Northampton 'Gateway' Freight Terminal - rail connection.

[Merle Haggard]

The preparation of the site has been going on for some time, and, a few weeks ago, the Northampton - Hanslope section was closed for 9 days to (presumably amongst other projects) provide the rail connection. Although it seemed to be likely from the position of a covered way for the rail track into the terminal I'm still surprised that this connection is a facing one off the up line with a trailing connection to the down line (obviously for trains departing).
This would seem to mean that trains can only arrive from and depart to the North - unless there's a (unlikely!) propelling movement from the down line across the up line and into the terminal
Is this really the plan - not to be served from the South? I'm only guessing, but wouldn't the bigger flows be from the Channel Tunnel?
I suppose they could run down to Northampton, run round and return but the line occupancy already seems pretty complete with most WCML freight trains routed via Northampton rather than Weedon and also traffic to D.I.R.F.T. from the South.

 

[swt_passenger]

The preparation of the site has been going on for some time, and, a few weeks ago, the Northampton - Hanslope section was closed for 9 days to (presumably amongst other projects) provide the rail connection. Although it seemed to be likely from the position of a covered way for the rail track into the terminal I'm still surprised that this connection is a facing one off the up line with a trailing connection to the down line (obviously for trains departing).
This would seem to mean that trains can only arrive from and depart to the North - unless there's a (unlikely!) propelling movement from the down line across the up line and into the terminal
Is this really the plan - not to be served from the South? I'm only guessing, but wouldn't the bigger flows be from the Channel Tunnel?
I suppose they could run down to Northampton, run round and return but the line occupancy already seems pretty complete with most WCML freight trains routed via Northampton rather than Weedon and also traffic to D.I.R.F.T. from the South.

There’s a recent thread that explains the southern facing connections are a separate phase:

Northampton to Milton Keynes closed in September

Looks like Closure Northampton - Milton Keynes Saturday 2nd - Sunday 10th September https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/major-future-boost-for-rail-freight-as-work-continues-on-west-coast-main-line-hub

www.railforums.co.uk

(Slightly odd place to find the thread, but I suppose it started as a timetable question.)

 

[zwk500]

The preparation of the site has been going on for some time, and, a few weeks ago, the Northampton - Hanslope section was closed for 9 days to (presumably amongst other projects) provide the rail connection. Although it seemed to be likely from the position of a covered way for the rail track into the terminal I'm still surprised that this connection is a facing one off the up line with a trailing connection to the down line (obviously for trains departing).
This would seem to mean that trains can only arrive from and depart to the North - unless there's a (unlikely!) propelling movement from the down line across the up line and into the terminal
Is this really the plan - not to be served from the South? I'm only guessing, but wouldn't the bigger flows be from the Channel Tunnel?
I suppose they could run down to Northampton, run round and return but the line occupancy already seems pretty complete with most WCML freight trains routed via Northampton rather than Weedon and also traffic to D.I.R.F.T. from the South.

https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/TR050006/TR050006-000245-Doc%202.9A%20-%20Railway%20General%20Arrangement.pdf

Plan on the Planning application https://infrastructure.planninginsp...ange/?ipcsection=docs&stage=app&filter1=Plans suggests it will have both north and south connections

 

[Merle Haggard]

Thanks you both for the quick response. I had rather expected that all the work, rather than only half, would have been done in an operation which caused so much disruption. 9 days of an RRB bus every ten minutes in each direction from 04.00 to 22.30 can't have been cheap, either.
I have been told that the planning conditions require all the infrastructure to be in place before warehouse construction can start. Interestingly for a rail development, that includes not only the rail connection but also improvements to M1 J15 and also, I think M1 J15A and definitely the Roade by-pass on the A508 - all of which have been paid for by the terminal operator - speeding up longer-distance journeys by road around here.
The other proposed freight terminal development, on the opposite side of the line, seems to have gone into abeyance. I declare a N.I.M.B.Y. interest in that because it involves the compulsory purchase of a workshop which I partly occupy

 

[zwk500]

Thanks you both for the quick response. I had rather expected that all the work, rather than only half, would have been done in an operation which caused so much disruption. 9 days of an RRB bus every ten minutes in each direction from 04.00 to 22.30 can't have been cheap, either.

