Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
(DECEMBER 2016)
DOCUMENT 6.5A
The Northampton Gateway Rail Freight Interchange Order 201X
Regulation No: 5 (2) (q)
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS | DECEMBER 2016
www.northampton-gateway.co.uk
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 3NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
CONTENTS
1. Introduction and purpose of this document
2. Summary of the Northampton Gateway proposals
3. Overview of the potential or likely impacts of Northampton
Gateway
4. Consultation issues and process, consultation programme, and
contacts
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 5NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT’
1.1 This document is intended to provide a short and straight-forward summary of the
Northampton Gateway proposals. It has been prepared by the applicant, Roxhill (Junction
15) Ltd (‘Roxhill’), and is intended to help local people and other consultees in reviewing and
commenting on the emerging proposals.
1.2 This summary sets out details of the proposals, gives an overview of the national policy
context, and also describes some of the likely or potential issues and impacts associated
with the proposals. The intention is that reading this document will also provide a good
overview of the main elements of, and programme for, the next stages of the process. It has
been prepared as part of the material used in the initial (non-statutory) public consultation
being held in December 2016/January 2017.
1.3 Northampton Gateway meets the definition and thresholds for a Nationally Significant
Infrastructure Project (NSIP), meaning Roxhill are required to apply for a development
consent order to authorise the development rather than for planning permission. The
application will be made to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS), and ultimately determined by
the Secretary of State for Transport.
1.4 As is made clear in the information being presented at the public consultation exhibitions,
on the awareness raising leaflets distributed locally, and on the project website, much of
the technical and environmental information from which this summary document is drawn
remains ‘work in progress’. The preparation of the Environmental Statement (ES) (which
forms part of the overall Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)) is underway, and a
‘Scoping Report’, setting out the range and methodology of the work to be undertaken
to prepare the ES, was submitted to PINS in mid-October. In response, PINS produced a
scoping opinion in early December, following consultation on the Scoping Report. That
process could have implications for some aspects of the proposed ES, and the work required
to complete the ES. Therefore, at this relatively early stage in the process Roxhill has not
yet undertaken or completed a number of the surveys and assessments required to prepare
the Environmental Impact Assessment (ES). More information about the ES is provided in
Section 3.
1.5 It is important to note that, following preparation and submission of a major planning
application on a similar site in 2014, which also included the submission of an ES, the
applicant already has a relatively good understanding of the site and the characteristics
of the surrounding area. Although the Northampton Gateway proposals are larger and
include a different range of activity on a larger site, the previous assessment of the likely
effects of the earlier development proposals is also of some assistance in providing an early
indication of the likely key issues and likely effects.
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 7NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
0 100 200 400
Metres
500300 600
117.3m
Lodge
Stoke Plain
Air
Track
Track
116.4m
Sinks
Sinks
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
Dismantled Railwa
y
Track
FB
Netherwood
Ward Bdy
Trac
k
Shaft
Trac
k
Silos
Path (um
)
Issues
Track
Path (um)
CS
Dismantled Railway
Def
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
Path (um)
100.5m
Pond
Dra
in
Trac
k
CS
Track
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
Communication Mast
Rock Vale
MP 59
CS
ED & Ward Bdy
Track
ASHTO
N R
OAD
Track
MP .25
Path (um)
Pond
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
LC
SRELDARTS
ENAL
RE
GD
AB
CL
LLEWGNIR
PS
RN
CNRAB
LC
YELOHCS
ES
O
STOKE
RO
AD
C O U R T E E N H A L LROAD
BLISWORTH
ROAD
KNOCK
LANE
TH
AM
PT
ON
RO
AD
BARN
LANE
CONNEGARLE Y S
WIN
DM
ILL
AV
EN
UE
G R E E N AW A YCLOSE
TO
WC
ES
TE
RR
OAD
LA
DY
FIE L D
WE
LL
SP
R
ING
DOVECOTE
RD
GR
EEN
AWAY
CL
LC
H
ANI
DEM
CL
APPLEBARN
YW
SM
AIL
LIW
CL
ENI
P
LCSGNIK
YW
SE
NIAB
YWNAMOR
CO
WBEC
K CL
BARN MS
THE SADDLERS
WALK
CO
NY
H AR TWE L L
ROAD
NO
RTH
AMPT
ON
RO
AD
A508
AS
HTO
NR
OAD
STR
AT
FO
RD
RO
AD
A508
NORTHAMPTON
ROAD
LON
DO
NR
OA
DA5
08
A45
W A K E WA
Y
WOODLANDS
CHEANEY
DRIVE
HYDE
ROAD
HIGHSTREET
THE
ME
AD
OW
S
SAXONA V E N U E
GR
AFTO
NR
OA
D
C H U R C H
CR
OF
T
STM A R Y S
WAY
C O U R T E E N H A L LR O A D
HYD
EC
L OS
E
THE
LEYS
HOE
WA
Y
BAILEYBROOKS
L A N E
SAXON
A V E N U E
THE
SP
INN
EY
R IC K Y
A R
D
WALK
DO
VE
WA
Y
STR
EET
HGI
H
AVEN
UE
LODGE
EVIRD
SP
INN
EY
YAW
WALKERS
EVIRD
EDIS
NOT
NIU
Q
ROAD
NOTNIUQ
YA
W
WAKE
WAY
WO
DA
EM
BRIDGE
ROAD
WOOLDALE
ENAL
WATERING AVENUE
SAXON
DA
OR
WO
OTTO
N
A45
RO
AD
NO
DN
OL
EN
AL
KOORBGNIDNIW
I NG
BR
O
OK
LA
B E R R YLANE
BA
INE
S W
Y
B A IN
ES
WA
Y
NIW
LCHCRUHC
CLOSEMRAF
GLEBE
KE
ER
C
LA
OH
S
DIA
TO
RC
L
Dra
in
FB
FB
Dra
in
Dra
in
Path
Ground
Recreation
Path
School
Caroline Chisholm
CP
Bdy
CP Bdy
Co Const & CP Bdy
Tk
Playing Field
Liby
Hotel
CPCOLLINGTREE
Path
School
Cemy
Course
Golf
GVC
Grange
Spinney
Track
GVC
Sewage Works
disused
Course
Golf
Path
Glebe Farm
Sch
PW
Gdns
Allot
Collingtree
Club
Path
84m
82m
74m
77m
79m
78m
84m Issues
House
FB
Drain
Drain
FB
Weir
M A L Z O RLANE
M IL T O NCOURT
O RC
H
A
RD C L
CO
L LIN
GTR
EE C T
GREEN ST
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
W
Air Shaft
Air Shaft
Issues
W
Issues
Drain
Drain
BP
Stone Works
Farm
Tunnel Hill
Cottages
Manor Farm
Hyde
Hyde Farm
Farm
Thorpewood Farm
West Lodge
Rectory Farm
Blisworth
Air
Blisworth Tunnel
Air
Air
Blisworth Hill
Playing Field
Nursery
Roade Cutting
Highgate
123m
134m
116m
79m
122m
113m
118m
Track
Trac
k
Track
Co Const Bdy
Courteenhall
Track
Track
Path
Path
Path
Blisworth Hill
Farm
Track
Pat
h
Plain Woods
Farm
Track
Path
Buttermilk Hall
Farm
Air
Shaft
Track
Track
Windmill
Cottage
Blaize
Farm
Trac
k
Churchills
Path
Track
Pav
Track
Bridge
Courteenhall
Path
Blisworth
Tunnel Hill
Mews
Tunnel Hill
Farm
Oak
Track
Bridge
Cottage
Southern
Wood
Dovecote
Farm
Path
Path
Track
Lodge
Farm
PathMast
Lodge
Farm
Track
Track
Track
Track
Track
Path
Allot
Gdns
Path
Tk
Track
Track
Dra
in
Drain
Tk
Co C
onst Bdy
Track
ESO
LC
TFI
WS
ROAD
QUINTO
N
YAWMILLERS
DAORTOIRAHC
ENAL
LO
OH
CS
YA
W
WIL
LIAM
S
WAYYDNAS
Track
Track
Drain
Woodville
Elizabeth
School
Farm
Cottage
