Representation by National Highways (National Highways)
- Date submitted
- 22 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Other statutory consultees
National Highways has been appointed by the Secretary of State for Transport as strategic highway company under the provisions of the Infrastructure Act 2015 as the highway authority, traffic authority and street authority for the Strategic Road Network (SRN). It is our role to maintain the safe and efficient operation of the SRN whilst acting as a delivery partner to national economic growth in accordance with the requirements of our statutory licence and in general conformity with the requirements of the Highways Act 1980. This is the section 56 representation of National Highways provided in respect of the Development Consent Order (DCO) application submitted by Tritax Symmetry (Hinckley) Limited (“Applicant”) which seeks powers to secure the construction, operation and maintenance of a rail freight interchange (including warehousing and associated highway works) on land near Junction 2 of the M69 in Leicestershire. The M69 Corridor is of national importance and has a significant role as part of the highway network within the Midlands region. The M69 corridor provides strategic links to the wider SRN at M6 Junction 2, and M1 Junction 21, as well as intersecting with the A5 Corridor at M69 Junction 1. We have reviewed the Applicant’s submission for the DCO, taking into consideration the National Planning Policy Statements, National Planning Policy Framework and DfT Circular 01/2022 – Strategic Road Network and the Delivery of Sustainable Development (“Circular”) and Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (“DMRB”). On initial appraisal of the submitted documents we note the following areas of concerns, such that we object to the DCO being granted and seek the opportunity to provide detailed comments and supporting evidence during the Examination of this DCO application: The application of relevant national policy and guidance: The former DfT Circular 02/2013 Strategic Road Network and the delivery of sustainable development was replaced on the 23 December 2023 by DfT Circular 01/2022: Strategic Road Network and the delivery of sustainable development, now known as the Circular. The submission has not taken into consideration the new policy set out in the Circular and the implications it has in regard to the submission and development proposals identified. Notably regarding the principle of ‘vision & validate’ and placing emphasis on active and sustainable modes of transport for development trips over car-based journeys. We consider based on our considerations the Circular has not been accommodated into the development proposals nor the supporting documents to the submission. Lack of consistency across the submission documentation: Based on our review of the submission there are discrepancies across the submission documents regarding the number of jobs the development proposals will generate. In some it is stated as 10,400 jobs and others 8,400 jobs. It is noted that the Transport Assessment work has been based around the lower, and therefore would be underreporting the impact across the SRN if the 10,400jobs is the representative job creation for the development proposals. Trip rates and trip generation: National Highways considered the trip rates and trip generation for the development proposals and agreed them during the pre-application discussions. However, having reviewed the submitted document we are now aware of the inclusion of a Lorry Park Facility which was not accounted for within the trip rates nor generation for the development site. Therefore, this element has not been considered in the strategic modelling methodology nor assessments. We therefore consider that further examination is required on whether the trip rates and generation proposed continue to be robust. Therefore, at present we are unable to support the trip rates and trip generation provided. Active & Sustainable Transport (including Travel Plan): National Highways has significant concerns that the proposals for active and sustainable travel have not been fully considered, and what is provided is exceptionally limited. We have therefore concluded it doesn’t meet the requirements of Circular and there is no clear vision or transport strategy for the development proposals. Our concern is that trips to and from the site by employees will be car dominated, having significant impacts upon the operation of the SRN. Strategic modelling methodology and outputs: National Highways are not able to fully consider the suitability of the strategic modelling undertaken at present. The justification being that not all parameters which have been utilised within the PRTM modelling methodology have been agreed with us including the furrnessing methodology. This has prevented us being able to fully review and consider the outputs which have been provided to ourselves until our concerns regarding the methodology have been addressed. Furthermore, we have not been able to undertake a full review of all the transport supporting information as a Transport Addendum is awaited which will provide further modelling methodology and outputs based on modelling through Rugby Rural Area Wide Model which is managed and maintained by Warwickshire County Council. This information is crucial for us to fully understand the impacts the development proposals will have on the SRN. Development impact on the SRN: As National Highways has been unable to agree the strategic modelling at present, we have been unable to identify the development impact on the SRN. However, based on the information provided within the submission and our knowledge of the operation of the SRN in the surrounding area of the development site, we have concerns about the following locations. - M1 Junction 21 (M1 / M69 Interchange) - M69 Junction 1 - M6 Junction 2 (M6 / M69 / A46 Interchange) - M6 Junction 3 - A5 / Drayton Lane ‘Ghost Right Turn Lane’ Priority Junction - A5 / Woodford Lane ‘Ghost Right Turn Lane’ Priority Junction - A5 / A444 ‘Redgate’ Junction - A5 / A47 The Longshoot / Dodwells Junctions - A5 / A4303 / B4027 / Coal Pit Lane Roundabout Junction - A5 / A426 Gibbet Hill Roundabout Junction Development mitigation strategy for the SRN: The applicants and their consultants have not discussed the mitigation strategy with National Highways at this present time. It should also be noted that some locations have mitigation identified whilst