Representation by Alison Ford
- Date submitted
- 14 May 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I write to lodge my opposition to the Hinckley National Rail Freight Interchange (HNRFI). My ‘consultation response’ covers: Environmental Impact, Highways and Rail Networks, Actual vs Perceived Need, Social Impact, Process and Consultation. Environmental Impact Burbage Common The impact of HNRFI on Burbage Common would be significant and disastrous. The proposed site is adjacent to Burbage Common which has SSSI status. The destruction of habitat would have serious implications for the flora and fauna of the area. Wildlife ‘corridors’ would be destroyed leading to the loss of wildlife across the area. What is now an area of beauty would become a hideous eyesore - with 35 metres high warehouses dominating a huge expanse of land. Part of the area is indeed covered by the Fosse Villages Neighbourhood Plan and is designated as countryside outside of the built up area. Burbage Common is a place of solace, peace, fresh air, quiet and birdsong. A place to exercise and improve one’s health. A place cherished and valued by the public. During the pandemic, more than ever, it was a place where we could remember loved ones, friends and family who had succumbed to Covid-19. A place where our mental health was recharged. If HNRFI goes ahead that ‘place’ will no longer be a place of quiet, fresh air, peace and calm. It will be threatened by pollution in all it’s ugly forms - noise, air, light - 24/7. An act of environmental vandalism. The Government recognised the importance of mental health issues during lockdowns, why then does it threaten the very place that supports it? Pollution The proposed development will be in operation 24/7. There will be an accompanying increase in pollution due to the significant increase in lorry traffic. There has been no attempt to reduce emissions from HGVs or diesel trains, which again will have a massive effect on local residents, families using Burbage Common and wildlife. Tritax envisage that there will be 2 trains every hour and 10,000 HGVs a day. Therefore, there will be a major increase in levels of light, air and noise pollution. This will have a worrying impact on the local community as well as Burbage Common wildlife. Highways and Rail Network Roads What are the likely highway impacts or mitigations? None were apparent at the consultation. Highway mitigations are already needed on a massive scale to cope with the existing traffic volumes at junction 21 M1/M69 roundabout and there are frequent major tailbacks. The plan is to increase traffic by 10,000 HGVs and a potential 8,400 worker movements a day on the M69; with no improvement to junction 21 M1/M69 roundabout proposed how will the road systems cope and what happens if the M69 has to close. Local roads do not have the capacity to deal with such a situation. The proposed A47 link road, joining Leicester Road opposite the Rugby Club, would cause a major road safety issue. Traffic is already heavy on this road and it is added to by traffic from the recycling plant and Burbage Common. The ‘blind bend’ in the road is an added safety risk. The recently developed ‘travellers’ site would be destroyed. Rail What are the proposed train routes? The level crossing at Narborough will not take the extra capacity. Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council have said they will not support the route from Southampton through Birmingham due to capacity restraints in Birmingham. The Felixstowe/port routes are already busy with passenger services. How will capacity be increased to take the slower container based trains? 18 (or 16, depending on whether you believe the handout literature or the ‘experts’ at the consultation) stopping trains per day with the accompanying diesel and noise pollution. Actual vs Perceived Need The Government SRFI policy stipulates they should be built close to the market they are intended to serve. However, there is significant overlap of existing RFIs in the West Midlands and East Midlands, so where is the proposed HNRFI’s market? The lengthy road trip outweighs any environmental benefits of the rail journey. Given the closeness of Magna Park, Europe’s largest distribution park, why not build an extended rail link there as it already uses the DIRFT’s rail head for some freight movements. This would avoid the HNRFI development altogether. I cannot see there being a need for both HNRFI and Magna Park. If, as was suggested at the consultation, some of the warehouses at Magna Park need replacing, then replace them rather than decommission it and build a new hub on greenfield land 9 miles down the road - a site with flooding issues, as shown in the major drainage proposals at the consultation. I am perplexed by the reference to the hub possibly being used for the automotive industry. There is no major automotive industry locally. Horiba Mira Ltd is a research facility and not a manufacturing one, so it has no major freight requirement. Or is there an undisclosed plan to include a battery building plant, along with all the subsequent health and safety issues that would entail? There are no benefits regarding the potential jobs mooted either. Nothing at the consultation changed my opinion that these ‘jobs’ would be low level and there was no recognition of the developments in ‘AI’ and the impact that it would have on the workforce in 10 years time when and if HNRFI is completed. Social Impact There will be major effects of HNRFI on local communities. Pollution, as already mentioned; huge disruption, both during the build and afterwards; loss of homes and businesses, destroyed in the path of HNRFI; decrease in the quality of life leading to health issues, particularly the negative effects on mental health. The terrible consequences for Burbage Common, it’s wildlife and the thousands of people who walk there. There are no benefits to the local people at all and certainly not to the flora and fauna of the area. Process Disruption Having experienced the building of the A47 bypass I know full well what this development would mean to the area. The disruption to life would be immense - road closures, pollution in it’s many forms and all borne by local communities for a minimum of 10 years. And then there would no doubt be the proposal for housing developments alongside new roads etc, although no one in their right mind would want to live in an area next to the HNRFI with increased pollution and accompanying poor air quality. After the A47 bypass was built and the Earl Shilton and Barwell SUEs mooted, it was stated that should development happen on the north side of the new A47 bypass, there would be no developments on the south side. Obviously another political promise rescinded. Consultation Was it a deliberate ploy to carry out a consultation during a pandemic and during the winter months? Independent scientific analysis As far as I can ascertain no ‘independent research’ has or is being undertaken on the environmental impacts of the proposal. No doubt the people behind HNRFI are banking on it being too costly for individuals or communities to have this work carried out. Yet how come such a huge, life changing development can be allowed to progress without such vital independent analysis being mandatory? There is a feeling that HNRFI is a fait accompli, that the consultation is merely a cynical exercise. I hope, for the sake of democracy, that this is untrue. However, given that local councils, local MPs and local communities do not support HNRFI it appears the voice of the people is already not being listened to.