dis
Pit
ParkGrange
Co
Con
st B
dy
Co Const & CP Bdy
Primary School
Roade
Field
Sports
Hotel
Mast
Mast
Mast
Path
ya
we
ld
ir
Bd
na
ht
ap
to
Y
o
AW
NOIRUTNEC
F
Path
Field
Sports
Iss
Path
Path
Tk
Moors
The
Path
Liby
Hotel
AL
G
54
YWSNAMHGUOLP
Path
GRANGE PARK CP
dis
Pool
Swimming
Wood
Waltham
Maid
Fair
Spinney
Grange
Path
Track
Track
Track
Path
Track
COURTEENHALL CP
ROADE CP
Works
Path
The Briary
Trac
k
Trac
k
Path
Path
Car Park
Burman Farm
PW
PavPW
Pol
Ho
PO
PW
Pav
Ground
Recreation
Roade
Works
CLOSE
PathTrack
Works
Works
Track
MARTLET
Trac
k
Pit
Path
Farm
ENALREGDA
Dovecote
Pav
B
covered
Gdns
Allot
PW
Track
Track
Farm
White House
Tk
Path
Bottom
Bourne
Works
Courteenhall
Courteenhall
Pool
Swimming
Spinney
Charles'
Track
Spinney
DriveSpinney
Windmill
Track
Screen
Quinton
Track
Track
103m
91m
107m
111m
107m
109m
83m
81m
112m
98m
87m
87m
113m
122m
114m
113m
113m
Cover
Hereward's
Alamein
Ground
Great
Sarah's Spinney
The Dyke
Arboretum
Spinney
Allotment
Spinney
Village
Reservoir
Playing Field
Roade Cemetery
Water
Longacre Kennels
Sewage
Deeping
Miller's
Brickhill
Knot
The Wake
Watermill Spinney
Lodge Spinney
Playing Field
Roade Cutting
Dismantled Railway
Fox Field
Round
Clump
House
Dairy Farm House
Dairy Farm
Rectory
The
Cottages
West Lodge
Farm
Home
Cottage
Gamekeepers
Centre
Community
Woodleys Farm
Issues
Issues
Issues
Tower
W
Meml
disused
Dra
in
Issues
Hall
War Meml
Drain
Sinks
FB
FB
Water Tower
Issues
T H E R O O K E R Y
LITTLE
F IE L D
RO
MU
LU
S
CL
D A I N T YGR
B RO
OK
E N D
SA R G E A N T S LA
LA
U R
EL
VA
L LEY
SPAR
TAN
LA K E WALK
LO D G E C L
B
A R NCLOSE
C OW
B
EC K C L
DU
NN
OC
KLA
RO
MA
N
GE
OR
GE
SDR
W R E N
CL
ASHLANE
TOM
SCL
OSE
KE
EP
ER
S
CL
FAR
MER
SC
L
T A N G L EW O O D
EVIR
D
FIN
NEY
Trac
k
Track
Rathvilly
Farm
Field
Playing
Gd
Recn
Pole
Parley
House
Milton
Trac
k
D
88m
73m
73m
83m
88m
E
Tk
NA
L
Trac
k
Track
LARK
Milton Malsor
A45
Mast
UA & CP Bdy
Co Const,
Co Const, UA & CP Bdy
Spring Gardens
House
Maple
V
Mast
ILL
AG
ER
SC
L
Farm
Home
Gaytonway
PINE
Woodbury
CL
Path
RI
Mast
C K Y A R D
WALK
Path
Path
Meml
Golf Course
Farm
Maple
MILTON MALSOR CP
PW
SchPW
House
Deveron
Spring
Farm
TH
EO
AK
S
COLLINGTREEROAD
BARN
LANE
R E C T O R Y
L A N E
HIG
H
S TR E E T
C O L L IN G T R E E ROAD
G R E E N
STR
EE
T
LO
WE R
ROAD
STO
CK
WE
LLW
Y
ASH LANE
S TOC K W E L L R
OA
D
C H E S T N U
T
CL
BROOK VW
PO
AC
HE
RS
CL
CR
YR
OIR
P
CL
OLD
BASS
ETT
CT
WALK
RICKYARD
OR
CH
AR
D W
Y
LC
REW
OL
FN
RO
C
CLO
VE
R F
D
CL
HC
RIB
RDSNILPAHC
CL
SN
RA
B HIGH
WO
OD
LAN
DS
DR
YE
BB
A
THE RIDINGS
KL
AW
TE
EW
SW
OD
AE
M
GROVE
THE
KLAWESORMIRP
HARTWELL RD
FOXFIELD WY
LCEVOLGXOF
CL
SWALE
ES
OL
C
OLD
ESOLCHOME
CL
SK
OO
RB
YELI
AB
R
D
TREVO
C
XOF
LANE
BUTL
INS
LC
NAW
OR
CRES
YROI
RP
SG
NIDI
RE
HT
SE
DA
LG
THE
LANE
BRETTS
CLOSER
EE
D
LCLERRIUQS
CLO
SE
MANOR
DR
COVE
RT
FOX
KLAW
DNUORG
TAERG
SG
NIDI
RTH
E
COPSHAZEL
A45
RO
AD
LON
DO
N
YA
WS
RE
KLA
W
EVIRD
COVERT
FOX
DN
E
HCRUHC
WALL
WIN
CL
RS
BLUEBELL
LCKCOMS
YDAL
WAY
DLEIFX
OF
YAW
ABBOTS
LANE
CROFT
WITHEYSTHE
ROAD
ET
OC
LC
SRELDARTS
ENAL
RE
GD
AB
CL
LLEWGNIR
PS
RN
CNRAB
LC
YELOHCS
ES
O
STOKE
RO
AD
C O U R T E E N H A L LROAD
BLISWORTH
ROAD
KNOCK
LANE
TH
AM
PT
ON
RO
AD
BARN
LANE
CONNEGARLE Y S
WIN
DM
ILL
AV
EN
UE
G R E E N AW A YCLOSE
TO
WC
ES
TE
RR
OAD
LA
DY
FIE L D
WE
LL
SP
R
ING
DOVECOTE
RD
GR
EEN
AWAY
CL
LC
H
ANI
DEM
CL
APPLEBARN
YW
SM
AIL
LIW
CL
ENI
P
LCSGNIK
YW
SE
NIAB
YWNAMOR
CO
WBEC
K CL
BARN MS
THE SADDLERS
WALK
CO
NY
H AR TWE L L
ROAD
NO
RTH
AMPT
ON
RO
AD
A508
AS
HTO
NR
OAD
STR
AT
FO
RD
RO
AD
A508
NORTHAMPTON
ROAD
LON
DO
NR
OA
DA5
08
W A K E WA
Y
WOODLANDS
CHEANEY
DRIVE
HYDE
ROAD
HIGHSTREET
THE
ME
AD
OW
S
SAXONA V E N U E
GR
AFTO
NR
OA
D
C H U R C H
CR
OF
T
STM A R Y S
WAY
C O U R T E E N H A L LR O A D
HYD
EC
L OS
E
THE
LEYS
HOE
WA
Y
BAILEYBROOKS
L A N E
SAXON
A V E N U E
THE
SP
INN
EY
R IC K Y
A R
D
WALK
DO
VE
WA
Y
STR
EET
HGI
H
AVEN
UE
LODGE
EVIRD
SP
INN
EY
YAW
WALKERS
EVIRD
EDIS
NOT
NIU
Q
ROAD
NOTNIUQ
YA
W
WAKE
WAY
WO
DA
EM
BRIDGE
ROAD
WOOLDALE
ENAL
WATERING AVENUE
SAXON
DA
OR
WO
OTTO
N
RO
AD
NO
DN
OL
EN
AL
KOORBGNIDNIW
I NG
BR
O
OK
LA
B E R R YLANE
BA
INE
S W
Y
B A IN
ES
WA
Y
NIW
LCHCRUHC
CLOSEMRAF
GLEBE
KE
ER
C
LA
OH
S
DIA
TO
RC
L
Dra
in
FB
FB
Dra
in
Dra
in
Path
Ground
Recreation
Path
School
Caroline Chisholm
CP
Bdy
CP Bdy
Co Const & CP Bdy
Tk
Playing Field
Liby
Hotel
CPCOLLINGTREE
Path
School
Cemy
Course
Golf
GVC
Grange
Spinney
Track
GVC
Sewage Works
disused
Course
Golf
Path
Glebe Farm
Sch
PW
Gdns
Allot
Collingtree
Club
Path
84m
82m
74m
77m
79m
78m
84m Issues
House
FB
Drain
Drain
FB
Weir
M A L Z O RLANE
M IL T O NCOURT
O RC
H
A
RD C L
CO
L LIN
GTR
EE C T
GREEN ST
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
W
Air Shaft
Air Shaft
Issues
W
Issues
Drain
Drain
BP
Stone Works
Farm
Tunnel Hill
Cottages
Manor Farm
Hyde
Hyde Farm
Farm
Thorpewood Farm
West Lodge
Rectory Farm
Blisworth
Air
Blisworth Tunnel
Air
Air
Blisworth Hill
Playing Field
Nursery
Roade Cutting
Highgate
123m
134m
116m
79m
122m
113m
118m
Track
Trac
k
Track
Co Const Bdy
Courteenhall
Track
Track
Path
Path
Path
Blisworth Hill
Farm
Track
Pat
h
Plain Woods
Farm
Track
Path
Buttermilk Hall
Farm
Air
Shaft
Track
Track
Windmill
Cottage
Blaize
Farm
Trac
k
Churchills
Path
Track
Pav
Track
Bridge
Courteenhall
Path
Blisworth
Tunnel Hill
Mews
Tunnel Hill
Farm
Oak
Track
Bridge
Cottage
Southern
Wood
Dovecote
Farm
Path
Path
Track
Lodge
Farm
PathMast
Lodge
Farm
Track
Track
Track
Track
Track
Path
Allot
Gdns
Path
Tk
Track
Track
Dra
in
Drain
Tk
Co C
onst Bdy
Track
ESO
LC
TFI
WS
ROAD
QUINTO
N
YAWMILLERS
DAORTOIRAHC
ENAL
LO
OH
CS
YA
W
WIL
LIAM
S
WAYYDNAS
Track
Track
Drain
Woodville
Elizabeth
School
Farm
Cottage
dis
Pit
ParkGrange
Co
Con
st B
dy
Co Const & CP Bdy
Primary School
Roade
Field
Sports
Hotel
Mast
Mast
Mast
Path
ya
we
ld
ir
Bd
na
ht
ap
to
Y
o
AW
NOIRUTNEC
F
Path
Field
Sports
Iss
Path
Path
Tk
Moors
The
Path
Liby
Hotel
AL
G
54
YWSNAMHGUOLP
Path
GRANGE PARK CP
dis
Pool
Swimming
Wood
Waltham
Maid
Fair
Spinney
Grange
Path
Track
Track
Track
Path
Track
COURTEENHALL CP
ROADE CP
Works
Path
The Briary
Trac
k
Trac
k
Path
Path
Car Park
Burman Farm
PW
PavPW
Pol
Ho
PO
PW
Pav
Ground
Recreation
Roade
Works
CLOSE
PathTrack
Works
Works
Track
MARTLET
Trac
k
Pit
Path
Farm
ENALREGDA
Dovecote
Pav
B
covered
Gdns
Allot
PW
Track
Track
Farm
White House
Tk
Path
Bottom
Bourne
Works
Courteenhall
Courteenhall
Pool
Swimming
Spinney
Charles'
Track
Spinney
DriveSpinney
Windmill
Track
Screen
Quinton
Track
Track
103m
91m
107m
111m
107m
109m
83m
81m
112m
98m
87m
87m
113m
122m
114m
113m
113m
Cover
Hereward's
Alamein
Ground
Great
Sarah's Spinney
The Dyke
Arboretum
Spinney
Allotment
Spinney
Village
Reservoir
Playing Field
Roade Cemetery
Water
Longacre Kennels
Sewage
Deeping
Miller's
Brickhill
Knot
The Wake
Watermill Spinney
Lodge Spinney
Playing Field
Roade Cutting
Dismantled Railway
Fox Field
Round
Clump
House
Dairy Farm House
Dairy Farm
Rectory
The
Cottages
West Lodge
Farm
Home
Cottage
Gamekeepers
Centre
Community
Woodleys Farm
Issues
Issues
Issues
Tower
W
Meml