There are a large number of factors in it, not the least of which would be accessing 2 worksites with the materials required to come in by train, with each worksite blocking the other from one direction.

I have been told that the planning conditions require all the infrastructure to be in place before warehouse construction can start. Interestingly for a rail development, that includes not only the rail connection but also improvements to M1 J15 and also, I think M1 J15A and definitely the Roade by-pass on the A508 - all of which have been paid for by the terminal operator - speeding up longer-distance journeys by road around here.

It's not a rail development though, it's a logistics development and an awful lot of traffic is going to come by road either way. J15 changes are probably an improvement overall, although it would have been nicer to build a proper roundabout junction. Sadly I moved out before the Roade by-pass was open so had 6 months of driving from Wolverton to Northampton disrupted for roadworks without seeing the payoff! What are they doing to J15A? There didn't look to be anything different when I stopped off at the services there over the summer.

 

[swt_passenger]

There are a large number of factors in it, not the least of which would be accessing 2 worksites with the materials required to come in by train, with each worksite blocking the other from one direction.

It's not a rail development though, it's a logistics development and an awful lot of traffic is going to come by road either way. J15 changes are probably an improvement overall, although it would have been nicer to build a proper roundabout junction. Sadly I moved out before the Roade by-pass was open so had 6 months of driving from Wolverton to Northampton disrupted for roadworks without seeing the payoff! What are they doing to J15A? There didn't look to be anything different when I stopped off at the services there over the summer.

They’re widening the approaches to, and I think adding extra lanes to the two small roundabouts on the A43 either side of the M1. It’s nothing major, I was through it about a fortnight ago, but the work was only slowing traffic slightly (at least in the evening).

I just had a look on Google Streetview and they seem to have it partially covered as you go round the roundabouts, they seem to be gaining a lane by reducing the roundabout diameter.

 

[Merle Haggard]

It's not a rail development though, it's a logistics development and an awful lot of traffic is going to come by road either way. J15 changes are probably an improvement overall, although it would have been nicer to build a proper roundabout junction. Sadly I moved out before the Roade by-pass was open so had 6 months of driving from Wolverton to Northampton disrupted for roadworks without seeing the payoff! What are they doing to J15A? There didn't look to be anything different when I stopped off at the services there over the summer.

I'm not sure that's how it was 'sold'.

I have been led to believe that the planning permission was granted, based on a particular (and large) proportion of traffic arriving by rail. It was reported in the press that the developer recently requested that condition being temporarily suspended (so that they could start construction of the warehouses) , giving the reason that 'Network Rail can't provide paths' (something that perhaps should have been taken into account at the outset). This strongly suggests that the original application was for a primarily rail terminal.

The reason for this rail-based application is clear to those of a cynical disposition. The other proposed scheme I've mentioned was initially for a road haulage depot and planning permission was rejected (on several well-founded grounds). They then changed the application to include rail; this then became 'national infrastructure' changing the rules to make it very difficult to refuse - and also changing land acquisition from negotiated voluntary sale to compulsory purchase at an un-negotiable price.

One might also remember the list of RfD International Railfreight Terminals originally proposed. Most, although built, seem to have either declined or never started as far as rail traffic goes becoming primarily road depots - Daventry being the exception (ironically, the one that was widely ridiculed - Long Buckby ha ha how much traffic would that generate!). It's very difficult to retrospectively demand that a 'rail freight' terminal continues to primarily use rail, but the Northampton Gateway one seems to have received permission with restrictions to try to address the lessons to be learnt from history. But much of this is not, strangely (or perhaps, predictably), in the public domain.

 

[The Planner]

The DCO indeed had a stipulation that only a %age could be sold without a rail connection. I think there were formation drainage issues that stopped the southern end being put in at the time. The paths issue is on the money as well, doubt they will get more than 5 or 6tpd in and out

 

[Merle Haggard]

The paths issue is on the money as well, doubt they will get more than 5 or 6tpd in and out

Thanks. But wasn't that also the case at the time of application? - there were probably more passenger trains South then than now.

