Radlett SRFI updates

[Edvid]

Last year, land for a Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (near the M25 where Radlett Aerodrome used to be) was sold to SEGRO by Hertfordshire County Council; preliminary works are now underway.

SEGRO Logistics Park Radlett | SEGRO

SEGRO Logistics Park Radlett

www.segro.com

Logistics Matters Magazine - SEGRO finally secures Radlett strategic rail freight interchange

SEGRO HAS paid £120 million to secure the former Radlett Aerodrome which it has been looking to redevelop as a strategic rail freight interchange for more than a decade.

www.logisticsmatters.co.uk

The listed property company bought the 1,035-acre aerodrome in the Upper Colne Valley, Hertfordshire from Hertfordshire County Council, Tarmac Plc and Gorhambury Estates Company bringing all three land holdings making up the site under one ownership.

The site will be developed into a strategic rail freight interchange supported by up to 3.6 million ft2 of modern, sustainable logistics warehousing, including ancillary B1 (office, light industrial, research and development) and B2 (general industrial) warehouses.

SEGRO has been involved with the site in one form or another since 2008. The battle to secure planning has been extremely controversial with St Albans Council, local MPs and campaigners, taking a strong stance against the development leading to a variety of legal battles and judicial reviews.

The latest one being to secure a judicial review against Hertfordshire Council’s decision to sell the land. Councillor Nuala Webb of St Albans Council said campaigners were seeking legal advice to lodge an application for a Judicial Review. “We think the decision is flawed,” she told the Local Democracy Reporting Service. "By going to Judicial Review, we hope the outcome will be to stop the sale of the land – and the decision to sell the land will be reversed.

“If the council don’t sell the land then the site cannot be developed. It’s a big step to take […] but we think there are good arguments, and we have a lot of support from MPs and other people.”

SEGRO received planning permission from the Secretary of State for the development, which is recognised by the Government as nationally significant infrastructure that will deliver major benefits on a national, regional and local scale. It will also form a key part of the UK’s modal shift from road to rail and help meet the country’s net-zero ambitions.

Works are expected to start on site in Summer 2023 with the initial focus of this multi-year investment programme focussed on creating the rail connection and preparing the site for development. It is anticipated that the completed scheme will deliver around 4,000 jobs, with a further c. 500 jobs generated on site during construction.

In line with the Company’s Responsible SEGRO commitments to Champion low-carbon growth and Invest in its local communities and environments, the development will incorporate a 610 acre country park surrounding the terminal. The park will include a 10-mile network of footpaths and recreational features including a trim trail, outdoor gym, new children’s play areas, new bird watching hides and a Visitor Interpretation Centre. Over 4,000 trees and 132,000 saplings will be planted, while the local habitat will be enhanced by creating new ponds and nesting sites.

In addition to employment opportunities and environmental considerations, the development will stimulate economic growth and enhance local infrastructure. SEGRO is committed to a significant investment programme to fund new traffic relieving measures, including £22 million to fund a new 1.4-mile stretch of relief road for Park Street / Frogmore to alleviate traffic on the A5183, and it is estimated that the completed scheme will deliver around £12 million each year in business rates.

David Sleath, Chief Executive Officer, SEGRO, said: “The former Radlett Aerodrome site offers a rare opportunity to bring together the economic and environmental benefits of rail freight, provides connectivity to key arteries of the highways network and access to a large pool of employees. The scheme will also benefit the national and local economies, as well as help satisfy the demands of consumers and businesses for the sustainable movement of the goods and services we increasingly rely on in our daily lives.”

Local opposition against the project is considerable, with backing from MPs Daisy Cooper (St Albans) and Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere). Campaigners applied for a judicial review on the aforementioned sale which they believe was unlawful; on 11 June the High Court will hold an oral hearing on said application, immediately followed by the judicial review if granted.

Rail freight terminal court case set for June hearing - St Albans Times

Campaigners challenging a proposed rail freight terminal on the former Radlett airfield in Park Street have been told their case will be heard in the Royal Courts of Justice on June 11.

stalbanstimes.co.uk

Campaigners challenging a proposed rail freight terminal on the former Radlett airfield in Park Street have been told their case will be heard in the Royal Courts of Justice on June 11.