disused
Dra
in
Issues
Hall
War Meml
Drain
Sinks
FB
FB
Water Tower
Issues
T H E R O O K E R Y
LITTLE
F IE L D
RO
MU
LU
S
CL
D A I N T YGR
B RO
OK
E N D
SA R G E A N T S LA
LA
U R
EL
VA
L LEY
SPAR
TAN
LA K E WALK
LO D G E C L
B
A R NCLOSE
C OW
B
EC K C L
DU
NN
OC
KLA
RO
MA
N
GE
OR
GE
SDR
W R E N
CL
ASHLANE
TOM
SCL
OSE
KE
EP
ER
S
CL
FAR
MER
SC
L
T A N G L EW O O D
EVIR
D
FIN
NEY
Trac
k
Track
Rathvilly
Farm
Field
Playing
Gd
Recn
Pole
Parley
House
Milton
Trac
k
D
88m
73m
73m
83m
88m
E
Tk
NA
L
Trac
k
Track
LARK
Milton Malsor
Mast
UA & CP Bdy
Co Const,
Co Const, UA & CP Bdy
Spring Gardens
House
Maple
V
Mast
ILL
AG
ER
SC
L
Farm
Home
Gaytonway
PINE
Woodbury
CL
Path
RI
Mast
C K Y A R D
WALK
Path
Path
Meml
Golf Course
Farm
Maple
MILTON MALSOR CP
PW
SchPW
House
Deveron
Spring
Farm
TH
EO
AK
S
COLLINGTREEROAD
BARN
LANE
R E C T O R Y
L A N E
HIG
H
S TR E E T
C O L L IN G T R E E ROAD
G R E E N
STR
EE
T
LO
WE R
ROAD
STO
CK
WE
LLW
Y
ASH LANE
S TOC K W E L L R
OA
D
C H E S T N U
T
CL
BROOK VW
PO
AC
HE
RS
CL
CR
YR
OIR
P
CL
OLD
BASS
ETT
CT
WALK
RICKYARD
OR
CH
AR
D W
Y
LC
REW
OL
FN
RO
C
CLO
VE
R F
D
CL
HC
RIB
RDSNILPAHC
CL
SN
RA
B HIGH
WO
OD
LAN
DS
DR
YE
BB
A
THE RIDINGS
KL
AW
TE
EW
SW
OD
AE
M
GROVE
THE
KLAWESORMIRP
HARTWELL RD
FOXFIELD WY
LCEVOLGXOF
CL
SWALE
ES
OL
C
OLD
ESOLCHOME
CL
SK
OO
RB
YELI
AB
R
D
TREVO
C
XOF
LANE
BUTL
INS
LC
NAW
OR
CRES
YROI
RP
SG
NIDI
RE
HT
SE
DA
LG
THE
LANE
BRETTS
CLOSER
EE
D
LCLERRIUQS
CLO
SE
MANOR
DR
COVE
RT
FOX
KLAW
DNUORG
TAERG
SG
NIDI
RTH
E
COPSHAZEL
RO
AD
YA
WS
RE
KLA
W
EVIRD
COVERT
FOX
DN
E
HCRUHC
WALL
WIN
CL
RS
BLUEBELL
LCKCOMS
YDAL
WAY
DLEIFX
OF
YAW
ABBOTS
LANE
CROFT
WITHEYSTHE
ROAD
ET
OC
0 100 200 400
Metres
500300 600 700 800 900 1000
N
This drawing, the works and concepts depicted are copyright of the consultant and may not be reproduced or made use of, either directly or indirectly without express written consent. All heights, levels, sizes and dimensions to be checked on site before any work is put to hand.
Drawing Status:
CAD Reference:
Drawn:
Date:
Scale @A1:
Project No: Drawing No: Rev:
M1 Junction 15 WestNorthampton
pHp Architectswww.peter-haddon.com
RED LINE PLAN-
PRELIMINARY
4054-R003a
RM / PL
MAY 2016
1/7500
4054-R00q R009 P5
Final route of the by-pass to be determinedthrough consultation. The area highlighteddefines the total land for the 2 differentroutes which will be reduced when route isagreed and finalised.
LOCATION PLAN
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 9NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2. SUMMARY OF THE NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY PROPOSALS
Description of the proposed development
2.1. The proposed development which is the subject of the application for Development Consent
comprises:
• An intermodal freight terminal including container storage and HGV parking, with
new rail sidings within the site to serve individual warehouses;
• Capability to provide a ‘rapid rail freight’ facility as part of the intermodal freight
terminal;
• Up to 468,000 sq m (approximately 5 million sq ft) (gross internal area) of warehousing
and ancillary buildings, with up to 155,000 sq m of additional floorspace provided in
the form of mezzanine floorspace;
• new road infrastructure and works to the existing road network, including provision of
a new access and associated works to the A508, a new bypass to the village of Roade,
and substantial improvements to Junction 15 of the M1;
• Strategic landscaping and tree planting, including drainage attenuation features, and
diverted public rights of way;
• Earthworks and demolition of existing structures on-site.
2.2. Excluding the land required for the Roade Bypass (the extent and precise location of which
is still to be determined) the total application area – or Order Limits – are approximately
247ha (610 acres) including the works associated with Junction 15 and the A45. The SRFI
site itself covers approximately 185 hectares (457 acres approx.). This includes an area
of land within the southern part of the site, south of the existing watercourse, which is
intended to be retained for agricultural use by the existing landowner. A ‘red line’ location
plan is included as Figure 1, and a Draft Illustrative Masterplan as Figure 2.
2.3. The SRFI site is located immediately to the west of Junction 15 of the M1, and to the east
of the Northampton Loop railway line. The A508 road provides part of the site’s eastern
boundary. The M1 runs along the remainder of the site’s eastern boundary, with the largely
residential area of Collingtree (in Northampton Borough) immediately beyond the M1.
Collingtree Road comprises the northern boundary of the SRFI site.
2.4. The SRFI site is currently agricultural land, well contained by the road and rail infrastructure
referred to above. Beyond the site boundary and separated from the site by open land, are
the South Northamptonshire villages of Milton Malsor to the west, Blisworth to the south-
west, Roade to the south, and Courteenhall to the east. Grange Park is located to the east
of the site, to the east of the M1 and Junction 15.
PAGE 10
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2.5. The precise alignment of the proposed Roade Bypass is not yet finalised, but two general
corridors have been identified following initial environmental assessment and preliminary
highways design work. The two potential alignments are both around the western side of
Roade across mostly agricultural land, but also include crossing the West Coast Main Line
railway.
2.6. The decision about the chosen route, and the nature of the junctions with existing roads
will be informed in part by the results of public consultation and also by dialogue with other
consultees.
2.7. Key ‘parameters’ regarding the maximum building heights and the maximum total number
of buildings, as well as the ‘zones’ or corridors in which buildings and key infrastructure will
be located will be fixed as part of the application process, and defined in the ‘Parameters
Plan’.
2.8. The Illustrative Masterplan is one potential form of development which would be in
accordance with the proposed parameters. The currently proposed Parameters Plan is
included as Figure 3. The Parameters are the subject of ongoing assessment and will be
reviewed as part of that process.
Why is Northampton Gateway a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project?
2.9. Whether or not development is a “Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project” (NSIP)
depends upon whether or not development comes within the description of NSIPS set out
in Sections 14 to 34 of the Planning Act 2008 (“2008 Act”).
2.10. It is apparent that the proposed development complies with the criteria for a Rail Freight
Interchange under Section 26 of the Act and therefore a DCO will be required.
2.11. The elements of the proposed development which are not an integral part of the SRFI are
all considered to be ‘associated development’.
