Car park will worsen station traffic

While I love watching trains, I find waiting at the level crossing in St Dunstan’s Street a frequently frustrating experience.

With the number of trains crossing each hour the barriers are often down for up to 40 minutes in the 60-minute period, resulting certainly in rush hour and wet days, in traffic tailbacks beyond the Westgate to Rheims Way and the top of St Thomas’s Hill in the other direction.

In view of this situation, is it appropriate to consider a large, three tier car park in Station Road West which will obviously attract more traffic and cause more congestion, not to think of the increased pollution levels?

Part of the problem would be solved by allowing traffic from the London Road end of St Dunstan’s to park on land on the north side of the station with access to the station’s north platform.

In any case since the proposed housing developments are to the south and west of the city nearer Canterbury East Station, surely more provision should be made there for increased car-parking capacity?

These considerations aside, many will no doubt be very upset to see the lovely row of chestnut trees sacrificed to create yet another monster car park which will be an eyesore to the vicinity of the classically proportioned 1846 station building.

I hope the city council will consider the traffic implications before approving such a scheme. Hubert Pragnell Meadow Road, Canterbury

Your timely editorial on July 14 urged Network Rail to create a second access to Canterbury West station from Roper Road.

Network Rail owns the recently-vacated car sales site in Roper Road which would be ideal for this, but it has in fact been secretly pursuing its own agenda.

It recently emerged that Network Rail requested the city council’s local plan inspector to allocate this site for housing in the local plan.

This would provide Network Rail with a handsome sum of money, but clearly pays no regard to the community’s needs.

This is the only site that could provide the much-needed second access to the station, and, as your editorial put it so succinctly, “reduce pressure on the Station Road West side” – especially at peak times.

The local plan inspector has announced he will consider Network Rail’s request at a public hearing in September.

Because of his requirement to find more housing sites, there is a serious danger that this site will indeed be allocated for housing.

Therefore, I appeal to members of the public and local organisations who support a second access to Canterbury West from Roper Road and the university to write accordingly to Mr M Moore, local plan inspector, c/o programme officer, Canterbury City Council, or email programme.officer@canterbury.gov.uk

Please ask for your letter/email to be considered when Network Rail’s proposal for housing in Roper Road is considered in September. May I thank in advance all who are willing to write. Jeremy Baker Fir Tree Close, Rough Common, Canterbury