If the court rules that Herts county council did not follow the correct legal process when selling the land to developers Segro, the sale will be overturned.

“This will be a huge day for us and everyone who lives in the St Albans area,” said Cllr Nuala Webb, one of the leaders of the Save St Albans: Fight the Freight group.

“If the ruling goes our way it will block the development of a totally unnecessary freight terminal on a totally unsuitable site.”

Campaigners argue that when HCC agreed to buy the land for £1 in the mid-1980s it was bought as permanent open space for the benefit of the local community. In a written submission to the court, HCC claimed they bought the land under a different act but the judge, Mrs Justice Thornton, said the council acknowledged they had not provided any evidence to support this.

“When local authorities buy land, they have to say under which Act they buy it. Council documents from the time continually refer to the area as open space,” said Cllr Webb. “The 1906 Open Spaces Act is very clear. It defines open space as any land where buildings cover no more than five per cent and the rest of the land is laid out as garden, used for recreation or lies waste and unoccupied.

“Under that Act, these 300 acres of valuable Metropolitan Green Belt are held in trust by the council. Rather than selling the land, Herts should be safeguarding it. “

St Albans MP Daisy Cooper and Hertsmere MP and Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden have both urged people to back the campaign. Organisers have arranged another public meeting at the Vision Hall in Radlett on Sunday March 24 at 2pm.

Campaigners believe their case is strengthened by a court ruling that overturned the sale of open space in Shropshire after it had been sold to a developer by a local council.

They are now trying to raise £25,000 to fund the legal challenge. They have already lodged £7,000 with the court to ensure the hearing on June 11 goes ahead. The application for a Judicial Review will be considered at an oral hearing. If permission is granted the full hearing will follow immediately.

“We’ve had a great response so far and raised £14,000 in a couple of weeks,” said Cllr Webb. “It shows the strength of feeling locally and a belief in our case, but we need more people to back us. It really is a case that affects the future of our community.”

For more information and to donate please go to: https://www.savestalbans.com/donate

 

[Edvid]

Application for judicial review was dismissed in the High Court today; the sale of land was ruled to be lawful. The campaign group may appeal after consideration of the written judgement (to be released next week).

Main earthworks on site are planned to commence next month (delivery timeline).

Radlett rail freight campaigners considering appeal after High Court dismisses case

Campaigners are considering their options after a High Court judge dismissed an application for a judicial review into the sale of Radlett…

www.hertsad.co.uk

Campaigners are considering their options after a High Court judge dismissed an application for a judicial review into the sale of Radlett Aerodrome.

The dispute began in 2023, when Hertfordshire County Council announced plans to sell the 1,000 acre site to real estate company Segro.

St Albans: Fight the Freight lodged an application for a judicial review, believing the sale of the land was 'unlawful' under the Metropolitan Green Belt Act of 1938.

They argued that when the council agreed to buy the land in the 1980s for just £1 it was on the condition it was to be preserved as permanent open space and could not be sold for development.

But Mrs Justice [Lieven] ruled today (June 12) that the sale of the former RAF site was lawful, pointing to the fact the land had not been used as open space, despite the original intention.

Campaigner Cllr Nula Webb said: "It's bitterly disappointing as the judge agreed that when the councillors agreed to buy the land in 1985 it was so they could protect it from development. This only makes the judgement harder to accept."

Cllr Terrie Fox, another campaigner for the group, said: "We will consider an appeal. Support from the local community has been fantastic and we want to thank everyone who has donated.

"We believe we have grounds to appeal but we have to mindful of the potential costs and how an appeal could be funded."

The group have already fundraised £60,000 to cover their legal fees in this case.

Segro have begun work on building a freight terminal on the land, which campaigners say will bring thousands of extra lorries and vans every day onto already congested local roads.

A spokesperson for Hertfordshire County Council said: "The decision taken by the judge today to dismiss the case prior to a judicial review is welcome and we will now turn our attention to working with the local district council to maximise the economic benefits that the sale will bring."

Campaigners will now await the written judgement (set to be published next week) before considering their options.

 

[D7666]

Main earthworks on site are planned to commence next month (delivery timeline).

