You reported a court case where some businessmen had allowed some young boys to be exposed to the pollution of asbestos dust (Evening Press, April 17).
This was potentially life-threatening. But there may be aspects of York's Town Plan that are life threatening in a similar way. The argument is simple. PM10s are very small polluting particles caused by traffic. These find their way into the smallest tubes in our lungs where they have a dangerously damaging effect. I have read that they kill at least 10,000 people a year in Britain.
I understand York's Town Plan still has the Castle/Piccadilly site, and the south side of the city centre earmarked for a large increase in retailing. Planners will tell you, any large retailing facility must be supported by large amounts of short-term car parking to be economically viable. Increased car parking in Piccadilly will generate lots of traffic which will pass through the areas near the city centre such as Fishergate.
The traffic impact report which accompanied the previous planning application predicted some 665,000 two-way car trips a year. This makes well over a million traffic movements through densely-populated areas. These areas have car ownership and car use which is below average. Why should the people of Fishergate and similar areas have to suffer this pollution? There are plenty of out-of-town shopping centres for York people to drive to.
Jan Shaughnessy,
Heslington Road,
Fishergate,
York.
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article