Rail freight row
PUBLISHED: 11:35 28 May 2009 | UPDATED: 14:07 06 May 2010
SIR - I am so disappointed to learn that HelioSlough have lodged a new application with St Albans District Council to build a Rail Freight Terminal in St Albans. This application is totally inappropriate as the land is currently Green Belt and to lose it
SIR - I am so disappointed to learn that HelioSlough have lodged a new application with St Albans District Council to build a Rail Freight Terminal in St Albans.
This application is totally inappropriate as the land is currently Green Belt and to lose it would mean St Albans, London Colney, Park Street and Radlett would become one large urban area. There are more suitable sites further north where unemployment levels are much higher and the need to ferry workers to and from their job via the road is less likely.
The size of the development is totally unacceptable. Five major warehouses, comprising 3.5 million square feet will add an unacceptable amount of traffic and congestion to local roads which are currently at maximum potential as far as the lorry, bus and car usage. It is anticipated that an extra 3,000 lorries will be on our roads - DAY AND NIGHT.
The Midland Main Line is already running at total capacity and to add Rail Freight to this line will mean total disruption for rail passengers. It is not capable of an extra 12 freight trains an hour 24/7 and this has already been proved.
This development will have a huge NEGATIVE impact on our community and the way of life of the St Albans people. It is a historical town where tourism thrives on the ability for people to visit our local Roman Sites, the new Butterfly Farm, the Cathedral and our town. If this new development were to go ahead, they will go elsewhere and our tourism trade will suffer.
The air and noise pollution will be unacceptable both during the creation of this terminal and once it is up and running. For the young children who will be more likely to suffer with asthma due to the air pollution, and the elderly who will incur breathing difficulties and also those of us living near to the proposal who will have noisy lorries and building disruption 24/7 during the building of the development, and then noisy trains delivering and transporting goods at all times of the day and night. It is totally unacceptable.
I would ask all your readers to contact Alan Moorhouse, the Development Control Manager, Planning and Building Control Department, St Albans District Council and also Anne Main MP, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA with their objections. More information can be found at www.strife.biz.
SIR - Your article on the re-application of the proposed rail freight depot (Herts Advertiser May 21) mentioned that people have to re-submit objections. This requirement infuriates people.
Time and time again aggressive developers submit endless repeat applications in the hope of wearing down objectors or using the fact not all objectors realise the need to re-submit objections.
Surely the legal profession and our local councillors can end this farce and keep on file original objections for applications that basically remain, in principle, the same. The law should not allow minor alterations to negate original objections on which a lot of time and effort will have been made. This farce simply alienates local people from local government. Get your act together! One point in your article seems incredible. That is that posters against the development are allowed to be placed at Network Rail's City Station.
They recently disallowed leaflet distribution giving advice on swine flu at one of their stations (bad image) so surely they would not wish negative posters to a project that will create extra rail business to be at one of their stations. Presumably the three poster sites are in the vicinity of the station, not within it.
P. H. FIELD,
St Stephens Ave,