Radlett rail freight campaigners considering appeal after High Court dismisses case

Campaigners are considering their options after a High Court judge dismissed an application for a judicial review into the sale of Radlett…

www.hertsad.co.uk

Commuting past the site I see earthworks in progress for weeks and weeks now, more on Up side than Down, but progressing nonetheless both sides quite a lot of activity on the former aerodrome site side for ~2 months now.

 

[Supercoss]

Planned MML closure December 21st through to 30th to install new under line bridge to serve the SRFI site , construction of bridge ‘ launch pad’ well advanced to permit jacking towards railway.

 

[reduke]

Planned MML closure December 21st through to 30th to install new under line bridge to serve the SRFI site , construction of bridge ‘ launch pad’ well advanced to permit jacking towards railway.

Is there anything published about that yet? Going to make Xmas travel quite interesting...

 

[Edvid]

Nothing (official) in the public domain yet. However, it isn't the only scheme that'll take place during the long Xmas closure - there's the Agar Grove overbridge replacement, OLE125 works south of St Albans, and I suspect track slews for the new station at Wixams too...

 

[The Planner]

Is there anything published about that yet? Going to make Xmas travel quite interesting...

It will just be the reverse of what happens if the WCML is shut. Buses from Bedford to MK and existing trains to Euston.

 

[Edvid]

The legal challenges continue - Save St Albans: Fight the Freight has lodged an appeal against the High Court ruling.

Radlett Freight row set to rumble on after campaigners lodge appeal

St Albans: Fight the Freight have been battling against the controversial decision to sell the 1,000-acre site to real estate company Segro.

www.hertsad.co.uk

St Albans Fight the Freight: Campaigners lodge appeal
9th July

By Liam Fitzpatrick

The long-running dispute over the future of the Radlett Aerodrome site is set to continue after campaigners confirmed they have lodged an appeal against last month's High Court ruling.

St Albans: Fight the Freight has been battling against the controversial decision to sell the 1,000-acre site to real estate company Segro.

It intends to build a freight terminal on the land, which opponents say will bring thousands of extra lorries and vans onto already congested roads.

An appeal made under the Metropolitan Green Belt Act of 1938 was rejected by a judge, who ruled that the sale was lawful.

However, the group had argued that the sale was unlawful, as the land was purchased by Hertfordshire County Council for £1 in the 1980s under the condition that it would be "preserved as permanent open space and could not be sold for development".

Campaigners say that the judge largely based her decision on information that came at a late stage from a farmer who claimed to have a tenancy agreement that proved the land was not open space.

They say that they had no time to challenge this evidence and that with more time, they could have persuaded the judge to come to a different decision.

Campaign leader Cllr Terrie Smith said: "We accept that the farmer has had a tenancy agreement since 2017, but up until then he had a rolling three month grazing licence, which is consistent with the land being designated open space.

"It's not clear who knew about the change, whether it was publicised or indeed whether it was even legal.

"It seems like much of Herts County Council policy it was based on assumption that the land was not designated open space even though neither we nor they can find any documentation to show this was the case."

The group now has two weeks to prepare its legal argument ahead of the next stage of the ongoing dispute.

For context, here's the ruling in question:

Challenge to Council’s decision to sell land to… - Landmark Chambers

Explore 'Challenge to Council’s decision to sell land to Strategic Rail Freight Interchange developer dismissed' at Landmark Chambers for in-depth…

www.landmarkchambers.co.uk

In June 2023 Hertfordshire County Council sold land within its ownership at the former Radlett Airfield to SEGRO (Radlett) Plc. SEGRO is in the process of building a Strategic Rail Freight Interchange on the land, pursuant to a planning permission granted on appeal by the Secretary of State in 2014. In September 2023 a Community Interest Company – St Albans: [Fight] the Freight CIC – applied for judicial review of the Council’s decision to sell the land to SEGRO, arguing that the sale was unlawful on two grounds:

1. when the Council had originally bought the land it did so pursuant to the Green Belt (London and Home Counties) Act 1938 and it unlawfully failed to comply with the notification and consent requirements set out in s.5 of the 1938 Act before selling the land to SEGRO. Under this ground the Claimant sought an Order quashing the sale; alternatively
2. the Council had originally bought the Land under s.9 of the Open Spaces Act 1906, the Land was therefore held on trust for the public pursuant to section 10 of the 1906 Act, and the Council sold the land without complying with the publicity requirements set out in s.123(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972, meaning that the land was still subject to the s.10 trust. Under this ground, the Claimant sought a declaration to that effect.

