Agenda Item No: 13

CABINET

16 JANUARY 2018

COMMERCIAL DIRECTOR: ANDREW QUINCEY

CABINET MEMBER WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION: COUNCILLOR ANDRE GONZALEZ DE SAVAGE

CABINET MEMBER WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRANSPORT, HIGHWAYS & THE ENVIRONMENT: COUNCILLOR IAN MORRIS

Subject: Gateway Strategic Rail Freight Interchange Recommendations: That Cabinet: 1. Note the proposals for the Northampton Gateway Strategic Rail Freight Interchange and the County Council’s response to the Stage 2 Statutory Public Consultation; 2. Agrees that delegated authority to be given to the Commercial Director, in consultation with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Public Protection, to agree any Statement(s) of Common Ground or other submissions to made to the forthcoming Examination of the Development Consent Order application (as described in Paragraphs 8.1 & 8.2 of this report).

1. Purpose of report 1.1 To provide an update on the proposal for a major rail freight interchange and to agree how the County Council will respond when the proposal is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for examination before being determined by the Secretary of State for Transport.

2. How this decision contributes to the Council plan

The Council’s vision is to make a great place to live and work. This is achieved through increasing the wellbeing of your county’s communities and/or safeguarding the county’s communities.

This initiative specifically delivers increased wellbeing by ensuring that:  People achieve economic prosperity, in a healthy, low carbon economy which gives access to jobs, training and skills development.  Communities thrive in a pleasant and resilient environment, with robust transport and communications infrastructure.  Resources are utilised effectively and efficiently, in coordination with partners and providers.

3. Background

3.1 There are currently two proposals for Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFI) south of the M1 between Junction 15 and Junction 15a in an area bounded by the villages of , , Roade, and .

3.2 The Northampton Gateway SRFI is located to the east of the railway with the to the north-east and the A508 to the east. The site is promoted by Roxhill.

3.3 The Rail Central SRFI is located to the west of the Northampton Loop railway immediately south of the village of Milton Malsor, with the A43 trunk road to the west of the site and the railway to the south. The site is promoted by Ashfield Land.

3.4 SRFI’s are designated as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects under the Planning Act 2008, with planning approval granted via a Development Consent Order (the “Order”). Under the Localism Act 2011 the application is examined by the Planning Inspectorate before being determined by the Secretary of State for Transport.

3.5 An Order will include all matters which are normally determined after planning consent is granted, such as Reserved Matters applications or approvals to undertake highway works under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. As such it requires the applicant to undertake significantly more work in advance of their application. However, this allows construction to start rapidly if approval is obtained.

3.6 The promoters of both sites have engaged with the County Council on technical matters as part of the preparation of the application. The Northampton Gateway SRFI has recently completed a second period of public consultation on its proposals and is expected to submit its application in February/March 2018 and it is this site to which this Cabinet report applied.

3.7 The intention is to bring a similar report to Cabinet once the Rail Central SRFI reaches a similar stage in the preparation of its application.

4. Description of the Northampton Gateway proposals

4.1 The Northampton Gateway SRFI (the “Proposed Development”) is proposed to the east of the Northampton Loop railway and to the west of the A508. The SRFI site (the “Main Site”) has an area of approximately 210 hectares (520.9 acres). The villages of Milton Malsor, and Blisworth, are located further to the west and south-west of the site respectively, both beyond the West Coast Main Line railway. The village of Courteenhall is located to the east, with the village of Roade further south along the A508. A site location context plan is included as Appendix 1.

4.2 The Proposed Development which is the subject of the application for an Order comprises:

 An intermodal freight terminal including container storage and Heavy Goods Vehicle parking and rail sidings to serve individual warehouses;  Up to 468,000 sq m (approximately 5 million sq ft) (gross internal area) of warehousing and ancillary buildings, with additional floorspace provided in the form of mezzanines;  New road infrastructure and works to the existing road network, including the provision of a new access and associated works to the A508, a new bypass to the village of Roade, improvements to Junction 15 and 15A of the M1 motorway, the A45, and other highway improvements at junctions on the local highway network;  Strategic landscaping and tree planting, including diverting public rights of way.

