Representation by Mark Bernard Wassell
- Date submitted
- 21 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I am in opposition to the proposed rail freight terminal on environmental and road infrastructure grounds. I am also convinced by the arguments that an additional freight terminal is not required in such close proximity to other similar facilities. My main concern is with the impact this development will have on wildlife in and around the ancient woodland of Burbage Common and Woods. The impacts of noise, lighting, traffic and emissions on many species will be enormous and irreversible. When will we stop putting profit and commerce before the diversity of wildlife on which we depend? This may be considered to be a nationally significant project in terms of infrastructure (although I am not convinced of this), but at what cost? I would argue that the Government should be doing a lot more to restore the habitats and wildlife which has already been lost through such developments instead of planning more destruction of our precious wild infrastructure, which if far more nationally significant in the long term than the ability to move goods around the country. The local impacts on residents will also be significant. Many enjoy the peace and rural beauty of Burbage Common and Woods, which in part is enjoyed due to its rural setting. The presence of this terminal will erode further our ability to escape from stressful lives and find peace and relaxation. Another local impact will be on road congestion. The number of lorry and vehicle movements will clog up already busy roads and lead to traffic chaos and misery. The opening up of the M69 junction will only partially mitigate this issue, and since the rationale for a local rail terminal is to minimise road freight transit, surely access to the motorway - which implies the need for long distance road freight routes - shows that this strategy is poorly thought through? Any blockage of the M1, M6 or M69 will quickly result in an overloaded local road system. Villages like Stoney Stanton and Sapcote are not designed to take such large numbers of heavy goods vehicles, and would ultimately require a bypass to carry the many thousands of additional vehicle movements predicted, using up even more precious farmland, woodland and habitat. Please reject this proposal and leave local residents and wildlife alike to enjoy what little there is left of our natural and rural surroundings.