Lieven J considered the claim at a rolled-up hearing on 11 June 2024. Shortly before the hearing, the Claimant abandoned its argument that the Council had acquired the land under the 1938 Act. Lieven J refused the Claimant permission to apply for judicial review, upholding the Council and SEGRO’s arguments that the Council had not had the power to acquire the land under s.9 of the Open Spaces Act 1906 because at the time the Council acquired the land it did not fall within the definition of “open space” set out in s.20 of the 1906 Act; and that the evidence demonstrated that the Council did not in fact intend to acquire the land for the purposes of holding it as open space for the benefit of the public and did not in fact do so. The Court also found that the claim had not been brought promptly as required by CPR 54.5(1).

Robert Walton KC acted for the County Council, instructed by the Council’s Legal Services Department.

David Forsdick KC acted for SEGRO, instructed by Gowlings LLP.

 

[59CosG95]

I have seen on AIVR that a few Twin Track Cantilever (TTC) masts (sans booms) have been installed between the M25 and the A414 - which must presumably be for all this.
My suspicions are that the OLE over the affected area is going to have to be de-wired to a point, the trackbed is removed, the tunnel is installed, the trackbed is reinstated, and finally the OLE is reinstated.

 

[Edvid]

Permission to appeal the High Court ruling has been rejected by the Court of Appeal.

Radlett Aerodrome campaigners 'devastated' by court ruling

A judge says they cannot appeal a ruling preventing a challenge to the council's sale of the site.

www.bbc.co.uk

Aerodrome campaigners 'devastated' by court ruling​

Martin Heath
BBC News, Hertfordshire
8 October 2024

Campaigners said they were "devastated" and "disheartened" by a ruling which could mark the end of their efforts to save a historic aerodrome.

St Albans: Fight the Freight group had appealed against a decision there could be no judicial review into the sale of Radlett Aerodrome in Hertfordshire.

A judge has now rejected the appeal, clearing the way for the site to become a rail freight terminal.

The group said it would now concentrate on monitoring the terminal as it was developed.

The government gave permission for the property development firm Segro to build a freight terminal on 1,000 acres of land at the old aerodrome in 2014.

While most of the site previously belonged to private owners and was sold by them, 300 acres were owned and sold by the council in a £34m deal.

Campaigners said the council had bought the land in 1984 for £1 so it would be kept as "open space".

The group sought a judicial review into the council's sale of their part of the site, but Mrs Justice Lieven refused permission for a review in June.

She said the council might have intended the land to be used as open space, but it had actually been a farm, which did not count as open space.

Campaigners sought permission to appeal that ruling, but this has now been refused by Lord Justice Lewison, who decided the application was made too late and did not have any reasonable prospects of success.

The group said: "We are devastated by this result, as we truly believed in the justice and necessity of our cause. This loss is painful, but it also reminds us of the long road ahead and the challenges we must confront."

The group added that it would now "keep up pressure on Segro to adhere to the planning permissions and conditions that have been set out as they develop the site".

A spokesperson for Hertfordshire County Council said: "The decision taken by the Judge to dismiss the application for an appeal is welcome and we will now continue to focus our attention to working with the local district council to maximise the economic benefits that the sale will bring."

 

[Edvid]

Main construction of the facility is now going ahead, with VolkerFitzpatrick involved in its construction:

VolkerFitzpatrick start construction of first phase of Radlett Strategic Rail Freight Interchange | VolkerFitzpatrick

VolkerFitzpatrick is proud to announce that it has started to construct the first phase of the Radlett Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (SRFI) on behalf of

www.volkerfitzpatrick.co.uk

10 October 2024

VolkerFitzpatrick start construction of first phase of Radlett Strategic Rail Freight Interchange​

VolkerFitzpatrick is proud to announce that it has started to construct the first phase of the Radlett Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (SRFI) on behalf of SEGRO, a leading owner, manager and developer of modern industrial property. The new interchange will be served from the Midlands Mainline (MML) railway via a new two road rail connection.

