Representation by Elmesthorpe Parish Council (Elmesthorpe Parish Council)
- Date submitted
- 20 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Parish councils
REPRESENTATIONS FROM ELMESTHORPE PARISH COUNCIL 1. Introduction 1.1. Around 95% of the main site (excluding the proposed motorway slip roads) is in Elmesthorpe Parish. 1.2. The proposal will have by far the greatest impact on the lives of the residents of Elmesthorpe. The nearest residential property is approximately 100 – 200 metres from the DCO boundary. 1.3. These representations are based on the input received from residents, many of whom feel that this proposal will have a devastating impact. 2. Location 2.1 There is no justification for this development to be built at Elmesthorpe, taking into account the proximity and capacity of the existing Rail Freight Interchanges in the area. It is believed there is capacity at existing Rail Freight Interchanges in the area 2.2. It is further believed this development will operate primarily as a road based warehousing facility with a disproportionately low amount of freight actually being transported by rail. 3. Workforce / need for jobs in the area 3.1. It is suggested that this development will result in 8,400 new jobs. Unemployment in this area is not high, and therefore most of the workforce will need to travel into the area at present. 3.2. The site is very poorly served by public transport. If the jobs are to be filled by people from outside the area, this will result in additional vehicle movements. This would also impact on the potential green benefits of this development. 3.3. There are insufficient amenities or infrastructure in the area to support the needs of the workforce and volume of people using the site. 4. Highways and Traffic Issues 4.1. The Parish Council has very limited expertise in matters relating to traffic modelling. However it is concerned about the impact of fleets of distribution vehicles at the M69/M1 junction at peak times when there is already congestion from existing traffic. 4.2. There is a knock on effect from the traffic/highways work being incomplete, namely that air pollution from vehicle movements cannot currently be properly assessed. 4.3. Residents concerns include: • congestion on the roads surrounding the site caused by HGVs and the workforce • increased traffic using the B581 through Elmesthorpe creating safety risks as the sole single pavement through the village is so narrow that it is impossible to walk two abreast • an increase in HGVs and other large vehicles using the B581 through Elmesthorpe as they struggle to pass each other at various points in the village, resulting in vehicles mounting the pavement especially on the railway bridge • the siting of the proposed uncontrolled crossing on the B581 which needs to be re-assessed 5. Access to Site & Parking Issues 5.1. Whilst it is proposed Burbage Common Road will not be used for access either by HGVs or workforce vehicles, the measures that are being put in place may be insufficient to prevent this happening. 5.2. The Parish Council is concerned about any alteration to the road layout at the junction of Burbage Common Road and the Stanton Road/Station Road as we understand the current junction is already suitable for emergency services. 5.3. There are concerns that members of the workforce who do not wish to queue to get on or off site at shift changeovers, will choose to park their vehicles in Elmesthorpe Village and to walk along Burbage Common Road to gain access on foot via the gate on the north eastern boundary. This gated access should be restricted to emergency vehicles. The same concerns arise in respect of the workers during the construction phase. There are only six public roads in Elmesthorpe, and workforce parking on them would cause absolute chaos and insanitary conditions. 5.4. There are also concerns that if the lorry park is not free, drivers will not be incentivised to stay on site and will drive off to park locally. 6. Noise 6.1. One of the major concerns to residents is the noise that will be generated by the freight trains, and the loading and unloading equipment which it is understood will be on a 24/7 basis. 6.2. There is limited information regarding the noise mitigation being provided, or the circumstances in which trains will be queueing on the line where it passes through the village, and how the noise generated will be mitigated. 6.3. In addition to the noise created by the interchange, there are concerns about the operational noise from stacking the containers, vehicle reversing alarms, loading and unloading vehicles, and the gantry cranes. 6.4. There are concerns about the quality of sleep that residents will get with the increased number of trains throughout the night and the limited noise attenuation proposals, with further implications for the mental health and well being of any affected residents. 7. Light Pollution 7.1. It is proposed that this development will operate 24/7 giving rise to concerns regarding the impact of overnight lighting on the village. 7.2. Assurances are sought that: • the buildings will only be lit at the top of the door/loading bays • the lighting in any vehicle parking areas and on the link road to the A47 will be at the height of normal street lighting • the proposal to use motion sensored lighting in the outer areas is not being pursued as it will be harder for the residents to adjust to an ever changing lighting level. 8. Air Quality 8.1. The residents consider that this development will give rise to additional air pollution from the following sources: • plant and equipment used during the building/construction phase • additional diesel trains once the rail port is operational • increased HGV movements to and from the site • increased workforce vehicle movements to and from the site • ancillary vehicles such as delivery vans • the on-site power plant and the chimney height 8.2. The air quality information provided by the Applicant has been limited, especially with regard to the construction phase. There are major concerns regarding the impact on the well being of residents of the dust and equipment emissions during the construction phase. 