2.12. The key criteria which define this as an NSIP are:
• Site area (in excess of 60 ha)
• Scale and nature of the uses proposed
PAGE 11NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
NU
S
VIEW
HIGH
LC
SRELDARTS
ENAL
RE
GD
AB
HILL
HC
RUHC
EG
DIR
BP
PU
RH
T
CL
LLEWGNIR
PS
ORCHARD CL
RN
CNRAB
LCYELOHCS
ES
O
STOKE
RO
AD
C O U R T E E N H A L LROAD
GAYTON ROAD
BLISWORTH
ROAD
KNOCK
LANE
ST A T IO N
R O A D
NO
RT
HA
MP
TO
NR
OA
D
BARN
LANE
CONNEGARL E Y S
C H A P E L
LANE
NO
RT
HA
MP
TO
NR
OAD
HIGH STREET
BUTTMEAD
POND
BA
NK
WIN
D MIL
LA
VE
NU
E
GREENSIDE
E N U E
CH
UR
CH
LANE
G R E E N AW A YCLOSE
TO
WC
ES
TE
RR
OAD
E N U E
HO
ME
CL O
SE
EA
ST F
IEL
D
LITTLE LANE
LA
DY
F IE L D
WE
LL
SP
R
ING
DOVECOTE
RD
W E S TB R O O
K
IL L T O P
GR
EEN
AWAY
CL
ASHLEY CT
LC
H
ANI
DEM
CL
ROMAN
AV
AUG
USTA
CL
SPARTAN
CL
APPLEBARN
CTFRO
STS
YW
SM
AIL
LIW
CL
LORDSWOOD
CL
ENI
P
LCSGNIK
GA
TEW
AY
CL
YW
SENI
AB
LCSEODDEB
YWNAMOR
CO
WBEC
K CL
LC
TN
OM
KA
O
BARN MS
THE SADDLERS
LC
ET
AG
DL
EIF
TF
OR
CK
CO
R
JARRETTS YDLC
EN
OT
SEKAR
WALK
CO
NY
LC
H A R TWE L L
ROAD
NO
RTH
AMPT
ON
RO
AD
A508
M1
AS
HTO
NR
OAD
STR
AT
FO
RD
RO
AD
A508
M1
NORTHAMPTON
ROAD
LON
DO
NR
OA
DA5
08
A45
W A K E WA
Y
WOODLANDS
CHEANEY
DRIVE
HYDE
ROAD
HIGHSTREET
THE
ME
AD
OW
S
SAXON A V E N U E
M1
GR
AFTO
NR
OA
D
C H U R C H
CR
OF
T
STM A R Y S
WAY
C O U R T E E N H A L LR O A D
HYD
EC
L OS
E
THE
LEYS
HOE
WA
Y
BAILEYBROOKS
L A N E
SAXON
A V E N U E
THE
SP
INN
EY
R IC K Y
A RD
WALK
DO
VE
WA
Y
AL
LIV
LLIHEZEERB
ESOLC
LE
RR
OS
EVIRD
DR
OF
TA
RT
S
STR
EET
HGI
H
EUNEVAATSUGUA
RO
ADN
EV
AH
TS
ER
AVEN
UE
LODGE
EVIRD
SP
INN
EY
RO
AD
ES
OLC
MR
AF
YAW
WALKERS
EVIRD
LAINOLOC
EDIS
NO
TNI
UQ
ROAD
NO
DN
O L
ROAD
NOTNIUQ
EVIR
D
SWOLLOH
YDAL
M1
YA
W
WAKE
WAY
WO
DA
EM
BRIDGE
LANE
BERRY
LAN
E
WATER
STREET
HIGH
HIL
LC
UR
TLE
E
ROAD
WOOLDALE
ENAL
WATERING
ROAD
STTUB
DAOR
EERTWOR
DRIVE
EP
OH
WO
OTTO
N
AVENUE
SAXON
DA
OR
WO
OTTO
N
A45
RO
AD
NO
DN
OL
ROAD
WOOLD
ALE
EN
AL
KOORBGNIDNIW
ING
BR
O
OK
LA
T U R N B ER R YLANE
E
PL A C E
S H E D F IE L D
WA
Y
BA
INE
S W
Y
S H A R DC
L OS
E
B A IN
ES
WA
Y
WATER
S
CL
NIW
EN
ED
YR
EK
LCHCRUHC
CIW
YAWEGDEH
CLOSEMRAF
GLEBE
KE
ER
C
LA
OH
S
EVEER
WEIV
NOT
FA
R
G
DRESOLCMRAF
EU
NE
VA
CH
ESTN
UT
DI A
TO
RC
L
Track
Dra
in
FB
FB
Dra
in
Dra
in
Path
Ground
Recreation
Path
Path
MANORSIMPSON
AND
CP
WOOTON FIELDSWOOTTON,
Mast
School
Caroline Chisholm
CP
Bdy
CP Bdy
Co Const & CP Bdy
Primary School
Preston Hedges
Tk
Playing Field
Liby
Iss
Hotel
CPCOLLINGTREE
Path
School
Cemy
Course
Golf
Hotel
GVC
Iss
Iss
Est
Ind
Grange
Spinney
Track
GVC
Sewage Works
disused
Course
Golf
Path
Glebe Farm
Sch
PW
Gdns
Allot
Collingtree
Spinney
Little Gap
PW
Cemy
Sch
PW
Club
Path
Centre
Community
84m
82m
89m
74m
77m
79m
98m
78m
84m Issues
Ground
Sports
House
Sinks
FB
Drain
Drain
FB
Weir
M A L ZO RLANE
M IL T O NCOURT
O R
CH
ARD C L
CO
L L
ING
TR
EE C T
S P Y
GL
AS
SH
L
GREEN ST
M1
F
R O S T Y H W
LOR
DS
WO
OD
Cross
Manor House
Issues
Issues
Sinks
Drai
n
Overflow
remains of
Sinks
Hall
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
W
Air Shaft
Air Shaft
Issues
W
Issues
Drain
Drain
BP
Stone Works
Farm
Tunnel Hill
Cottages
Manor Farm
Hyde
Hyde Farm
Farm
Thorpewood Farm
West Lodge
Rectory Farm
Nun Wood
Blisworth
Works
Nursery
Air
Blisworth Tunnel
Air
Air
Blisworth Hill
Playing Field
Nursery
Roade Cutting
Highgate
Grand Union Canal
107m
108m
86m
91m
123m
134m
116m
79m
122m
113m
118m
BLISWORTH CP
Blisworth
Junction
Sewage
Track
Trac
k
Track
PW
PW
PO
Track
Co Const Bdy
Courteenhall
Track
Track
New Tunnel
Hill Farm
Path
Path
Path
Blisworth Hill
Farm
Track
Pat
h
Plain Woods
Farm
Track
Path
Path
Path
Trac
k
Buttermilk Hall
Farm
Navigation
Cottage
Air
Shaft
Track
Track
Windmill
Cottage
Blaize
Farm
Trac
k
Path
Churchills
Path
Track
Abattoir
Factory
Towing Path
Pav
Track
Bridge
Courteenhall
Path
Sch
Blisworth
Tunnel Hill
Mews
Tunnel Hill
Farm
Oak
Track
Tel Ex
PH
Highcliffe
Farm
Bridge
Cottage
Southern
Wood
Dovecote
Farm
Path
PH
Path
Track
Lodge
Farm
Track
PathMast
Glebe
Farm
Iss
Track
Tk
Business
Park
Lodge
Farm
Track
Track
Track
Track
Track
Path
Allot
Gdns
Path
Tk
Track
FB
Dra
in
Allot
Gdns
Track
Track
Track
Path
Trac
k
Trac
k
Dra
in
Drain
Tk
Co C
onst Bdy
Track
CL
ESO
LC
TFI
WS
ROAD
QUINTO
N
YAWMILLERS
DAORTOIRAHC
YAW
NROCREPPEP
ENAL
LO
OH
CS
WO
DA
EM
GN
OL
YA
W
WIL
LIAM
S
EV
EE
RG
EL
DDI
M
YAWNO
GARRAT
WAYYDNAS
WOL
LO
H
Y
HIGH
S T
RE
E
Track
Track
Wind Turbine
Wind Turbine
Drain
Woodville
Elizabeth
School
Farm
Cottage
dis
Pit
ParkGrange
Co
Con
st B
dy
Co Const & CP Bdy
Primary School
Roade
Field
Sports
Hotel
Mast
Mast
Mast
Path
ya
we
ld
ir
Bd
na
ht
ap
t
TSORF
o
Y
o
AW
NOIRUTNEC
AG
YN
AF
FIT
EVORGM
L
E
F
Lodge
Ashton
Path
Field
Sports
Iss
Path
Path
Tk
Moors
The
Risings
The
Path
Liby
Hotel
AL
G
54A
YW
EVE
ER
G
ELT
TIL
YWSNAMHGUOLP
LC
LL
Path
GRANGE PARK CP
dis
Pool
EN
Swimming
Wood
Waltham
Maid
Fair
Spinney
Grange
Path
Track
Track
Track
Path
Cottage
Glebe
Track
COURTEENHALL CP
ROADE CP
Works
Path
The Briary
Trac
k
Trac
k
Path
Path
Car Park
Burman Farm
PW
PavPW
Pol
Ho
PO
PW
Pav
Ground
Recreation
Roade
Works
KC
OH
CLOSE
PathTrack
Works
Works
Track
MARTLET
L
Trac
k
CDROFHCTID
ESOLCCHISOLM
Pit
Path
Farm
ENALREGDA
Dovecote
Pav
Courteenhall
B
CLOSE
CROFT
ST
TU
B
covered
Gdns
Allot
PW
EG
Track
DIRB
NOTLI
Track
Farm
M
GREEVE
White House
Tk
Path
LC
Wood
PA
GE
L
Liddell
TT
EN
E
Bottom
Bourne
Works
Courteenhall
Courteenhall
D
Pool
Swimming
Spinney
IS
Y
Charles'
N
Track
Spinney
DriveSpinney
Windmill
Track
PW
MoatThe Lodge
Pool
Swimming
Farm
Glebe
Farm
Lower
Works
Screen
Quinton
Track
Track
86m
103m
91m
107m
111m
107m
109m
83m
81m
112m
98m
87m
87m
113m
122m
114m
113m
113m
Cover
Hereward's
Fox Covert
Alamein
Ground
Great
Sarah's Spinney
The Dyke
Arboretum
Spinney
Allotment
Spinney
Village
Reservoir
Playing Field
Roade Cemetery
Water
Longacre Kennels
Sewage
Deeping
Miller's
Brickhill
Knot
The Wake
Watermill Spinney
Lodge Spinney
Playing Field
Roade Cutting
Dismantled Railway
Oaklea
Fox Field
East Lodge
Round
Clump
House
Dairy Farm House
Dairy Farm
Rectory
The
Cottages
West Lodge
Farm
Home
Cottage
Gamekeepers
Centre
Community
Woodleys Farm
Issues
Sinks
Issues
Issues
Drain
Issues
Issues
Issues
Tower
W
Meml
disused
Dra
in
Issues
Hall
War Meml
Drain
Sinks
FB
FB
Water Tower
Issues
T
T H E R O O K E R Y
S TO C K W E L L AV
VE
R
D A N TV A L E
W O O D G A T E R D
LITTLE
F IE LD
FA
RM
CL
OS E R D
SA
ND
OV
ER
FO
SB
ER R Y
CL
LOW
GREEVE
WH
ITT LE
SC
S
S P A R T A N C LO S E
RO
MU
LU
S
CL
D A I N T YGR
BLACKYMORELA
H O M E S T E A D R S
WO
OT
TO
NB
RO
OK
CL
BRO
OK
E N DF R O S T YHOL
SA R G E A N T S LA
MIL
TO
NBRID
GE
LA
U R
EL
VA
LLEY
H O C K N E L L C L
SPAR
TAN
CL
CO
PY
MO
OR
CL
L A K E WALK
LO D G E C L
THEM U L L IO N S
FARMCLOSE RD
OA
KG
RO
VE
BAR NC
LOSE
C O
WB
EC K C L
DU
NN
OC
KLA
D O WN
SW
AY
RO
MA
NC
L
L A N E S ID E HW
B
C IN
N
A
MO
N
CL
BA
NC
RO
FT
WY
HE
DG
E
GE
OR
GE
SDR
VILLA WAY
W R E N
CL
ASHLANE
TOM
SCL
OSE
S A N D OV
ER
KE
EP
ER
S
CL
FAR
MER
SC
L
BA
SIL
CL
CHESTNUT AV
T A N G L EW O O D
Drai
n
Trac
k
Lock
Lock
Lock
Lock
Drawbridge
Lock
Lock
Lock
Lock
Lock
EVI
RD
DNALHSARB
A45
DA
OR
LONDON
EVIR
D
FIN
NEY
E
Arm
Farm
B U R H A M CL
B A N C R
N
O F T C L
AL
N
Trac
k
EE
RG
E
L S F IE
NA
LN
REDLIW
L D
Track
Rathvilly
Farm
Field
Playing
Gd
Recn
Pole
Parley
House
Milton
Trac
k
BUSH
SN
OT
RO
M
D
C L
88m
S H A T
T ER
ST
73m
73m
83m
88m
88m
91m
ON
E
E
LONGMW
VIR
D
LAN
GFO
RD
E
EAST HUNSBURY CP
Tk
NA
Path
L
Trac
k
Mast
Track
LARK
ES
OLCNOR
FF
AS
DA
Golf Course
Milton Malsor
ORWOODGATE
A45
YW
Landfill Site
Mast
MastCo C
onst
Bdy
UA & CP Bdy
Co Const,
Co Const, UA & CP Bdy
Spring Gardens
House
Maple
V
Mast
ILL
AG
ER
SC
L
Farm
Home
Gaytonway
PINE
Woodbury
CL
FE
Depot
Path
N N E L C T
CHUR
CH V
W
FLIN
TER
S C
L
Jetties
R
Depot
I
Trac
k
Mast
C K Y A R D
WALK
Spr
Path
Path
Trac
k
dis
Drain
Drain
Sta
Ppg
Drai
n
disused
T
Meml
Dra
in
H
Golf Course
Trac
k
Workings
Farm
Maple
E A S H E S
BANCROFT
Co Const Bdy MILTON MALSOR CP
PW
SchPW
House
Deveron
Spring
Farm
Sewage Works
Lodge
Shepherd's
School
Marina
Gayton
TH
EO
AK
S
BE
L
FR
Y
TOW
CEST
ER
ROAD
M1
A43
COLLINGTREEROAD
BARN
LANE
R E C T O R Y
L A N E
HIG
H
S TR E E T
C O L L IN G T R E E ROAD
G R E E NS
TR
EE
T
B E L F R YL A N E
M1
LO
WER
ROAD
M1
STO
CK
WE
LLW
Y
ASH LANE
S T OC K W E L L R
OA
D
T U R N B E R R YLANE
A UG
U S T A
A V EN
UE
SPY
GL A S S
HILL
R US H Y
END
M
1
DO
WN
S
WA Y
C H E S T N U
T
CL
LA
