South Northamptonshire Council The Forum Moat Lane Towcester Northants NN12 6AD www.southnorthants.gov.uk www.facebook.com/SouthNorthantsCouncil @SNorthantsC The Planning Inspectorate Your Ref : TR050006 National Infrastructure Our Ref : S/2018/0002/DCO Temple Quay House Case Officer : Denis Winterbottom 2 The Square Telephone : 01327 322109 Bristol Email : development.management@ BS1 6PN southnorthants.gov.uk Date : 9 November 2018 email to [email protected] Dear Sir Planning Act 2008 (as amended) – Section 55 Proposal Application by Ashfield Land Management Limited and Gazeley GLP Northampton s.á.r.l. for an Order Granting Development Consent for the Rail Central Strategic Rail Freight Interchange Location Land at Arm Farm between Blisworth & Milton Malsor, the A43 and the Northampton Loop of the West Coast Main Line railway. Representation on the Consultation undertaken prior to Submission of the Application for a Development Consent Order. I refer to your letter dated 29/10/2018 inviting this Council to submit a representation on the consultation carried out by the applicant prior to the submission of the application for a Development Consent Order. The Council has reviewed the documents submitted with the application made available by the Planning Inspectorate. It has also reviewed comments received from interested parties. It has also relied on observations and information obtained from visits made by Council staff to consultation events. The Consultation report prepared by the Applicant and submitted with application concludes the publicity and consultation undertaken is in accordance with the published Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC). The Council considered a draft of the SoCC with respect to the Phase 1 consultation on 14 April 2016. The Council’s response raised concerns that consultees should be able to comment on all matters relating to the proposal and that the public were experiencing difficulties in leaving comments on the applicant’s website. These concerns were addressed within the SoCC published in April 2016. The Council was consulted on a draft of a revised SoCC with respect to the Phase 2 consultation in June 2017. The Council recommended an additional public consultation event be held at a venue within Towcester during the Phase two consultation period and that the submitted draft revised SoCC be amended to include within the list of locations for pubic exhibitions and consultation events reference to and details of an event to be held at a venue within Towcester. The timing included in this document for of the Phase 2 consultation was Autumn 2017. The Phase 2 Consultation was subsequently postponed. The Council was consulted on a further draft of a revised SoCC in January 2018. This included revised dates in for the Phase 2 consultation during Spring 2018 (postponed from Autumn 2017). The Council noted the consultation arrangements proposed remained unchanged other than the dates but also recommended that the Transport Assessment should be published for consultation. The applicant has formally consulted the Council as required by Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008. The proposal has been publicised in accordance with requirements in Section 48. With respect to the consultation with the local communities required in Section 47 the applicant undertook an initial phase of consultation in accordance with the SoCC published in April 2016 and further statutory consultation was subsequently undertaken in accordance with the Statement of Community Consultation published in January 2018. The Council has no reason to believe the Phase 1 and Phase 2 statutory consultation undertaken with the local community and the Local Authority prior to the submission of the application has not been otherwise than in accordance with the procedural requirements within the Planning Act 2008. Part six of the Consultation Report refers to a Phase 2a Localised Consultation undertaken by the applicant in June / July 2018. Paragraph 11.3 identifies this as a further stage of formal statutory consultation undertaken pursuant to government guidance. The extract from the guidance quoted later in paragraph 11.3, however refers to appropriate “non-statutory targeted consultation”, this gives rise to some confusion over the proper status of this further localised consultation. A Local Liaison Group convened by the applicant to engage with interested parties, including parish councils, has met at intervals throughout the period prior to the submission of the application. There were occasions when meetings were not held and a newsletter update was instead published. Parish councils and community groups have expressed concerns to the Council regarding the consultation undertaken since the emergence of the proposal. These have been notified to the applicant in responses to the consultation and many are summarised in the appendices to the Consultation Report submitted with the application. Appendices 51, 52 and 53 summarise the responses pursuant to the Phase 2 statutory consultation under Section 47. The Council has received comments concerning the consultation undertaken from parish councils, other interested groups and people within the local communities. Comments received are appended to this response. The content of these documents should not be interpreted to represent the view of this Council. The Consultation Report in paragraph 9.7 identifies that in response to the statutory Phase 2 Section 42 and Section 43 consultation, responses were received from a number of organisations, including Network Rail, Highways England, Natural England, the Environment Agency, South Northamptonshire Council, Northampton Borough Council and several parish councils and that summaries of the responses received and the regard afforded to these is reported in Appendix 49. Appendix 49 does not however appear to include the response received from Network Rail. The response of the authority responsible for the rail network is significant to the understanding of, whether the proposed rail infrastructure is technically feasible, of the progress made by the applicant in securing approval for this, and to whether there is capacity available on the rail network to facilitate the movement of freight by rail to this site; a concern that has persisted throughout the consultation. The Council has been informed by the Canal and River Trust of their opinion that the consultation undertaken with them does not meet the requirement under the Planning Act 2008. They raise the concern in that the prior consultation undertaken with them respect to their interests has not been thorough, effective and proportionate and this has not complied with published guidance on pre-application process. The communications from solicitors acting for Canal and River Trust are appended to this response. Concerns relayed to the Council by local people during consultation phases refer to the scope and quality of the information made available, to the presentation of the consultation material, and to a lack of transparency through which some elements of the proposal have emerged or been progressed. These matters include inter alia :- omission of information relevant to significant elements of the proposal within consultation materials; including - the capacity of the rail network to provide sufficient freight paths to effect a modal shift without detriment to the level of passenger services on the West Coast Mainline., - assessment of the market demand and of the need for the RFI facility in this location close to Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT) where Phase 3 is poised to provide additional capacity, - the lack of assessment of the cumulative impact of the proposal and the Northampton Gateway RFI proposed on adjoining land. the disparity between the detailed information within technical documents not easily assimilated by ordinary people and the summary documents provided which was too short to ‘be of much use’. lack of sufficient detail concerning the proposed development and in the quality of the presentation of details, e.g. the scale of landscape visualisations and difficulties in accessing information published on the website; the inability of people affected by the proposal to assimilate the very detailed technical information provided within the timescale of the consultation. These scope of the concerns is summarised within the Commentary on the Adequacy of Consultation prepared by Stop Rail Central, dated 24/9/2018. A copy sent to the Council is included within the Appendices to this response. The Council has also been made aware that concerns have been raised over the adequacy of details provided with regard to the acquisition of private property interests. In conclusion whilst the legal requirements of consultation may have been followed the Council considers more could have been done to clarify the following elements of the proposal to facilitate the consultation. The rail infrastructure, inherent to the principle of a Rail Freight Interchange proposal and the cumulative impact of this proposal with other proposals are two significant elements where the information made available in all the stages of consultation has been limited in terms of the detail and the progress. A significant concern in the pre-application consultation has been the lack of availability of information on the cumulative impact of this proposal with other proposals, in particular the proposed Northampton Gateway RFI, not least as land required for the proposal appears