

Response to Government Section 106 Agreements Consultation January 2005April 19th 2005 – We
believe that the existing system in which rail freight interests
have been represented by the Strategic Rail Authority has worked
well, especially in the latter years of its existence, but would
have been more authoritative if more attention had been paid to
the economic architecture which rail freight operators face. It
is vital that, after the abolition of the SRA, arrangements are
in place to get informed input from rail freight sources. Local
authorities are required to demonstrate a need for rail freight
facilities and need impartial rail freight advice to do so. Planning
authorities alone cannot be expected to assess the rail requirements
in such major developments, as the expansion of ports. Annex B Proforma followed for consultation responses Circular para no. We agree with the proposed wording in item 3 on the grounds that rail freight is key to mitigating the impacts of many developments. A good example of this is port expansion where rail freight enhancements can allow more freight to be carried by rail to reduce impact on the local and national road network. Para 6 Paras 12-14 Contribution for affordable housing – no comment Paras 3, 11-16 Typology for use of planning obligations In certain
types of development it is important that rail freight is an option
because of the wider economic benefits, which may accrue to non-users. Paras 19-21 Pooled contributions Paras 8, 24-27 Local planning obligations policies Para 28 Joining-up
across public sector Paras 29-31 Formulae and standard charges Para 32 Standard agreements/undertakings The SRA’s Regional Planning Managers currently provide a vital link between land-use planning and rail transport. We believe that this function combined with the expert input of rail knowledge of the sort presently provided by the SRA Freight Executive is crucial in the new DfT structure if rail freight is to play its full role in the economy. The Regional
Planning Assessments, which the SRA Regional Planning Managers
are currently drawing up, have both long and short-term strategic
roles in drawing the different rail elements together so that
Route Utilisation Strategies (RUSs) and LDFs can fully reflect
and influence developments in rail services and infrastructure. Need for rail expertise at Public InquiriesAs well as links with land use planning, there is a need for specialist resources to represent the strategic rail interests at Public Inquiries and Examinations in Public. These functions are currently undertaken by the SRA and also need to be replicated in the new structure if planning permission for rail freight developments is to be granted. For example, the strategic nature of the major site at Cricklewood in North London was confirmed by the S.R.A. at the Public Inquiry into the plans for the redevelopment of the area and supported by the S.R.A’s ‘Freight Strategy’ and subsequent ‘Plan’ which stated that there was a need for 3-4 intermodal terminals in the London area. The L.I.F.E. freight interchange project near Heathrow Airport did not gain planning consent for the lack of just such a strategic lead. Another example is the recent Planning Inspectorate decision, at Theale, Berkshire, where alongside the planning framework, SRA evidence was crucial in safeguarding rail land for future potential rail use.The Planning Inspectorate rejected an appeal by Beftonforth Ltd against a decision of West Berkshire Council to refuse the application to erect a 15,000 s.q.m. telehouse (commercial data sore) on land in Theale, Berkshire, adjacent to the Reading-Newbury line. The Inspector dismissed this appeal because West Berkshire Council had identified this land for possible potential future rail use as an extension of the rail served lands defined in its Local Plan. The inspectorate
noted that, in dealing with rail freight, PPG13 advises that the
SRA is best placed to advise on the sites and routes that are
important to delivering wider transport objectives. The SRA gave
expert evidence refuting various arguments made by Beftonforth.
In particular, the SRA used working examples to show that the
existing sidings were not too small to be viable and showed that
there were no capacity constraints on the line. Brownfield landThere is huge competition for development of brownfield sites. Planning Policy Guidance 3 gives priority for housing on brownfield sites so a strategic lead is needed by Government to retain those sites suitable for rail. Without the necessary national and local policies, Cricklewood, for instance, could be allocated to housing to the exclusion of rail. Para 36 Cost recovery Para 37 Public Involvement Paras 38-40 Use of unilateral undertakings Para 41 Monitoring and implemention of obligations
|