BROOK VW
PO
AC
HE
RS
CL
OAKMONT CL
M A R JO R AM
CR
YR
OI
RP
CL
OLD
BASS
ETT
CT
WALK
RICKYARD
OR
CH
AR
D W
Y
L
CRE
W
OL
FN
RO
C
CLO
VE
R F
D
CL
HC
RIB
RDSNILPAHC
CL
SN
RA
B HIGH
WO
OD
LAN
DS
DR
YE
BB
A
THE RIDINGS
KL
AW
TE
EW
SW
OD
AE
M
GROVE
THE
KLAWESORMIRP
HARTWELL RD
FOXFIELD WY
LCEVOLGXOF
CL
SWALE
ES
OL
C
OLD
ESOLCHOME
CL
SK
OO
RB
YELI
AB
R
D
TREVO
CXO
F
LANE
BUTL
INS
LC
NAW
OR
CRES
YROI
RP
SG
NIDI
RE
HT
SE
DA
LG
THE
LANE
BRETTS
CLOSER
EE
D
LCLERRIUQS
CLO
SE
MANOR
DR
COVE
RT
FOX
KLAW
DNUORG
TAERG
S
GNI
DIR
THE
COPSHAZEL
A45
RO
AD
LON
DO
N
YA
WS
RE
KLA
W
EVIRD
COVERT
FOX
DN
E
HCRUHC
WALL
WIN
CL
RS
BLUEBELL
LCKCOMS
YDAL
WAY
DLEIFXOF
YAW
ABBOTS
LANE
CROFT
WITHEYSTHE
ROAD
ET
OC
0 100 200 400
Metres
500300 600 700 900 1000800
Roade
Zone B
SHEET 1Document x.xxx(pHp 4054-R010)
117.3m
Lodge
Stoke Plain
Air
Track
Track
116.4m
Sinks
Sinks
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
Dismantled Railwa
y
Track
FB
Netherwood
Ward Bdy
Trac
k
Roade
Zone A1
Zone A2
Zone A3
Zone A4
Shaft
Trac
k
Silos
Path (um)
Issues
Track
Path (um)
CS
Dismantled Railway
Def
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
Path (um)
100.5m
Pond
Dra
in
Trac
k
CS
Track
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
Communication Mast
Rock Vale
MP 59
CS
ED & Ward Bdy
Track
ASHTO
N R
OAD
Track
MP .25
Path (um)
Pond
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2015. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
LEGEND
Zone B rail interchange / rapid freight
Limits of deviation
S2
Telecomms mast existing position tobe relocated
Landscape open space includinglandscape screen bunding
New road infrastructure andimprovements to existing infrastructureincluding landscaping
Zone A development area
Existing woodland to be retained
Rail corridor including new rail lineand landscaping
Order Limits
Area for development signageS1 = Sign Board max size (includingsupporting frame) 7.5m High x 18.3mWide x 1.3m DeepS2 = Totem Sign max size (includingsupporting frame) 15.5m High x 4.0mWide x 4.0m Deep
S1
Farm buildings to be demolished
Telecomms mast relocated position
Maximum Plateau level (in mAbove Ordnance Datum)
Building Height Range measured toroof ridge / highest point
1 to 8
468,000 (5,037,510sqft)
18.5m
S C H E D U L E O F P A R A M E T E R S
Total
1 to 4
Gantry Cranes 18.0 m max. ht
180,000 (1,937,520)
1 to 4 91.00
18.5m
1 to 4
Zone A1
Zone A2
Zone
Zone A3
Number of Units
Zone A4
Maximum Development Floorspaceper Zone(Excluding Mezzanine Floorspace) m² (sqft)
85.50
Zone B
Total4 to 20
1 to 4
MAXIMUM TOTAL GROUND FLOOR FLOORSPACE (ZONE A EXCLUDING MEZZANINE FLOORSPACE)*
1858 (20,000sqft) Buildings 10.0m
Container Storage max height 12.0m
TotalTotal
18.5m
1 to 4
152,000 (1,636,128)
91.00
18.5m
55,000 (592,020)
91.00126,000 (1,356,264)
93.00
1858 (20,000sqft)
In Addition To The Floorspace Figures Above, Up To 155,000sqm (1,668,420sqft)Of Floorspace Can be Provided In The Form Of Mezzanine Floorspace To Units Within Zone A
* This total floorspace is the maximum floorspace (excluding mezzanine space) that will be developed across zone A notwithstanding that themaximum floorspace stated for each zone A1 to A4 combined would exceed this figure i.e it is the overall floorspace cap for zone A excludingmezzanine floorspace.
This drawing, the works and concepts depicted are copyright of the consultant and may not be reproduced or made use of, either directly or indirectly without express written consent. All heights, levels, sizes and dimensions to be checked on site before any work is put to hand.
Drawing Status:
CAD Reference:
Drawn:
Date:
Scale @A1:
Project No: Drawing No: Rev:
M1 Junction 15 WestNorthampton
pHp Architectswww.peter-haddon.com
PARAMETERS PLANKEY LAYOUT
PRELIMINARY
4054-R003g
RM / PL
JUL 2016
1/10000
4054 R007 P9
N
DRAFTPARAMETERS PLAN
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 13NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
ILLUSTRATIVE MASTERPLAN
PAGE 14
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
What is a Strategic Rail Freight Interchange? Why do we need it?
2.13. The Northampton Gateway proposal is a ‘Strategic Rail Freight Interchange’, usually
abbreviated to ‘SRFI’. Alternatively, National Policy and legislation sometimes refers to
them as Rail Freight Interchanges (RFI). In simple terms, these operate like ports, with
goods arriving and transferred from train to lorry, or vice versa, as part of the supply chain
and distribution of freight and goods around the UK. The activity related to the movement
of goods is often referred to as ‘distribution’ or ‘logistics’, and is an important economic
sector and employer in its own right.
2.14. The proposals are a response to an explicit recognition by Government of the need for
more SRFIs to help deliver the economic and environmental benefits and outcomes from
a continued shift from road to rail freight. Government policy is discussed in further detail
below.
2.15. Some goods will come to an SRFI and be stored before being collected or sent somewhere
else at a later date, while others will only be at the SRFI long enough to be moved from
one vehicle to another before continuing their journey. Some goods might be processed or
packaged at, or close to, an SRFI before being moved again. The freight and goods which
will use Northampton Gateway will come from, or be sent to, destinations around the UK
via the road and/or rail network, including via the UK’s key sea ports, many of which are
connected to the rail freight network.
Why at this site?
2.16. The site of the proposed Northampton Gateway is at a strategically important location with
excellent access to the national road and rail networks, making it a sound and logical choice
for an SRFI.
2.17. The site is directly adjacent to the main north-south motorway in England, and also close
to the strategic east- west A14 route via the A45, as well as close to junctions with the M45
and M6 motorways. The site has very good rail connections to all the major container ports
on the South Coast, East Coast and Thames Estuary, and is linked to the Northampton Loop
Line which feeds into the West Coast Main Line which is the UK’s main freight corridor (it
handles more than 40% of all UK rail freight).
2.18. In addition to port related traffic, the site will also be well positioned to allow goods to be
transferred by rail between this SRFI and other regional rail terminals elsewhere, and will
form part of a ‘national network’ of SRFIs envisaged by national policy (see below).
PAGE 15NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2.19. In addition, the site is close to a number of urban areas, including not only Northampton, but
it would also serve a core market including Milton Keynes, Towcester, and Wellingborough.
These, and other surrounding towns and villages, in combination with commuters using the
M1, would also provide a supply of labour to fill the jobs created.
2.20. In light of all of the above, this location is ideally suited to accommodate an SRFI. It is also
aligned with national policy with regard to the locations for SRFIs as explained below..
2.21. The Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) for the South East Midlands (SEMLEP) recognises
and promotes the strengths and opportunities of the area for logistics and distribution
activity due to its accessibility to national road and rail networks, and to national markets.
This sectoral strength is recognised through a number of the priorities in their Strategic
Economic Plan, and the associated evidence base including the ‘Logistics Report’ of 2013.
2.22. Northamptonshire has historically embraced the ‘growth’ agenda, with the national
‘Sustainable Communities Plan’ encouraging significant infrastructure and housing growth
in the ‘Milton Keynes & South Midlands Growth Area’ which included Northamptonshire.
Northampton was a major focus for this growth as the main urban settlement in the County,
and the approach explicitly recognised the need for new jobs alongside the new housing
growth planned. The current Core Strategy is still ambitious, and plans for provision of
41,760 new homes across West Northamptonshire between 2011 and 2029, with 25,758 in
Northampton Borough, with a jobs growth target (for monitoring purposes) of 28,500 in
the period 2008-2029.