 

[The Planner]

Thanks. But wasn't that also the case at the time of application? - there were probably more passenger trains South then than now.

In a word, yes.

 

[Hadders]

There are a large number of factors in it, not the least of which would be accessing 2 worksites with the materials required to come in by train, with each worksite blocking the other from one direction.

It's not a rail development though, it's a logistics development and an awful lot of traffic is going to come by road either way. J15 changes are probably an improvement overall, although it would have been nicer to build a proper roundabout junction. Sadly I moved out before the Roade by-pass was open so had 6 months of driving from Wolverton to Northampton disrupted for roadworks without seeing the payoff! What are they doing to J15A? There didn't look to be anything different when I stopped off at the services there over the summer.

J15 is massively improved, I use it regularly and it works really well - much better than what was there before. How it will hold up when the warehousing starts being used remains to be seen.

J15A just looks like a bit of widening on the approaches and making the roundabouts smaller so another lane can be squeezed in.

 

[Nottingham59]

The paths issue is on the money as well, doubt they will get more than 5 or 6tpd in and out

There should be more freight paths available when HS2 phase 1 starts. Whether they get used is of course a different matter.

 

[The Planner]

There should be more freight paths available when HS2 phase 1 starts. Whether they get used is of course a different matter.

This will have been open 6 or 7 years by then. They arent expecting to make their money from rail.

 

[Merle Haggard]

J15 is massively improved, I use it regularly and it works really well - much better than what was there before. How it will hold up when the warehousing starts being used remains to be seen.

J15A just looks like a bit of widening on the approaches and making the roundabouts smaller so another lane can be squeezed in.

Regarding how J15 is now much easier to use - that was my point really, a rail (freight) development makes car travel easier (and thereby reduces thgeany advantages of (passenger) rail). When the site is finished we may have more artics from the warehouse but hopefully no more 8 wheel tippers in a tearing hurry.


I have since discovered that the J15a alterations are paid for by 'SEGRO Logistics Park' who initially brought the site of short lived services on the A43 as a road haulage base and are, I think, the organisation trying to build a rail served site on the opposite side of the line to the Gateway one - it's one stretch of land all the way from J15a to the line - apart from the minor road once the A43 and the barn I use.

 

[The Planner]

Regarding how J15 is now much easier to use - that was my point really, a rail (freight) development makes car travel easier (and thereby reduces thgeany advantages of (passenger) rail). When the site is finished we may have more artics from the warehouse but hopefully no more 8 wheel tippers in a tearing hurry.


I have since discovered that the J15a alterations are paid for by 'SEGRO Logistics Park' who initially brought the site of short lived services on the A43 as a road haulage base and are, I think, the organisation trying to build a rail served site on the opposite side of the line to the Gateway one - it's one stretch of land all the way from J15a to the line - apart from the minor road once the A43 and the barn I use.

SEGRO own Northampton Gateway.

 

[Merle Haggard]

SEGRO own Northampton Gateway.

Thanks, my confusion.
My local residents' Facebook page* had a post from Win-Vic about J15A closures in connection with 'SEGRO' and I jumped to a conclusion. I assumed any reference in advice to the general public would use 'Northampton Gateway' name so we could understand what they were talking about. But nice to know how much easier they are making car journeys around here, who needs passenger trains?
There is an application for a rail freight terminal lumbering through the appeals process and this is related to the former A43 services close to J15a and this is the one I thought they were referring to.

* although we live as far from J15a as is possible in Northampton

 

[The Planner]

Thanks, my confusion.
My local residents' Facebook page* had a post from Win-Vic about J15A closures in connection with 'SEGRO' and I jumped to a conclusion. I assumed any reference in advice to the general public would use 'Northampton Gateway' name so we could understand what they were talking about. But nice to know how much easier they are making car journeys around here, who needs passenger trains?
There is an application for a rail freight terminal lumbering through the appeals process and this is related to the former A43 services close to J15a and this is the one I thought they were referring to.

* although we live as far from J15a as is possible in Northampton

The Milton Malsor proposal goes quiet and sometimes comes back, I'm not convinced it will get anywhere. NR will certainly say there is no capacity for it now.