others the documents note that mitigation is required but a scheme has not been identified. At present we are unable to agree the development mitigations strategy. This is because we have been awaiting the completion and sign off the strategic modelling with the applicant’s consultants and other stakeholders to understand the traffic flows at the junction in the base and future year assessments. This data is key to setting the design parameters and design standards and whether any departures from standard are required in accordance DMRB. Design and deliverability of the access arrangements onto M69 Junction 2: National Highways has had limited discussion in the design of the proposed access arrangements onto M69 Junction 2. This is because we have been awaiting the completion and sign off the strategic modelling with the applicant’s consultants and other stakeholders to understand the traffic flows at the junction in the base and future year assessments. This data is key to setting the design parameters and design standards and whether any departures from standard are required in accordance DMRB. Design and deliverability of northbound off-slip and southbound on-slip at M69 Junction 2: National Highways has had limited discussion in the design of the proposed additional northbound off-slip and southbound on-slip at M69 Junction 2. This is because we have been awaiting the completion and sign off the strategic modelling with the applicant’s consultants and other stakeholders to understand the traffic flows at the junction in the base and future year assessments. This data is key to setting the design parameters and design standards and whether any departures from standard are required in accordance DRMB. Phasing of the Development: The phasing of the development is not clearly set out, and how it would relate to the delivery of the associated infrastructure required to support the development proposals. It is National Highways opinion that the access arrangements and the provision of the proposed northbound off-slip and southbound on-slip at M69 Junction 2 could be potentially required prior to built construction of the development proposals. However further clarity is sought on this matter. In addition, it is also considered that the rail head should be provide from opening of the scheme to promote the sustainable movement of freight, as if it isn’t provided at this stage it could potentially result in the development being road based. Therefore, having a greater impact on the operation of the SRN than what has currently been identified. Deliverability of the Railhead and capacity on the Nuneaton & Leicester Railway Line: National Highways is concerned whether the railhead on the Nuneaton & Leicester Railway Line is deliverable as we have not seen the assessments nor agreement from Network Rail. We also have concerns that the acceptance of the scheme would limit future capacity on the line to the detriment of passenger services which are crucial as a viable alternative to car based strategic trips between Birmingham, Nuneaton, Hinckley and Leicester. HGV routing strategy & enforcement: National Highways requires further clarity on the proposed HGV routing strategy and notably around its enforcement. At present National Highways cannot agree to this who is responsible for the strategy and enforcement is not clear. We also require additional information for the potential location of any associated infrastructure and who would be responsible for its maintenance. Construction management plan: National Highways requires further clarity on the construction management plan due to how it will function with the implementation of the development proposals and the associated infrastructure. In addition, the routing of construction traffic also needs to be fully considered during the phasing of the development and implementation of the associated infrastructure. As works to M69 Junction 2 may warrant for this junction to be closed for significant periods to traffic movements whilst works should the development be approved are implemented. Land Ownership Matters: The Book of Reference (“BOR”) includes various plots of land owned or occupied by National Highways in respect of which compulsory acquisition powers to acquire new rights are sought. To safeguard National Highways’ interests and the safety and integrity of the SRN, National Highways objects to the inclusion of any plots in the Order and to compulsory powers being granted in respect of land forming part of the SRN, including the acquisition of the subsurface of any carriageway. Such plots constitute land acquired by National Highways for the purpose of its statutory undertaking and, accordingly, this representation is made under section 56 and sections 127 and 138 of the Planning Act 2008. National Highways considers that there is no compelling case in the public interest for such compulsory powers and that the Secretary of State, in applying section 127 of the Planning Act 2008, cannot conclude that the permanent acquisition of land forming the SRN or under the SRN, nor the creation of new rights and restrictions over such plots can be created without serious detriment to National Highways’ undertaking. No other land is available to National Highways to remedy the detriment. National Highways also objects to all other compulsory powers in the Order that affect, and may be exercised in relation to, National Highways’ property and interests. In order for National Highways to be in a position to withdraw its objections, National Highways requires: (a) the inclusion of protective provisions in the Order for its benefit; and (b) agreements with the Applicant that regulate (i) the manner in which rights over such plots are acquired and the relevant works are carried out including terms which protect National Highways’ statutory undertaking and agreement that compulsory acquisition powers will not be exercised in relation to such land; and (ii) the carrying out of works in the vicinity of the SRN to safeguard National Highways’ statutory undertaking. To safeguard National Highways’ interests and the safety and integrity of the SRN, National Highways objects to the inclusion of such compulsory powers and any other powers affecting National Highways in the DCO. National Highways requests that the Examining Authority treat National Highways as an Interested Party for the purposes of the Examination. If you require any clarification on the points raised, we can be contacted via [redacted]