You report (December 29) that no objections have been made so far to the intended replacement of the present fencing which is less than three years old. I might not object but have questions requiring answers. Beyond the alleged procedural oversight by Network Rail failing to obtain planning permission for the present fences, what is/was 'controversial' about them?  They are entirely effective preventions against the throwing of objects - or indeed bodies - onto the railway below.  In my view as a regular user they are not unattractive in their green rendering and afford visibility in both directions.     

If, as I maintain, there is neither aesthetic nor utilitarian deficiency in the existing fences, what exactly are the envisioned improvements justifying a replacement? What might be the opportunity costs in personnel deployment and duration; and materials cost of such an unnecessary and wasteful project?


Paul Anthony Newman (Rev),

Cranworth Road,