DCSIMG

Lighting and visual impact raised at DIRFT plans exhibition

TWO key issues were raised by the public at a consultation into the DIRFT 2 plans.

Prologis, the developer behind the scheme, has applied to change the planning permission it has for new units on land between the A428 and A5 on the northwestern edge of DIRFT.

On Wednesday last week they held an exhibition of the plans in Crick Village Hall.

Jim Goodger, from Crick Parish Council, said: “The two things I’ve been asking about are the effects of the extra lights and the planting needed to mitigate the visual impact.

“There is a lot of light pollution from DIRFT – a bright glow in the sky at night.

“We have DIRFT here now, so all we can do is seek mitigation for the two key problems that we have with it and rely on technology to improve and solve those issues.”

Catherine Lomax, one of the area’s representatives on Daventry District Council, said: “I would echo Jim’s comments on light pollution.

“I do have some questions about the growth of DIRFT, which is approaching other villages now. There’s not much space left there, so in future I don’t know what’s going to happen.

“My other concern is traffic. More units will see more workers driving in and out, plus more lorries.

“Plus, Rugby is planning on building homes on the old Rugby mast site, so that will mean a lot of pedestrians and cyclists in the area.”

The alterations to the plans are to accommodate Sainsbury’s, who want to set up a distribution warehouse at DIRFT.

The new supersized warehouse would provide around 1,000 jobs.

Robin Woodbridge, senior vice president for development and leasing at Prologis, said: “When we got the original planning approval we didn’t have a tenant. Now we have Sainsbury’s interested we need to make some changes.

“We actually think it improves the site – the building is lower than the ground level, and there’s an earthen bund around the edge of the site with planting on to screen it from the planned new Rugby homes.

“We’ve had to take into account not just the current neighbours, but the future ones as well.”

 

Comments

 
 

Back to the top of the page