Rail hub will be ‘catastrophic’ councillor predicts

A huge rail hub and warehousing scheme in Leicestershire would have "a catastrophic impact for all time" on the local area according to a county councillor. A decision is expected on the highly controversial Hinckley [1] National Rail Freight Interchange (HNRFI) in March, with secretary of state for Transport Heidi Alexander to have the final say. If the scheme gets the go-ahead, the 650-acre site spanning land in both Hinckley and Bosworth [2] and Blaby [3] boroughs would be home to nine warehouses along with a rail terminal for up to 16 trains [4] per day, with developer Tritax Symmetry saying more than 8,000 jobs [5] will be created.

But Councillor David Bill, who represents part of Hinckley on Leicestershire County Council [6], told LeicestershireLive [7] the latest information provided by Tritax had not reassured him about the impact of the GBP750-million development on local roads and residents. In September, Ms Alexander's predecessor, Louise Haigh, said she was "minded to refuse" the scheme [8], but gave Tritax the chance to address concerns. Just before Christmas [9], the Department of Transport published a series of documents [10] from the developer covering issues raised by the planning [11] inspectorate's examining authority, including the impact on Sapcote of HGVs travelling through the village, and potential issues at junctions on the M1 and M69 [12].

Coun Bill said he had been working his way through the new information, but said he had seen no evidence that "cumulative harm" - where smaller issues together become a major problem - would be mitigated. "With 8,000 employee cars and 5,000 HGV movements every day congestion [14] can only get worse between M69 Junction 2 and M1 Junction 21," he said, adding that Junction 21 was already "fraught with danger". Coun Bill - who also sits on the council's highways and transport scrutiny committee - said the "bulk of the employee cars and the HGVs" would be using Junction 2 of the M69, adding he could not see how it could "operate safely" as a result, even with a proposed new M69 access road. He said: "Some traffic will of course use the new relief road over the common, but the road will also be used in the opposite direction by drivers trying to avoid congestion elsewhere.

Without adequate and accurate modelling this junction could become yet another bottleneck with queues backing up onto the motorway just as we currently see in Leicester." The new documents from Tritax suggest changes would be made in Sapcote. In addition to a previously-mooted zebra crossing, the proposals include improvements to a pedestrian area outside the Co-Op, footway widening and moving a bus [15] stop.

But Coun Bill said: "The dangers to pedestrians in the village have long been of concern and simply widening pavements where there is room does not answer the problem of when two HGVs meet in the centre." He also claimed suggestions for "route management" - where HGVs are sent on specific roads to avoid congestion and danger in other areas - would not be effective. "The submitted documents refer to prohibited route management," he said. "These schemes are all to the good, but unfortunately blockages to the strategic network occur all too often and diversions through residential areas are an inevitable consequence, as those of us who live in the area know only too well. It is worth pointing out that the planned route management only involves HGV traffic using the proposed site.

All other HGV traffic will undoubtedly be drawn to this junction." Coun Bill said he, along with others who had appeared at the hearings, was "disappointed that the planning inspectors did not give as much weight to many of our concerns as we would have wished", including the impact of motorway closures on the local community. He said: "This proposed massive warehouse scheme, sited within a few hundred metres of the popular sanctuary of Burbage Common and Woods, undoubtedly will have a catastrophic impact for all time.

The extent of the site is equal in area to the size of the village of Burbage." LeicestershireLive attempted to contact Tritax about Coun Bill's comments but received no response. The company has defended the rail hub proposal in the new documents, saying a "robust alternative site analysis" was used to choose the site, and that no other location for the hub was possible "within the market area".

The documents read: "The scheme will provide considerable national and regional benefits, including moving freight by rail to and from our major ports, particularly Felixstowe and London Gateway, vital for trade. The residual local impacts of [the hub] are very clearly outweighed by its extensive and nationally significant benefits." But Coun Bill said the scheme was "unwanted and unloved", and would "inevitably push more through traffic on to our roads - and incidentally change our countryside for ever".

Interested parties have until Friday, February 7, to send comments to the government [16] in response to the new documents.

We are now bringing you the latest updates on Whatsapp first [17]

References

^ Hinckley (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ Hinckley and Bosworth (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ Blaby (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ trains (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ jobs (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ Leicestershire County Council (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ LeicestershireLive (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ "minded to refuse" the scheme (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ Christmas (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ published a series of documents (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ planning (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ M69 (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ Leicester's borders could expand as county requests elections be postponed (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ congestion (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ bus (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ government (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)
^ We are now bringing you the latest updates on Whatsapp first (www.leicestermercury.co.uk)