VolkerFitzpatrick is currently working on the multi-million pound rail contract, incorporating a new underpass as well as overhead line equipment works, lineside civils, installation of switches and crossings for the main line connection and signalling. The underpass is essential not only to enable further works on the project but will also carry the two road rail line feed into a new rail terminal area and allow the construction of the associated warehousing.

This prestigious project marks a significant milestone in enhancing the UK's rail freight infrastructure, providing substantial benefits for the local economy and the national supply chain.

To install the new 60-metre precast underpass structure, currently being constructed next to the rail line, VolkerFitzpatrick is using Freyssineyt’s unique and complex cabling system that has been constructed underneath the concrete structure. When complete, the underpass structure weighing over 6000 tonnes, will slowly be moved through an excavation under the rail line during a Network Rail 9-day blockade over the 2024 Christmas period.

[...]

Courtesy of @masekwm here's another view of the underpass and the wider site:

 

[masekwm]

 

[richieb1971]

I am confused why we are building a warehouse distribution centre by rail next to a railway which is not W10.

Warehouses use W10 containers right?

edit - Noticed there is an upgrade to W12 planned. Interesting.

 

[Bald Rick]

I am confused why we are building a warehouse distribution centre by rail next to a railway which is not W10.

your confusion is well placed.

edit - Noticed there is an upgrade to W12 planned. Interesting.

Not on this section, to my knowledge, although happy to be proved wrong. It would be expensive and disruptive.

 

[Meerkat]

I am confused why we are building a warehouse distribution centre by rail next to a railway which is not W10.

Warehouses use W10 containers right?

edit - Noticed there is an upgrade to W12 planned. Interesting.

They aren't doing that. They are building a warehouse distribution centre next to the M25 with some railway greenwashing to get the planning etc

 

[John Webb]

They aren't doing that. They are building a warehouse distribution centre next to the M25* with some railway greenwashing to get the planning etc

* insert here "but without any direct connection"........

 

[Verulamius]

Given the south connection into the site, what freight services are likely to use it?

London Gateway is too close.
Felixstowe?
Southampton (I think that Birmingham was seen as too close?)
Other?

 

[Nottingham59]

Given the south connection into the site, what freight services are likely to use it?

London Gateway is too close.
Felixstowe?
Southampton (I think that Birmingham was seen as too close?)
Other?

I see DP World runs a "modal shift programme" to subsidise intermodal freight by rail. I wonder if RSFI will take advantage of that and run the occasional intermodal from Southampton or Gateway at night? Will deep sea containers need to be in pocket well waggons to fit W10 gauge?

Modal Shift Programme In The UK | DP World

The Modal Shift Programme in the UK by DP World advances low-carbon transport, reducing road emissions and improving logistics efficiency across networks.

www.dpworld.com

 

[Bald Rick]

Given the south connection into the site, what freight services are likely to use it?

London Gateway is too close.
Felixstowe?
Southampton (I think that Birmingham was seen as too close?)
Other?

Its a very, very good question. Felixstowe and Southampton are both too close as well, really, both being a sub 2hr HGV trip port to Radlett (and therefore rather quicker than the train could ever be)

I see DP World runs a "modal shift programme" to subsidise intermodal freight by rail. I wonder if RSFI will take advantage of that and run the occasional intermodal from Southampton or Gateway at night? Will deep sea containers need to be in pocket well waggons to fit W10 gauge?

Modal Shift Programme In The UK | DP World

The Modal Shift Programme in the UK by DP World advances low-carbon transport, reducing road emissions and improving logistics efficiency across networks.

www.dpworld.com

Yes, any containers higher than 8’, ie almost all of them, will have to be in pocket wagons, which rather hampers the economics, especially for short runs (eg to Felixstowe or Southampton).

Whilst it is W8 gauge - suitable for 8’6” containers - from Cricklewood to Bedford, it is only W7 on the Dudding Hill line through to Acton (where the Southampton trains would run) and W6 on the link to Gospel Oak (where the Felixstowe and Gateway trains would run) and that is 8’ max on standard wagons.