9. Visual Impact 9.1. There are widespread concerns about the visual impact of the proposed development. This impact was not addressed by the poor visual images provided at the public consultation events. 9.2. It is hugely important that the proposed warehousing is constructed of materials in varying tones of colour so as to better blend into the landscape, and thereby reduce the visual impact. 10. Flooding & Drainage Issues 10.1. There are major concerns regarding the likelihood of flooding of the development site, and how any steps taken to alleviate the risk of flooding of the development site will impact on adjoining watercourses. The fields off Burbage Common Road are regularly flooded, and visibly have a high water table. 10.2. There are major concerns that issues with drainage and sewerage infrastructure locally will be exacerbated once the site becomes a massive area of hard surfacing. 10.3. Certain aspects of the modelling give rise to major concern as the Applicant’s consultants were unable to gain access to several areas of land to undertake their research and it is therefore assumed that the modelling has included an element of guess work. 10.4. The consultants indicated that the cost of improvements to watercourses outside the boundary of the site would be borne by the Environment Agency. The Environment Agency has subsequently advised that they will not be paying for this. The Parish Council is seeking reassurance that Elmesthorpe residents will not bear the cost of any drainage improvement works. 10.5. The attenuation lakes may be of insufficient size for the extent of the development proposed. 10.6. The stream to the rear of homes in Bostock Close takes water from the existing farmland and is already subject to sudden and dramatic increases during periods of heavy or prolonged rain. There are concerns that if the measures proposed to control the outflow of water from the site are insufficient, their homes may be flooded. 10.7. The Parish Council also understands that properties to the south of the Bridle Path Road crossroads are at a low point in the surrounding area. During high rainfall, they already have standing water in their gardens and adjoining fields, and the brook to the north of these homes already struggles to cope with high rainfall, so there are concerns that these properties will also flood if the outflow of water is not correctly managed. 11. Wildlife & the Loss of Farmland 11.1. The impact of the proposed development on local wildlife has attracted extensive concern, and it is believed that surveys have under estimated the wildlife in the area. 11.2. It is generally felt that the provision of a green area as an extension to Burbage Common will not be sufficient to offset the loss of natural habitat for the wildlife as the construction work alone will drive much of the wildlife away and it may never return. Further, the value of a green area close to the new A47 link road is considered to be limited. 11.3. The site adjoins the Elmesthorpe Land Settlement Area which is considered by many to be a unique area of open countryside. 12. Rights of Way & Access to Burbage Common/Woods 12.1. The access via Burbage Common Road to Burbage Common & Woods and the Elmesthorpe Plantation is well used by walkers, dog walkers, cyclists, horses and riders. There is currently an extensive network of footpaths and bridleways across the site which the Parish Council understands are to be re-routed. The alternatives put forward to replace what is being lost are considered to be neither practical nor of the same quality. 12.2. The proposals for T89 footpath give rise to specific safety concerns involving the B581 (see 4.3.) 12.3. Given the forecast 10 year period the development is expected to be in the construction phase, the Parish Council is seeking an assurance that any proposed rights of way diversions will be in place from the point in time at which the site is physically secured for construction purposes. It is not acceptable for the Burbage Common SSSI to be inaccessible from Elmesthorpe at any time. 12.4. In summary, the residents consider the proposed erasure, alteration or diversion of rights of way to be to the detriment of the whole community. 13. Construction 13.1. The Parish Council requests that the Applicants: • commence the construction work at the M69 J2 end of the site • the heavy machinery required for earth moving and other construction work will enter the development site at the M69 J2 end of the site • heavy machinery and construction traffic will not be travelling through the village • retain all soil on site where possible • heavy machinery and construction traffic will not gain access to the site via Burbage Common Road • retain all earth moving and heavy machinery on site once the construction work commences. 13.2. The Parish Council is seeking further information regarding how large the workforce for the construction phase is likely to be and whether it is expected that they will arrive and leave the site in private vehicles. If they are using private vehicles, there are extensive concerns that they will be accessing the site via Burbage Common Road. 14. Green Credentials 14.1. It is generally felt that this proposal will not have the green benefits that are being put forward by the Applicants, with the benefits appearing to rely heavily on moving freight by rail rather than by road. 14.2. It is considered that the green benefits derived from using rail rather than road freight are negated by a number of other factors: • the warehouse units are stated to be “built to net zero carbon in construction” but there doesn’t appear to be any wider commitment to making the site itself carbon neutral or placing any expectation on the occupiers of the site to meet environmentally friendly targets • building to net zero carbon does not offset the ecological impact of the development • the freight trains will be diesel and not electric. Summary In view of the above, the Parish Council opposes this application as outlined in the submitted documents.