National Policy
2.23. The Government published policy guidance on SRFI in November 2011, and updated this with
the National Policy Statement in December 2014. This is available via the Department for
Transport’s website, and a link is also provided in the project website (www.northampton-
gateway.co.uk) – also see Section 4 of this document.
2.24. The National Policy Statement is clear that there is a need for a network of SRFIs, and
forecasts are for significant growth in freight traffic, including a doubling in container traffic
by 2030. There is a long lead-in to the delivery of SRFIs taking into account the planning
process and construction process – to deliver the capacity needed by the forecasts new
SRFIs need to be identified and brought forward without delay.
2.25. The National Policy Statement does not define the envisaged network of SRFIs in detail,
with sites to be brought forward and delivered by the private sector in response to the
priorities and objectives set by Government policy. Increasing the use of rail transport, as
opposed to HGV road vehicles, is seen by Government as essential in terms of the benefits
of reducing road congestion, but also in terms of improved environmental sustainability and
increased energy efficiency.
PAGE 16
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2.26. The National Policy Statement (NPS) recognises the importance of SRFIs in terms of both
economic development and addressing climate change. The Statement makes explicit
references to their role in facilitating the movement of freight from road to rail, and in
reducing freight mileage on both national and local road networks. This is seen as central
to Government’s vision for transport which is described as:
‘Government’s vision for transport is for a low carbon sustainable transport system that
is an engine for economic growth, but is also safer and improves the quality of life in our
communities…....The transfer of freight from road to rail has an important part to play in a
low carbon economy and in helping to address climate change.’ (NPS 2014, paragraph 2.53)
2.27. The NPS describes the aim of an SRFI as:
‘…to optimise the use of rail in the freight journey by maximising rail trunk haul and
minimising some elements of the secondary distribution leg by road, through co-location
of other distribution and freight activities. SRFIs are a key element in reducing the cost to
users of moving freight by rail and are important in facilitating the transfer of freight from
road to rail, thereby reducing the trip mileage of freight movements on both the national
and local road networks.’ (NPS 2014, paragraph 2.44)
2.28. The NPS describes the main drivers of demand and need for SRFIs, summarising them in
paragraphs 2.46 – 2.52 as:
• The changing needs of the logistics sector – with reference to the need for a network
of SRFIs to aid sustainable distribution and the changing needs of the ports and retail
sectors as examples of the evolving logistics industry.
• Rail freight growth – described in the context of additional port capacity (e.g. at
Felixstowe North and London Gateway) which will lead to a significant increase in
logistics operations, and increase the need for SFRI to reduce dependence on road
freight. The NPS refers to freight forecasts, although additional forecasts have been
produced since – also see below;
• Environmental – with recognition of the strategic benefits which drive the need for
more SRFIs with regard to reducing carbon dioxide emissions (and other emissions),
but also the need to ‘minimise’ local land use and transport impacts;
• UK economy, national and local benefits – the NPS recognises the considerable
benefits for the local economy with regards to employment growth, but also skills
development.
PAGE 17NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2.29. It is explicit in the NPS that Government believes it is important to facilitate the development
of the intermodal rail freight industry as part of a ‘low carbon and sustainable transport
system’. To help facilitate the increased shift of freight from road to rail Government policy
is based around several key conclusions:
‘a network of SRFIs is needed across the regions, to serve, regional, sub-regional and cross-
regional markets’ (NPS 2014, paragraph 2.54); and
‘there is a compelling need for an expanded network of SRFIs’ (NPS 2014, paragraph 2.56).
2.30. While it does not seek to identify specific sites or locations to deliver the expanded network
of SRFIs sought, the NPS does include some useful general and strategic references to
locational issues. In summary, the NPS policy regarding the location of SRFIs is:
‘SRFI capacity needs to be provided at a wide range of locations, to provide the flexibility
needed to match the changing demands of the market, possibly with traffic moving from
existing RFI to new larger facilities.’ (NPS 2014, paragraph 2.58)
2.31. In addition, the NPS includes a number of generic criteria or characteristics to describe the
type of locations in which they are expected to be developed. These can be summarised as
locations which:
• are located alongside the major rail routes, close to major trunk roads as well as near
to the conurbations that consume the goods (paragraph 2.45);
• are accessible to likely sources of labour/workforce (paragraph 2.52)
• have good connectivity both with the road and rail networks, in particular the
strategic rail freight network (para 2.54);
• are near the business markets they will serve – major urban centres, or groups of
centres – and are linked to key supply chain routes (paragraph 2.56);
2.32. The Northampton Gateway proposals align very well with these criteria, being located
on the national strategic road and rail freight networks, adjacent to the built-up area of
Northampton and accessible from a number of other nearby urban areas and other
communities.
Freight Growth Forecasts
2.33. At the time of its publication in December 2014 the NPS made reference to forecasts provided
in the Network Rail ‘Freight Market Study’ published in October 2013 . These forecasts were
adopted as a robust basis for long-term planning purposes and as a demonstration of the
expected “pressure” (NPS, paragraph 2.49) on the existing national road and rail networks
from a predicted increase from around 23 billion tonne kms in 2011, to 44 billion tonne kms
by 2033.
PAGE 18
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2.34. This strategic picture provided by the forecasts of changing freight market trends and
requirements, and analysis undertaken for the Department for Transport (DfT), confirms
the need for an expanded network of SRFIs across the regions.
2.35. More recently additional strategic documents relating to rail freight have been prepared
which also set out forecasts of anticipated growth and changes in the rail freight market.
These include the DfT ‘Rail Freight Strategy’ published in September 2016 , and a number of
associated documents and evidence base commissioned by the DfT. While the 2013 market
study provided ‘unconstrained’ forecasts which remain central to the DfTs approach, the
more recent work has also considered some of the constraints and other issues which could
prevent realisation or delivery of the full potential growth in rail freight. This updated work
identifies strong growth in a number of key rail freight markets, including containerised
freight which the report says will double over the next 15 years.
2.36. The long-term forecasts prepared for DfT also refer to a number of other potential sectors
expected to grow in the future, albeit some from a low existing base, including the potential
for ‘rapid’ rail freight services to serve increasing demand for delivery of a range of goods
associated with the retail sector.
2.37. Work for the DfT by AECOM and Arup, also published in September 2016 , identifies a
number of interventions required to help address the constraints on the delivery of
continued growth of rail freight, and to the delivery of the various associated benefits of
a shift of freight from road to rail. The identified interventions include encouraging and
enabling delivery of a larger network of SRFIs. In terms of supporting rail freight growth
and generating strong carbon reductions this is described by Arup as
“probably the most positive strategic action that can be taken”
(Section 8, page 68, ‘Future Potential for Modal Shift in the UK Rail Freight Market, AECOM & Arup, Sept 2016)
Aims and Objectives of the Northampton Gateway Proposal
2.38. The Northampton Gateway proposal seeks to respond to the increasing market demand
and need for rail freight interchanges in the UK as outlined above. The proposal would
provide rail-served warehousing and freight interchange facilities at a strategic location on
the national rail and road networks. In addition, it aims to respond directly to existing policy
guidance which recognises there is a need for an expanded network of SRFIs.
2.39. It aims to deliver opportunities to increase the proportion of freight moved by rail which
could deliver environmental and congestion benefits as part of wider and national policy
initiatives.
PAGE 19NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
2.40. At the local level the proposals will, through direct and significant investment in the road
infrastructure, vastly improve a major congestion hot spot at M1 Junction 15 and provide
improvements to both local and regional road-users. The proposed provision of a new
Bypass to the village of Roade is a response to the anticipated likely traffic impacts as a
result of the SRFI, including a potentially significant relative increase in HGV movements as
a proportion of total traffic through the village.
2.41. Northampton Gateway would attract new inward investment and business growth, creating
additional direct employment and other indirect economic benefits. The proposal would
provide new employment in a growing economic sector, and would directly support a wide
range of other economic sectors both in the local area and beyond. Direct employment
once fully operational and complete is estimated to be in the region of between 6,000 and
7500 jobs based on standard densities, and assuming full implementation of the mezzanine
floorspace allowed for in the proposals.
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 21NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3. OVERVIEW OF THE POTENTIAL OR LIKELY IMPACTS OF NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
3.1 The Northampton Gateway proposal could have a range of potential effects on the local
area, as well as at the strategic level. This includes economic and social effects and impacts
as well as physical and environmental effects or impacts.
3.2 As with any large development scheme, it will provide a mixture of potentially beneficial or
positive effects as well as some potentially adverse local effects. As an experienced developer,
including with regard to bringing forward a recent SRFI (NSIP) project in Leicestershire, the
applicant is aware that a considered and high-quality design and masterplan can reduce the
likelihood of many adverse local impacts, and minimise the residual effects.
3.3 As is referred elsewhere in this report, an Environmental Statement (ES) is being prepared
as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) required for the application. This is
required to ensure that decision makers consider the environmental impacts when deciding
whether or not to proceed with a project or proposal. The EIA process can also highlight
the opportunities for a sensitive design and masterplan to minimise or even eliminate many
of the potential adverse effects.
3.4 In the following sections, a distinction is made between various parts of the proposed
development site area, as follows:
“main site” - the SRFI site itself lying between the M1 motorway and the Northampton Loop
line, along with the immediately associated highway works at Junction 15 and access works
on the A508
“bypass corridor” – the corridors within which the alternative alignments of the proposed
Roade bypass are contained.
“proposed development” – all the development within the order limits (within the red line) .
Environmental Statement (ES)
3.5 The purpose of the ES is to draw together, in a systematic way, an assessment of a project’s
likely significant environmental effects. This helps to ensure that the importance of the
predicted effects, and the scope for reducing or mitigating them, are properly understood.
The ES will be submitted alongside the application for development consent in 2017.
PAGE 22
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.6 At present, preparation of the ES is ongoing with a range of surveys and assessments
underway. The results of the early assessment work are being used to inform the initial
(non-statutory) consultation being held in December 2016/January 2017, and have fed into
the parameters plans and other information being displayed. The latest assessment work
is being presented in an Environmental Report which is being made available as part of the
consultation process.