4.3 The number and precise location of the proposed buildings, and their detailed appearance, are not yet known or fixed. However, key characteristics and details regarding the proposed buildings, including the maximum building heights and plateau levels, will be fixed as part of the application process, and defined on a ‘Parameters Plan’. The Parameters Plan forms the basis of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The Illustrative Masterplan (Appendix 2) shows one potential form of development which would be in accordance with the proposed parameters.

4.4 The proposed Roade Bypass (also referred to as the ‘Bypass corridor’ or ‘Bypass site’) is located around the western side of the village, and runs across the West Coast Main Line railway before rejoining the A508 to the south of the village. The Bypass forms part of a package of transport improvements in addition to the improvements to Junction 15 and 15a of the M1, and the A45, and include relatively small-scale improvements to junctions associated with the A508 corridor close to the site.

4.5 The promoters predict that the completed development in operation could directly support around 7,544 full time equivalent jobs based on standard national densities of an average of one job per 77 sq m of floorspace. The socio-economic assessment which forms part of the Environmental Statement concludes that around 60% of Travel to Work trips will originate from within the Northampton area. 90% of these jobs are likely to be taken by people within the core ‘study area’ for the analysis of , Northampton Borough, Daventry District Council, the Borough Council of Wellingborough, Kettering Borough Council, and Council, with only 10% from further afield.

5. Landscape and visual effects

5.1 A Landscape and Visual Impact assessment is being prepared as part of the Environmental Statement to consider the likely effects of the proposals as a whole, including the proposed Roade Bypass. There are no specific statutory landscape designations that cover any part of the Northampton Gateway proposals. The Roade Bypass extends into the edge of a locally designated Special Landscape Area which is largely located to the south-east of Roade.

5.2 The landscape of the proposed SRFI site comprises arable farmland, with the surrounding area mixed in character with existing major transport and development infrastructure, including the urban area of Northampton and the M1

motorway particularly apparent in the east and north of the site, and with railway infrastructure to the immediate west.

5.3 Variations in ground levels create an important part of the Main Site’s immediate landscape, with a ridge of ground extending along the western side, with the land generally falling back towards the urban edge of Northampton and Junction 15. The eastern edge of the site (close to the A508) is some 15-20m lower than the top of the ridge in the west. Only the far north-western corner of the Main Site falls away from the motorway towards Milton Malsor. Therefore, the Main Site sits in a shallow but enclosed landform setting, with a general aspect away from the nearest villages and towards the urban area, and separated in localised terms to the west and south. The village of Blisworth sits on higher ground, with most of the village on land falling away from the Main Site. Collingtree on the eastern side of the motorway sits at a similar level to the eastern part of the site, and generally falls away from the motorway and away from the Main Site.

5.4 The Roade Bypass is relatively more elevated and varied than the Main Site in terms of levels, with varying slopes and falls around the western side of Roade. The Bypass corridor stretches across two small dips and ridges in the landform to the north and west of Roade. The more rolling nature of the landscape provides scope for the Bypass to be relatively enclosed where it lies closer to the edge of the settlement.

5.5 At the local level, the effects vary on different receptors at different stages of the development process. The scheme includes a range of mitigation measures, many of which are incorporated or embedded into the scheme design and layout. These include siting and heights of the Proposed Development, as well as the earthworks and ground modelling proposed.

5.6 The developer intends to minimise construction effects, which are temporary, through best practice measures relating to the management of site activities. This will include protection of retained trees and woodland areas through the construction process, and the phased but early delivery of the outer landscaping and earthwork bunds. Also, temporary screen fencing where relevant will be used.

5.7 Once the Proposed Development is operational the residual landscape and visual effects will reduce over time as the landscaping and planting matures, and this will be managed and maintained over the longer-term through a Landscape Management Plan.

