MP urges councillors to ‘closely consider resident’s voices’ on a warehouse proposal that he is against
Lee Barron, MP for Corby & East Northamptonshire, has sent an open letter to North Northamptonshire councillors regarding the development of a 1.9 million ft2 warehouse scheme in Thrapston, where council planning officers have already recommended approval.
By Liza Helps, Property Editor, Logistics Matters
THE PLANNING committee is set to meet tonight to consider the application which was originally submitted in 2022.
The scheme being brought forward on a 148-acre greenfield site by IM Properties will also include a 1,07 million ft2 flagship distribution centre for global transport and logistics company DSV which has been a local presence for over 40 years and originally operated as the Thrapston Warehouse Company when it was based in the centre of the town.
It currently bases its operations across two buildings at Haldens Parkway, but these do not meet existing needs, create major inefficiencies and have limited scope for improvement. The new DC will provide a highly sustainable and efficient new base for its operations in Thrapston safeguarding nearly 750 jobs.
The development has proved highly controversial with more than 800 letters of objection from local residents and objection from local parishes mostly concerned with what is seen as ‘over development’, and significant harm to the countryside. In addition, the objectors cite that Thrapston has been identified as a secondary growth location.
However, the town is on a strategic logistics corridor and in its report to local councillors planning officers report that consultants have noted that ‘the focus of development on Growth Towns as opposed to the strategic road network does not necessarily reflect the locational needs of the market or provide for what operators of logistics businesses are seeking.
The report goes on to say that “the existence of allocated sites in locations which better reflect the settlement hierarchy and spatial strategy in the Development Plan does not mean they are available.
“The evidence supplied by the applicant, suggests that the need for development of this scale and nature exceeds what has been provided for in terms of allocations, and which is readily available to prospective operators.
It has been agreed that there would be significant harm and losses to the countryside with Natural England seeking Section 106 agreements and assurances from the developer to mitigate these harms and losses prior to nay development being brought forward.
In fact, the scheme is expected to deliver a bio net gain of 43% in terms of habitat units, 100% hedgerow units and 10% water course units over and above the minimum 10% BNG. As well as providing a network of linked green spaces and outdoor amenities across the site, that are accessible to the local community enhancing accessibility.
The development will be built net zero carbon and target BREEAM Excellent and EPC A ratings.
The planning officers note that the development will provide significant gross jobs, thought to be circa 2,000, including indirect and direct employment from supply chain, with work experience and training opportunities both in the construction and operational phases of the scheme.
In addition, the planning report to councillors note that given the scale of the investment and employment created through the proposed development, the anticipated benefits to the economy are considered to be substantial. Significant weight can therefore be attributed to the benefits arising to the local and regional economy with job creation and retention in an established and strongly performing sector clearly representing economic benefits directly attributable to the proposed development.
Barron in his open letter cast appears to cast doubt on the impartiality of the consultant’s reports and the quality of the jobs set to be offered.
He said: “I fear the consultant’s report for the current application fails to consider the impact this proposal will have on our communities, and questions have been raised around the independence of the consultants.
“The Thrapston area already faces challenges of road traffic and heavy goods vehicles breaching weight restrictions. We want to see good quality jobs on offer in our community.”
Only last month the North Northampton Council planning committee rejected proposals for a similar scheme on a site close by going against planning officer’s recommendation. This application is set to go before the Planning Inspectorate later this month.