3.7 The Environmental Report provides detail about the proposals under the topics and themes
which will be included in the future ES, and, where possible, also identifies the likely key
issues and impacts which will feature in the ongoing assessment work. The Environmental
Report therefore provides an early basis of a future ES report, and in due course fuller draft
ES chapters will be available. It is intended that an advanced draft of the ES will be available
for the second stage consultation. During that, statutory, consultation stage to be held in
mid-2017 copies of the advanced draft ES chapters will be available via the project website
and located in local libraries and other places.
3.8 The ES will comprise a number of themed chapters, each dealing with a different aspect of
the proposals and its likely effects. The chapter headings currently identified are as follows:
• Socio-Economic aspects
• Landscape & Visual Effects
• Geology, Soil and Groundwater
• Ecology and Nature Conservation
• Water Resources and Drainage
• Noise and Vibration
• Air Quality
• Cultural Heritage
• Lighting
• Transportation
• Agricultural Land
3.9 While the ES itself will contain a full chapter on each of the above, the summary below
contains the principal elements of the ES expected to be of most interest to the public,
informed specifically by the comments and discussions had during informal dialogue with
stakeholders to date.
Socio-Economic
3.10 The socio-economic effects are considered primarily in terms of effects on employment
and the economy as a key economic indicator. Economic benefits are usually expressed in
terms of Gross Value Added (GVA) which is a measure of workplace income (wages and
profits) generated by the development through the production of goods or services.
PAGE 23NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.11 The employment impacts of the proposals will be assessed for both the construction phase
and the operational phase. An initial assessment of the likely socio-economic effects of the
development suggests it is overwhelmingly positive. Using standard ratios of floorspace
to employment prepared by the Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) based on sites and
developments elsewhere suggests that the proposal will result in somewhere between 6,000
and 7,500 additional jobs once fully operational. The upper end of this figure assumes that
the proposed mezzanine space is all fully delivered.
3.12 These jobs are expected to be filled by people from across the local and wider area,
with key sources of labour expected to be in the areas around Northampton, Daventry,
Wellingborough, Towcester, and Milton Keynes, as well as nearby villages.
3.13 The construction period will bring important and temporary benefits in terms of employment
and growth in the local supply chain related to construction, the operational development
would bring significant and positive economic effects at both the local and regional level.
Construction is likely to require around 900 ‘worker years’ which equates to support for
some 90 permanent jobs in the construction industry throughout development of the
proposals.
3.14 The initial economic assessment undertaken using Gross Value Added per filled job
indicates that the development would generate an additional £316 million annually across
the assessment area which is focused on Northamptonshire local authority areas as well as
Milton Keynes.
Landscape and visual effects
3.15 A Landscape and Visual Impact assessment is being prepared as part of the Environmental
Statement. The assessment will consider the likely effects of the Proposed Development,
including the Roade Bypass.
3.16 Both the main site and bypass corridor comprises primarily arable and pasture farmland,
and the surrounding area contains a mixture of land-uses including major transport and
development infrastructure (including the M1 motorway and railway infrastructure) and also
includes settlements ranging from the urban area of Northampton to smaller villages in
South Northamptonshire, as well as farmland and woodland.
PAGE 24
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.17 The main site’s context and topography provide opportunities to develop a strong landscape
strategy to help mitigate and minimise the impacts of the proposals. Variations in ground
levels will require earthworks to provide plateau for the proposed buildings, and this will
result in large parts of the development plots being effectively sunk into the ground. At
the western/northern end of the main site, the proposed ground levels will be significantly
lower than the existing, by up to around 7m. In addition, the proposals include an extensive
and robust landscape framework devised to provide a strong ‘green’ structure to the site
and effective mitigation for the potential visual and landscape effects.
3.18 Using the earth moved to create the development plateau, the proposals include a significant
landscaped bund around the perimeter of the main site to the north/east (along the M1),
west and south-west along the boundary with the Northampton Loop railway. This will
sit in a significant landscaped corridor running around the site, with the bund being up to
around 18m higher than the development plateau in places, and including extensive tree
planting. In addition, existing woodland and planted areas will be conserved and retained
within the site (e.g. the woodlands known as Churchills, and Highgate). The significant
bunding with the new and existing woodland and tree planting will substantially screen the
proposed development from outside view, and greatly reduce the visual impacts. The strong
landscaped led approach to the site’s boundaries will also help to minimise and soften the
landscape impacts, although even so the proposals would clearly result in notable change
to the landscape. The scale and nature of that change, and the likely residual effects of it,
will be fully assessed in the final ES.
3.19 There are numerous key ‘receptors’ of landscape and visual change – these include primarily
the nearest communities to the Proposed Development, including Collingtree, Milton Malsor,
Roade, and Blisworth. However, other receptors include users of the rights of way network,
as well as road users although these are not considered to be as sensitive to change as
those living or walking in the countryside. The likely effects on all relevant receptors will be
assessed as part of the Environmental Statement.
3.20 Similarly, the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed Roade Bypass will also be
assessed. The proposed alignment of the Bypass has not yet been fixed and the initial
consultation process is seeking views on which of the two identified potential routes is
preferred. However, of the two routes, one has been identified as being preferred (the
blue route) based on early assessment work having considered a range of potential
environmental effects. This includes initial judgements about the potential landscape and
visual effects of the Bypass, with the preferred route being located lower in the landscape
than the alternative route identified which could have additional impacts on the wider
landscape.
3.21 Subsequent care and attention to the detailed design, implementation and subsequent
management of these landscape and associated green infrastructure proposals will be
important to ensure that the likely effects are further minimised wherever possible and the
identified opportunities for enhancement.
PAGE 25NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
Ecology and Nature Conservation
3.22 Habitat and faunal surveys across the application areas as a whole are being undertaken and
some will extend into 2017 in accordance with best practice, regulations, and the seasonal
nature of many species specific surveys.
3.23 There are no statutory designated ecological sites, such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest
(SSSIs), within or immediately adjacent to the main site. Surveys undertaken at the main
site have recorded the presence of some habitats of ecological interest, including woodland,
hedgerows and watercourses as well as a number of mature trees. Some features have
been designated as Local Wildlife Sites or highlighted as candidates for this non-statutory
designation, including Highgate woodland and the Junction 15 Grassland potential Local
Wildlife Site. These woodland areas are of at least local importance in ecological terms,
as well as having other benefits (for example with regard to landscape and visual issues).
However, the majority of the SRFI site consists of intensively managed arable fields and to
a lesser extent improved grassland, habitats which are of low intrinsic ecological interest or
value.
3.24 At its closest point the main site is approximately 5km form the Upper Nene Valley Gravel
Pits SPA/SSSI which is located to the north-east of the site. The potential for any impacts
from the Proposed Development on the SPA/SSSI is being assessed, and is primarily focused
on the impacts on over-wintering birds known to use the site.
3.25 The Roade Bypass corridor alignments are also dominated by intensively managed arable
fields, with other habitats including grassland, hedgerows, a watercourse and some isolated
areas of scrub. There is a geological SSSI (rather than an ecological SSSI) within part of
the Roade Bypass corridor associated with the railway cutting, although this area also
corresponds to the Roade Cuttting potential Local Wildlife Site, which is of at least local
importance. An area of unimproved grassland that has been identified that will be more
comprehensively characterized by further Phase 2 survey, but is considered likely to be of
greater than local importance (County-National importance).
3.26 Faunal surveys undertaken to date have recorded the presence of Great Crested Newts
(GCN), badgers, bats and some important bird species within the application site (including
Golden Plover). Appropriate measures are proposed in the design of the proposals to
retain habitats for these species wherever possible. In the case of GCN, all breeding ponds
will be retained and unaffected by the proposals. Where the nature of the proposed
development does not allow for habitat retention, a comprehensive mitigation strategy
will be implemented to offer replacement habitats, with enhancements for biodiversity
incorporated where possible.
PAGE 26
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.27 However, the significant landscaping and tree and hedgerow planting, and new wetland
areas proposed on-site provides opportunities to deliver an increased mix and scale of
habitat diversity, and achieve gains for biodiversity within the site.
Water Resources and Drainage
3.28 The Proposed Development is located entirely within Flood Zone 1 (low probability of
flooding). Flood Zone 1 is defined as land assessed as having a less than 1 in 1000 annual
probability of river or sea flooding in any year (<0.1%) and is the lowest defined category of
flood risk.
3.29 Both the main site and the bypass corridor are currently subject to a generally natural
regime of surface water run-off and infiltration with the main drainage outlet from the main
site being via a tributary of the Wooton Brook, itself a tributary of the River Nene. Whilst
the Proposed Development site area is considered to be at low risk of river flooding, there
are known instances of flooding downstream along the Wooton Brook, and it is clear that
without introducing specific measures the proposed development (particularly the main
site) could exacerbate that risk as a result of the increased rate and volume of surface
runoff.
3.30 However, the surface water drainage strategy included within the proposals will ensure
that surface water will be managed appropriately to ensure that the rate, and quality, of
water leaving the main site is not increased or compromised. In simple terms, a number of
mitigation and design measures are proposed to ensure the development does not create
additional flood risk or negative effects in terms of drainage of surface water elsewhere in
the local catchment area.
3.31 The measures proposed on the main site include the provision of water storage areas
(ponds or basins) as part of a ‘Sustainable Drainage System’ to prevent an adverse impact
to the wider catchment. These features will control the rate of water run-off, and the design
and assessment work to date suggests that this approach will result in a reduced risk of
flooding downstream during periods of heavy rain by restricting the rate of run-off from the
site to levels below those experienced currently. Therefore, the emerging drainage strategy
is expected to deliver beneficial impacts to locations downstream of the site through more
predictable discharge into watercourses during flood events.
3.32 The drainage strategy for the Bypass corridor will be developed as the precise alignment
of the route is confirmed. However, as for the main site, a drainage strategy will be devised
which ensures rates of run-off do not create or exacerbate risks of flooding nearby.
PAGE 27NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
Noise and Vibration
3.33 The noise assessment work is ongoing. The assessment will consider the likely impacts
of both the construction phase and the operational phase of the Proposed Development,
including the potential noise impact from traffic (road and rail), as well as from the use of the
SRFI once complete. In addition, the assessment will also consider the potential vibration
effects that would primarily relate to the increased rail activity inherently associated with
the development of a rail freight terminal.
3.34 Initial baseline monitoring has been undertaken at a number of key locations, selected to
be representative of the existing noise sensitive receivers near the main site and Roade
Bypass. Further monitoring is required which is being undertaken. The aim of the surveys is
to quantify the existing baseline noise and vibration conditions against which the impacts
of the proposed development can be assessed.
