Baz wrote: > On 6 Oct 2008, at 20:07, nbquidditch wrote: > > <snip> > >> It is >> interesting that when the widening took place a part of Alrewas was >> compulsorily purchased and part of the deal was that a footbridge >> would be built over the road to the part of the village that was >> detached - the bridge still hasn't been built and I understand at >> least two people have died trying trying to cross the road between >> their house and the main part of the village. > > That's weird. Presumably such a deal wasn't hard-wired into the > actual agreement; I can't imagine how it could be. I suppose it > might have been offered as an inducement by the promoters of the road > scheme to encourage objectors to the compulsory purchase order to > withdraw. Any community that accepted such an assurance was rather > poorly advised.
Possibly this was a Section 106 agreement? These have only been around since 1990 and I'm guessing the road widening took place before then, but if not and it is one then it's legally binding on the developer. Steve NB Bream
