Freight interchanges

Ian Jenkins commented on the Four Ashes rail freight interchange ( Open Access, RAIL 911).

He is concerned at the loss of Green Belt countryside and that the majority usage of this freight hub may well be by road-based haulage rather than rail freight. I can sympathise with his position, having unsuccessfully fought against a similar proposal in the East Midlands.

However, the planning approval for such hubs is not handled by the local authorities.

If freight hubs are to be served by a minimum of four trains per day and the site covers an area of at least 60 hectares, then it is classified as a nationally significant infrastructure project and is called a Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (SRFI).

Such applications are processed by the Planning Inspectorate, which is a government agency. There is a planning framework for such applications which is known as the National Policy Statement for National Networks. This indicates that there is a presumption in favour of granting development consent provided certain conditions are met.

So, such proposals are probably going to be treated more favourably by the Planning Inspectorate than they may be by some local planning authorities.

If you look to see where SRFIs have been built, you will find that a large number of them are situated within (or close to) what is sometimes called the logistics ‘Golden Triangle’ - an area bounded by the M1, M6 and M42. This Golden Triangle relates to the ideal placement of road haulage logistics sites.

If you follow the thinking of the National Policy Statement for National Networks, then SRFIs should be located very close to major cities (for example, Manchester, Leeds and Bristol). It also makes sense for these SRFIs to be of sufficient distance from major container ports such as Felixstowe and Southampton to make a rail journey viable.

Andrew Bodman, Northampton