5.8 The Draft Environmental Statement can be found in full on the Northampton Gateway website http://www.northampton- gateway.co.uk/consultation.php#downloads

6. Transport Assessment

6.1 A Transport Assessment is being prepared by the developers as part of the application and will explain the predicted transport and traffic impacts of the Proposed Development. It will also explain the mitigation measures to minimise or eliminate adverse impacts, and any expected benefits or improvements as a

result of the proposals. The Transport Assessment uses the County Council’s Northamptonshire Strategic Transport Model which allows Roxhill to understand the impacts of the Proposed Development, and also to model and test potential mitigation measures to understand their likely effects on traffic distribution. The work to date has been overseen by a Transport Working Group including Highways and the County Council.

6.2 The proposed SRFI is located adjacent to Junction 15 of the M1. This junction suffers with a constrained physical design with tight radii on the roundabouts and a somewhat confusing layout, and it sees very high traffic demand at peak hours. The Junction is regularly operating well over its design capacity (27% above on a regular basis), resulting in significant queuing and congestion, with poor journey times and reliability. Queues on the A508 can often be in excess of 400m long, and the junction is well known locally as a regular congestion ‘hot-spot’.

6.3 The Northampton Gateway proposals includes a substantial upgrade to Junction 15 as part of a comprehensive package of highways works and improvements. The Junction 15 improvements would see works including:  Enlargement of both northern and southern roundabouts;  Realignment and widening (to 5 lanes) of the A45 southbound approach to the roundabout, and A45 northbound widened to 3 lanes to beyond Watering Lane;  Provision of 3 full lanes over the M1 bridge;  Signalisation and widening of the Saxon Avenue approach;  Dualling of the A508 approach from the south, with 5 lanes provided at the entry to the roundabout;  Improved routes for pedestrians and cyclists.

6.4 In addition, the Proposed Development would also deliver improvements at Junction 15A to the north along the M1. Works including lane widening and new signals at both the northern and southern roundabouts would prevent predicted queuing onto the M1 in the longer-term.

6.5 The highways works would see a number of improvements focused on the A508 corridor heading south from Junction 15. This includes a number of small-scale junction and other improvements at existing junctions already known to create problems or safety concerns.

6.6 The most significant element of this package is a proposed new bypass to the village of Roade. The Bypass would be a single carriageway road (60mph speed limit) around the western side of the village, and would include tree planting and landscaping, including earthwork bunding to help mitigate visual and noise effects, and drainage swales and attenuation features. In summary the bypass would comprise:  A new highway linking the A508 Northampton Road to the A508 Stratford Road;  The provision of roundabout junctions between the Roade Bypass and the A508 Northampton Road, A508 Stratford Road and Blisworth Road;  Drainage swales and attenuation features;

 A bridge over the West Coast Main Line railway;  An underpass for bridleway RZ1;  The alteration and diversion of existing public rights of way;  The construction of a shared use footway and cycleway; and  Environmental mitigation bunds.

6.7 Detailed plans showing the wider route A508 upgrade are included as part of the consultation material and include:  Alteration to the A508/Courteenhall Road T-junction to become a left-in left- out only junction which would include the relocation of the existing bus stop currently located to the south of Courteenhall Road approximately 70 metres further south;  Alterations to Stoke Road/Knock Lane (Blisworth Road) priority T-junction to widen the carriageway and improve the highway drainage;  A capacity and road safety improvement scheme at the A508/Rookery Lane/Ashton Road staggered crossroads;  Alteration to the A508/Pury Road ghost island T-junction to increase the storage area for traffic turning right from the A508;  A new pedestrian refuge on the A508 at to assist with crossing to the northbound bus stop, and provision of a right turn harbourage facility for northbound traffic from the A508 turning in to Church Lane.

6.8 While not yet finalised, the emerging total package of works has been tested in the Northamptonshire Strategic Transport Model. While it may be refined further, the modelling shows that this package of works would remove existing congestion ‘bottlenecks’ on the highway network, particularly at M1 Junction 15 and 15A, and at Roade. As a result, existing traffic is shown to ‘reassign’ to the principal road network consisting of the A508 between the A5 and M1 Junction 15, and at M1 Junction 15 and 15A. This is a desirable outcome, as the A508 is a primary route, and this reassignment is shown to lead to a consequential reduction in traffic on many of the surrounding local roads and the villages of Milton Malsor, Blisworth, Roade and Ashton. In simple terms, as a result of the package of highways improvements which the Proposed Development would deliver, the villages would see less through-traffic in the future than they do now, with beneficial impacts in terms of congestion reduction, noise reduction, and improved air quality. This is in a future scenario where the new homes and other development planned by the Joint Core Strategy (the key planning document for the area) have been delivered, and the traffic associated with that additional development is also on the highway network.

