SO once again the Satnam Peel Hall saga raises its head after Satnam pleaded with the court to be allowed to carry on.

I would think they had a relatively easy job swaying the court in view of some of the decisions made these days by the top legal brotherhood.

The only cheering comment in the new application seems to be that no industrial area is now included.

However the rest of the proposals raise a number of questions:

1. 1,200 residential premises will mean at least 1,700 to 1,800 more cars using already inadequate roads.

2. Financial/professional services – presumably doctors, solicitors, banks etc. Further traffic use.

3. Restaurants/cafes – how many and of what type?

4. Drinking establishments – are there not enough already available within a short distance?

5. Hot food takeaways – how many and will they not create more litter?

6. Non-residential institution – what exactly is this?

7. Family restaurant/pub – will there not be enough of these in three and four above?

8. Primary school – how many pupils and will a percentage be from outside this development?

9. Open space/sports – will these be for the use of the development only?

10. Supporting infrastructure – a vague title comprising what exactly?

11. Means of access – does this mean new roads or just entries to the development from the existing inadequate roads?

In addition to the residents’ vehicles every one of the above items will involve extra traffic creating havoc and problems for the existing local residents.

It is to be hoped that Warrington Borough Council continues to fight to retain Peel Hall in its present state both for residents and in the wider concerns of helping to fight global problems.

ALLEN RIX Fearnhead