3.35 A key input to the assessment of the potential noise impacts will be data from the detailed
transport and traffic modelling. This will rely on outputs from the Northamptonshire
Strategic Transport Model which is likely to be available in early 2017. Consequently, until
the noise and vibration monitoring and transport modelling are completed, it is not possible
to provide detailed information about the likely noise effects of the proposals.
3.36 From the work carried out so far, however, it is possible to provide an initial indication of
some of the likely noise impacts and effects. These results will be confirmed or otherwise
once the detailed assessment has been completed.
3.37 For properties to the east of the M1, the anticipated levels of sound from operational activities
at the SRFI would be such that little to no adverse impact is expected to occur. This is due
to the inherent mitigation provided by the landscaping and the generally higher ambient
noise levels because the receptors are close to the M1. It is expected that the development
would result in at most a negligible or minor adverse impact at these properties.
3.38 Properties to the west of the M1 are more likely to experience operational noise from
the SRFI due to their relatively close proximity to the site boundary and generally lower
ambient noise levels. The scheme design includes inherent mitigation which will help to
minimise any adverse impacts. There is also likely to be increased railway noise at receptors
in close proximity to the Northampton Loop railway line due to the additional freight train
movements (although this increase is expected to be gradual and over a relatively long time
period). The extent of this impact will be investigated and determined in the subsequent
assessment work.
PAGE 28
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.39 There will be an increase in traffic on the local road network associated with vehicles
travelling to and from the main site. When added to the existing baseline flows on these
roads, these vehicles are anticipated to result in a relatively small increase in road traffic
noise which is unlikely to be particularly noticeable at most nearby receptors and therefore
will generally result in at most negligible or minor adverse impact.
3.40 The proposed Roade bypass is anticipated to reduce the volume of traffic on the A508
through the centre of Roade, noticeably reducing the traffic noise and having a beneficial
impact at receptors close to that part of the A508. However, the bypass is likely to increase
the traffic noise experienced on the outskirts of Roade near the bypass. The assessment
work to be undertaken in due course will consider what mitigation might reasonably be
required to minimise any adverse impacts at these receivers.
3.41 There is also potential for an increase in perceived vibration at the nearest dwellings to the
existing railway in Milton Malsor, though the extent of this impact cannot be determined
until modelling and prediction work have been completed.
Air Quality
3.42 Impacts on air quality will be assessed for both the construction phases and the operational
phases of the proposed development. A key input to the detailed modelling of likely impacts
on air quality is the modelled transport data, therefore the detailed assessment has not yet
been undertaken. However, in advance of that data being available, it is possible to begin
to understand and assess the existing air quality context for the proposed development.
3.43 As a result of local air quality monitoring, there are a number of Air Quality Management
Areas (AQMA) designated in the local area relating to high levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
associated with major roads. The closest AQMA is the M1 AQMA running along the north-
eastern edge of the site past Collingtree, in Northampton Borough. Another AQMA is
located along the A45 in Wootton, and South Northamptonshire District Council undertakes
air quality monitoring on the A508 in Roade, where elevated concentrations of NO2 are
experienced as a result of traffic congestion along narrow roads.
3.44 A key basis for assessing air quality is the UK Air Quality Strategy (UKAQS), which sets a
number of “standard” concentrations – referred to as AQS concentrations - that are to be
achieved at sensitive receptor locations across the UK by various “objective” dates.
3.45 NO2 is the main focus of air quality issues locally. Neither council undertakes monitoring of
fine particulates (PM10), as NO2 is considered to be the primary pollutant of concern in the
area.
PAGE 29NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.46 Monitoring data indicates that annual mean concentrations of NO2 in Northampton and
South Northamptonshire tend to be generally below the 40μg.m-3 AQS, even at some busy
town centre locations. There appears to be a slight downward trend in NO2 concentrations
at the Northampton monitors, broadly in line with that indicated in the UK wide predictions
made by Defra. Background annual mean NO2 concentrations were 65% below the AQS
in 2013. However, local monitoring data from ‘roadside monitors’ shows that NO2 levels
sometimes exceed the AQS levels at some roadside locations.
3.47 Additional air quality monitoring is now being carried out by Roxhill to inform modelling and
impact assessments. Monitoring locations include: four locations in Collingtree to monitor
emissions from the M1; one adjacent to West Lodge Cottages on the A508; and one on
the main site as a background location. It is intended that the monitoring tubes will be in
situ for 12 months, in order to collect representative annual mean concentrations (pollution
concentrations tend to vary throughout the year, as the result of seasonal patterns in both
meteorological conditions and emissions). However, the initial results indicate that the most
significant existing air quality issues are associated with the M1 motorway, and locations on
the eastern side of the M1.
3.48 As referred to above, the main assessment of likely effects cannot be undertaken until the
detailed traffic data is available from the transport assessment. The Air Quality assessment
will therefore be undertaken in 2017, and will be reported on during the later consultation
process.
3.49 However, at the strategic level, the provision of an SRFI will directly enable a reduction in
HGV traffic, with every freight train typically removing between 43 and 76 lorries from the
roads according to Government data contained in the Rail Freight Strategy (Sept 2016).
Therefore, in strategic terms, the proposals are likely to contribute towards a reduction in
pollution and an improvement in air quality.
3.50 At the local level, the impacts are likely to be more varied. The Roade Bypass is expected
to deliver significant improvements to air quality in the village as a result of greatly reduced
through traffic and congestion. An increase in traffic on the M1 is likely to causesmall but
localised increases in pollution.
Transport
3.51 The methodology for assessing the transport impacts of the proposals is being discussed
and agreed through a Transport Working Group consisting of the local highways authority
(Northamptonshire County Council) and Highways England, and the key source of modelling
data will be the Northamptonshire Strategic Transport Model which is currently being
updated provided it is available for use from early 2017.
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 31NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
3.52 Junction 15 of the M1 is known to be a major local bottleneck and a key congestion ‘hot-
spot’. Indeed, recent survey data shows that the junction currently sees average peak
hour traffic levels at around 127% of the junction’s operating capacity. This significant
exceedance of the junction’s capacity results in significant congestion and queuing, and
highly unpredictable journey times for local and other road-users.
3.53 The Northampton Gateway proposals would deliver a significant programme of
improvements to Junction 15 as part of a wider package of transport and traffic measures
aimed at improving access to the motorway, and enabling and encouraging access to
the site by a range of modes of transport. It is anticipated that the emerging design to
the reconfiguration of Junction 15 will provide a 30% improvement in capacity across the
morning and evening peak hour periods, ensuring sufficient capacity to not only serve the
traffic generated by the proposed development, but also to reduce queuing and improve
journey times and reliability for existing road users at the junction.
3.54 Existing walking and cycling routes will be enhanced or extended, and some existing
physical barriers to walking and cycling addressed as part of the changes proposed to
Junction 15 and along the A508 in particular.
3.55 The Roade Bypass will remove strategic and through-traffic from the village centre, and
reduce congestion.
3.56 The detailed assessment of transport and traffic impacts will be undertaken once the
Northamptonshire Strategic Transport Model is available in early 2017. Key parts of the
network expected to feature in the ongoing analysis and dialogue with the transport bodies
will be, in addition to Junction 15 and the proposed Roade Bypass, any impacts on the A45,
as well as on the wider network. This will include examining the effect of the proposed
Bypass and improved A508 and Junction 15 on traffic flows and driver route choice,
particularly through some villages to the west and south of the site.
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 33NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
4. CONSULTATION ISSUES AND PROCESS, CONSULTATION PROGRAMME, AND PROJECT CONTACTS
4.1. Non-statutory consultation and engagement is now underway as part of an initial stage of
public consultation. Indeed, dialogue with local bodies about distribution development
in this location has been underway since 2014 when an earlier proposal was made for
distribution development on part of the main site in response to the requirements of an
existing local employer. That earlier work, and results of the consultation undertaken, has
helped shape and inform the SRFI proposals.
4.2. A statutory consultation stage will be held later in 2017 when the proposals have been
further progressed, and more specific detail about the proposals and the likely impacts is
available.
4.3. Prior to the statutory consultation Roxhill Developments Ltd will prepare a Statement of
Community Consultation (SoCC) to explain the ways in which they will consult with the
public. Once prepared the SoCC will be available via the website, and also in printed form at
locations to be agreed. The consultation strategy for both the non-statutory consultation
(Dec 2016/Jan 2017) and the statutory consultation (Later in 2017) will be underpinned by
a number of strands of activity and routes by which local people can comment on, or ask
questions about, the proposals. These include:
• The project website – www.northampton-gateway.co.uk
• At public exhibitions where information will be presented, and members of the
consultant team will be available to discuss the proposals. The initial consultation
events are being held at the Hilton Hotel in Collingtree as follows:
• Monday 12th December 1.30pm – 7.30pm;
• Tuesday 13th December 1.30pm – 7.30pm;
• Wednesday 14th December 1.30pm – 7.30pm.
• By post to: Northampton Gateway SRFI
PO Box 10570
Nottingham
NG2 9RG
• Questions and comments can also be left via a project telephone line: 01788 538440
4.4 In addition, other consultation and engagement activity is also underway and ongoing with
a wide range of statutory consultees and other bodies, including the Environment Agency,
Highways Agency, Natural England, Network Rail, and others including landowners, local
authorities and parish councils.
4.5 The expectation is that the application for Development Consent will be made to PINS in the
late summer or early Autumn of 2017.
NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY
PAGE 35NORTHAMPTON GATEWAY | SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
4.4. The final application submission to the Planning Inspectorate will include a Consultation
Report which will provide a description of the range of consultation and engagement activity
throughout the evolution of the Northampton Gateway project. This will include a full and
detailed description of the non-statutory and statutory consultation and engagement.
Project contacts
4.5. As referred to above, the website will be kept up to date with the latest project information
and documents. In addition to the public exhibitions, the project team can be contacted
via the website (the project email address is [email protected]), or
via the information phoneline and postal address given above.
![MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC Global website...1.5A/ 6.5 [Power Supply] R61P [CPU] R04CPU RY40NT5P Total Consumption Current 1.5A / 6.5A S V DC 32 / current consumption 1.5A /s_SA /6.5A Az áramfelvétel](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5f36fe787071e7134c12f678/mitsubishi-electric-global-website-15a-65-power-supply-r61p-cpu-r04cpu.jpg)
