• The post you are reporting:
   
  "Although it applies to the planning applicant, and not to site customers, it stops short of explicitly requiring the former to regulate the latter."
  Not a very major condition if customers do not have to adhere to it and if the applicant does not have to enforce it, regardless of what Kent highways wanted.
  Any pedestrian who walks out in front of a car (which in your example was parked on the 'in' sign) without looking frankly deserves to be run over. I sympathize with your plight but this aspect of the planning transgressions is not as significant as you seem to think, the onus has always been on the driver to not run people over or cause accidents, as for the highway code changes it is just asking for someone to be killed!

Report Post

Your Name

Reason