transportation and Highways
Wakefield Council
Newton Bar
Wakefield
WF1 2TX
Tel: 01924 305858
Fax: 01924 306629
Email: ithomson@wakefield.gov.uk
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
Kim685
Full Member
***
Posts: 287



« Reply #331 on: December 16, 2010, 09:34:13 pm »

  At the time of the original application Members were aware of your comments regarding highway matters but nevertheless were of the opinion that the regeneration benefits of the proposed supermarket (now being developed) outweighed the highways concerns for Featherstone.
 


Gobsmacked!
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged

Forkhandles
Full Member
***
Posts: 648


« Reply #332 on: December 17, 2010, 10:28:41 am »

In fev-speak,they couldn't give a toss Angry Shocked
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
Kim685
Full Member
***
Posts: 287



« Reply #333 on: December 17, 2010, 06:07:30 pm »

Who is Mr Clayton?
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged

Obe 1
Full Member
***
Posts: 5


« Reply #334 on: December 17, 2010, 07:23:44 pm »

I still find it hard to believe the site was even considered as a possibility for a supermarket on that junction let alone was passed and is now been constructed Shocked Shocked Shocked. Totally crazy!!!
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #335 on: December 22, 2010, 07:34:12 pm »

Dear  Grin

Thank you for your email of the 14 December 2010.  I can assure you that the design of the junction has been considered in detail in the light of concerns expressed by yourself and others and highways colleagues I am satisfied the new junction will significantly improve pedestrian safety and give the best flows within the constraints of the highway.

I am aware that the situation was discussed at a Regeneration Steering Group in mid November when Ian Thomson attended and he did review the situation following that meeting.  As a result a number of issues that were raised have been looked at and assessed by my Highway Design Engineers. As a result of these investigations my Engineers do not consider that any major design changes are necessary. However a minor change to the Pedestrian Island on Pontefract Road is being looked at with a view to offering maximum protection to the island from HGV’s turning left out of Station Lane. This is seen as mainly a precautionary measure to resolve potential maintenance issues.           

With regard to the white line markings temporary changes have had to be made while the construction has progressed.  In order to construct the carriageway widening work adjacent to the Lidl development on Pontefract Road safely, and keep the queuing at the junction to a minimum, we have had to make temporary alterations to the existing lane positions on Pontefract Road.

The straight ahead and right turn lane has had to be moved closer to the centre of the carriageway to allow the provision of a temporary footway to be set up within the existing carriageway so that pedestrians can access the new pedestrian crossing on the Wakefield Road side of the junction.

It is important to bear in mind that we have schools on both sides of the works and it is our primary concern that school children have safe pedestrian access to the new crossing point, even if this is to the detriment of car users.

Stop lines have been placed further away from the junction to accommodate the left turn out of Station Lane for HGV's.  The junction is now running on the new controller which will become more efficient as the works are completed which is due to happen towards the end of January 2011.

I am happy to discuss in the New Year if helpful

Kind Regards

Andrew Wallhead

Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
Forkhandles
Full Member
***
Posts: 648


« Reply #336 on: December 22, 2010, 07:53:30 pm »

As the old song goes..............I can see trouble ahead.
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
yetion1
Administrator
Full Member
*
Posts: 1715


READY


« Reply #337 on: December 22, 2010, 08:06:10 pm »

Trouble!!! your not kidding.
The problem will not go away, I.E. every frigging meeting in 2011  Wink Grin
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
Kim685
Full Member
***
Posts: 287



« Reply #338 on: December 22, 2010, 10:28:06 pm »

The sad thing is, it will probably take a serious or fatal accident to make them realise they were wrong. Then it's too late.......
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged

Whistleblower
Full Member
***
Posts: 145



« Reply #339 on: December 24, 2010, 01:39:35 pm »

The junction is a joke (just like the railway crossing) took me over 10 minutes today to drive down the lane and that’s before the new supermarket is open
Report Spam   Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum | Buy traffic for your forum/website

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines