Plans will not benefit our area at all
I was very dismayed to see a headline in Hinckley’s own paper which seems to suggest that should the HNRFI development proposed by Tritax Symmetry go ahead, it will be beneficial to the area.
Granted, it is the developers promoting this idea and as such this is unsurprising. However, having lived in Stoney Stanton for nearly 40 years, I share many of the same concerns expressed by other residents of the nine villages encircling the proposed development area.
The major issues for the majority centre on a) the effect on the environment b) traffic around and through the villages c) pollution and d) impact on the wellbeing and quality of life of local residents.
The article mentions the 450 acres of land that this rail freight interchange (RFI) would occupy. At present, it is good farmland and beautiful open green space. This will be consumed by the development with little reparation of green space destroyed.
For example, 250+ mature trees will be removed from the site and 75 per cent of the existing hedgerows. True, there will be some replanting, but hedges and trees take years to mature enough to produce cover and food for creatures.
The rail freight hub, if given the go-ahead, would butt on to Burbage Common and Woods.
This area is designated an SSSI - a Site of Special Scientific Interest. It comprises ancient woodland and common which is a well used and loved recreational area. It provides habitats for many species of birds, animals and plants - some of which are rare. It is very unclear from the Ecology PEIR (Preliminary Environmental Impact Report), produced by Tritax, what the impact caused by the close vicinity of such a large development would be on this important location.
However, it is reasonable to believe that constant lighting and noise from the operation (24 hours a day, every day) will be disruptive to the natural rhythms of local wildlife and that heavy traffic would be a hazard. In addition, from a human perspective, the huge warehouses would be clearly visible to visitors to the woods and common and the construction traffic noise would be very audible. This can only detract from what should be a relaxing and enjoyable experience in open countryside.
The article emphasises the removal of 300,000 lorry trips per year from our roads. However, it fails to point out that this refers to removal across the whole UK. If the development proceeds many more additional HGV trips will be centred around our own area than at present, which can hardly be seen as a bonus locally. Traffic congestion in and around the villages is a huge concern to local residents.
The villages, such as Stoney Stanton and Sapcote, already struggle to cope with lorries attempting to negotiate the narrow streets. General traffic at peak times is often brought to a standstill at present due to sheer numbers of vehicles. The RFI would only add to this - especially if there was a closure on the M69 causing traffic to find alternative routes.
The M69 itself is already often congested. Although a new slip road is proposed, there will be a huge increase in volume of traffic around the M69 junction 2 due to extra HGV traffic and commuters.
Tritax are keen to point out the creation of 8,000 jobs. However, Hinckley and Bosworth, and Blaby districts are areas of relatively high employment and the majority of these posts will be taken by employees from outside of the locality. This will increase traffic volume even more thus further exacerbating the problem.
There is no reference to pollution in the article.
There will be inevitable constant light, noise and air pollution. Residents in Elmesthorpe and Stoney Stanton, the closest villages to the site, will all be particularly heavily impacted by this.
In summary, I conclude that the detrimental effects on the locality will far outweigh any benefits of this development. I am extremely concerned about the negative effects it will bring to the area and on the wellbeing and quality of life of those who live nearby.
Diana Harrold, Stoney Stanton