6.9 In addition to the highway proposals, a Framework Travel Plan has been prepared in draft to encourage and enable access by a range of travel modes, and the proposals include new walking and cycling routes to (and within) the site as part of the wider infrastructure provision. In addition, a Public Transport Strategy has been prepared which would see extended existing bus services, and a new service to serve the site, as well as new stops on the A508 to serve the site.

6.10 However, to ensure a robust assessment which makes worst-case assumptions about the likely levels of car traffic, the Transport Assessment does

not assume any shift of travel by employees away from the car to these other modes. This ensures that the highways mitigation works and improvements are designed to cater for the highest likely levels of car traffic.

6.11 The Transport Assessment and more details of the proposed improvements can be found on the Northampton Gateway website http://www.northampton- gateway.co.uk/consultation.php#downloads

6.12 While documents relating to rail capacity and operations were published as part of the recent consultation, no specific information was published which allows the County Council to determine whether or not the proposals would impact on the passenger rail services to Northampton and Long Buckby. Given known constraints on the railway network, and aspirations in the County Council’s Rail Strategy to see passenger rail services improved in future, this is a matter that needs to be addressed.

6.13 The County Council’s response to consultation on the Transport Assessment is included as Appendix 3.

7. Consultation and Scrutiny

7.1 Roxhill prepared a Statement of Community Consultation in September 2017, having consulted with the Local Authorities. They held the Stage 2 Statutory Public Consultation between 9th October and 24th November. A number of public exhibitions were held and the consultation material was available to view at a number of locations including the County Council offices at One Angel Square and local libraries.

7.2 Once the developers have submitted their application and it has been accepted by the Planning Inspectorate, the public will be able to register with the Planning Inspectorate and provide a summary of their views of the application in writing. At pre-examination stage, everyone who has registered and made a relevant representation will be invited to attend a preliminary meeting run and chaired by a Planning Inspector. This stage of the process takes place approximately 3 months from the developer’s formal notification and publicity of an accepted application.

7.3 The Planning Inspectorate has six months to carry out the examination. During this stage, people who have registered to have their say, are invited to provide more details of their views in writing. Careful consideration is given by the Planning Inspectorate to all the important and relevant matters, including the representations of all interested parties, any evidence submitted and answers provided to questions set out in writing and explained at hearings.

8. Next Steps

8.1 As an interested party, particularly in relation to highways and transport issues, the County Council will need to register its interest in participating in the examination process, and submit a summary of its views of the application in writing.

8.2 In due course, the County Council will need to submit more details of its view on the application in writing. It is also usual, on complex examinations such as this, for public authorities such as the County Council and the developer to prepare Statements of Common Ground outlining those issues on which they are agreement, as this will be of considerable assistance to the Planning Inspectorate in undertaking the examination.

9. Equality Screening 9.1 At present the exact details of the proposal are unknown and are subject to change following consultation and scrutiny by the developer. Therefore the final equalities impact will not be known. This paper is for information only with any response to the proposals being delegated as set out in Recommendation 2.

9.2 The responsibility for considering Equalities issues on the whole development rests with the developer and the Planning Inspectorate/Secretary of State and it is not for the County Council to undertake the screening process for the Order.

Reason that no EqIA is required  as appropriate The paper is for information only  The proposal/activity/decision has no impact on customers or the service they receive The proposal impacts upon staff but the proposed staffing changes will not affect the service that customers receive* Other (Please explain further) * Where a proposal affects staff, the appropriate HR processes will be followed, which have already been subject to the EqIA process and will be compliant with HR legislation

10. Alternative Options Considered 10.1 As this report is responding to proposals by others, undertaken through a statutory process, alternative options are not appropriate. 11. Financial Implications 11.1 As a private development, the costs of undertaking the development are not a matter for the County Council. The cost of officer time in holding pre-application discussions, responding to the application and participating in the examination is met from existing service budgets. The costs of undertaking specific work, such as the use of the Northamptonshire Strategic Transport Model, is charged to the developer.

12. Risk and Business Continuity Management 1. Risk(s) associated with the proposal

Risk Mitigation Residual Risk If development is started Financial bonds which will be Amber and not completed or not taken from the developer to completed satisfactorily the cover this eventuality are County Council is left with included in the Draft incomplete or sub-standard Development Consent Order.

works on the existing highway which it will then be responsible for. That failure to agreement Delegation of authority to agree Amber statements of common documents and submissions ground or to file plus engagement with the submissions within the developer and engagement with timescales set out by the the Order process should Planning Inspector could prevent this. result in insufficient highway improvements being approved.

2. Risk(s) associated with not undertaking the proposal

Risk Risk Rating If the County Council does not participate in the examination Red process it will be unable to comment on the proposal further.

13. List of Appendices Appendix 1 – Site Location Plan Appendix 2 – Illustrative Mater Plan Appendix 3 – Response to Consultation

Author: Name: Chris Wragg Team: Northamptonshire Highways Contact details: Tel: 01604 364411 Email: [email protected] Background Papers: www.northamptongateway.co.uk https://infrastructure.planninginspectora te.gov.uk/projects/east- midlands/northampton-gateway-rail- freight-interchange/ Does the report propose a key NO decision is taken? This is not a key decision, but the development proposal if approved will have a major impact on the infrastructure and economy of the county. If yes, is the decision in the Forward YES Plan? Will further decisions be required? If so NO please outline the timetable here Does the report include delegated The timetable for exercising the decisions? If so, please outline the delegated decisions will be dependent timetable here on the progress of the application and examination.

Is this report proposing an amendment NO to the budget and/or policy framework? Have the financial implications been YES cleared by the Strategic Finance Name of SFM: Rosemary Pallot Manager (SFM)? Have any capital spend implications N/A been cleared by the Capital Investment Board (CIB) Has the report been cleared by the YES relevant Director? Name of Director: Andrew Quincey Has the relevant Cabinet Member YES been consulted? Cabinet Member: Councillor Andre Gonzalez de Savage Has the relevant scrutiny committee NO been consulted? Scrutiny Committee: Environment, Development & Transport Has the report been cleared by Legal YES Services? Name of solicitor: Debbie Carter- Hughes Have any communications issues been YES cleared by Communications and Name of officer: Liam Beasley Marketing? Have any property Issues been N/A cleared by Property and Asset Name of officer: Ian Boll Management? Procurement/ Contractual Implications: N/A  Have you evidenced Name of officer compliance with the Council’s (This should be Damon Lawrenson Contract Procedures Rules? signature who chair’s Commercial  Have you identified where you Board with People and Places Directors are seeking Cabinet to approve and Head of Procurement) an exemption from the Contract Procedure Rules and detailed the risks and mitigations?  Have you identified any EU or UK legislative risks associated with the exemption process such as non-compliance with the Public Contract Regulations Act 2015, transparency and open competition?  Have you identified the procurement or contractual risks associated with a contract?  Has the contract/procurement been subjected to the Council’s Commercial Board? Are there any community safety None apparent. implications?

Are there any environmental YES. An Environmental Statement is implications: being prepared by Roxhill as part of their application. Are there any Health and Safety NO Implications: Are there any Human Resources NO Implications: Are there any human rights YES. The Draft Development Consent implications: Order includes proposals for the compulsory acquisition of land.

Constituency Interest: Location of the rail freight terminal: Bugbrooke – Councillor Adam Brown Location of proposed off-site highway works: – Councillor Allen Walker East Hunsbury & Shelfleys: Councillor Andre Gonzalez de Savage Hackleton and Grange Park – Councillor Michael Clarke Nene Valley – Councillor Lizzy Bowen Sixfields – Councillor Pinder Chauhan Towcester & Roade – Councillor Adil Sadgyov