 

[Verulamius]

Its a very, very good question. Felixstowe and Southampton are both too close as well, really, both being a sub 2hr HGV trip port to Radlett (and therefore rather quicker than the train could ever be)




Yes, any containers higher than 8’, ie almost all of them, will have to be in pocket wagons, which rather hampers the economics, especially for short runs (eg to Felixstowe or Southampton).

Whilst it is W8 gauge - suitable for 8’6” containers - from Cricklewood to Bedford, it is only W7 on the Dudding Hill line through to Acton (where the Southampton trains would run) and W6 on the link to Gospel Oak (where the Felixstowe and Gateway trains would run) and that is 8’ max on standard wagons.

According to the planning permission granted by the Government in 2014 there are certain railworks required. https://assets.publishing.service.g...14-07-14_DL_IR_SRFI_Radlett_REDET_2109433.pdf

RAIL RELATED WORKS – GAUGE ENHANCEMENT TO THE MIDLAND MAINLINE
13.1 Not more than 175,000 square metres of floor area in the Units shall be occupied until the
Midland Mainline Gauge Enhancement Works have been completed such that the W10 gauge
enhancement has been provided either:
(a) from the development to Acton Yard, West London Junction and Willesden Junction
(Acton Branch), or
(b) from the development to Junction Road Junction.

 

[Bald Rick]

According to the planning permission granted by the Government in 2014 there are certain railworks required. https://assets.publishing.service.g...14-07-14_DL_IR_SRFI_Radlett_REDET_2109433.pdf

According to the planning permission granted by the Government in 2014 there are certain railworks required. https://assets.publishing.service.g...14-07-14_DL_IR_SRFI_Radlett_REDET_2109433.pdf

IMHO they will find a way of getting out of that, once the cost of the work is understood.

 

[richieb1971]

I assume a warehouse customer would understand they cannot be connected to the container grid by rail?

It sounds to me like the powers that be just want this over the line and doing it in the wrong order. The midland mainline is already been subjected to huge amounts of service disruption and this would be another level again.

Does this project have any notable benefits because I haven't read any yet?

 

[Nottingham59]

I assume a warehouse customer would understand they cannot be connected to the container grid by rail?

They won't care. It's next to the M25.

Does this project have any notable benefits because I haven't read any yet?

It will be very profitable for the people who are building it and renting out the space.

The sadness is that the planning system requires the building of rail infrastructure that will not be used, when for the same money a useful grade separation or other enhancement could have been built elsewhere on the railway network to the benefit of all rail users.

 

[richieb1971]

They won't care. It's next to the M25.

It will be very profitable for the people who are building it and renting out the space.

The sadness is that the planning system requires the building of rail infrastructure that will not be used, when for the same money a useful grade separation or other enhancement could have been built elsewhere on the railway network to the benefit of all rail users.

Wait. So the rail connection is already deemed useless? That its simply a tick box exercise? I hate talking about railways, as passionate as I am about them there are too many elements of sillyness in this world. This project is upsetting people left and right, being built on a false premise and offering a fraction of what can be gotten from it being elsewhere. Doesn't something like this require sign-off by network rail for suitability?

 

[Bald Rick]

I assume a warehouse customer would understand they cannot be connected to the container grid by rail?

They can be connected by train, but not particularly efficinetly. Any potential lessee of the warehousing would obtain quotes from FOCs for their anticipated rail traffic before signing up.

So the rail connection is already deemed useless?

That‘s a bit strong. Some people on here are questioning the viability of the link for intermodal traffic (including me). Of course we might be wrong and it might see loads of container trains in and out.

Given it is under construction long before any of the warehousing, I would expect it to be used to import aggregate etc for the site construction, so it may well be of some use. Notwithstanding that there is a well established aggregates terminal just across the way!

 

[sh24]

There will be a number of business who will consider rail even if its more expensive to tackle their ESG objectives. And depending on who uses the site, there could be some domestic use to Scotland.

Sadly Brexit has killed off any real chance of intermodal use to Europe.

 

[Bald Rick]

And depending on who uses the site, there could be some domestic use to Scotland.

Could be, but I can’t see what attraction it has over services from DIRFT or the new Northampton site (also a SEGRO park). The latter two have direct rail connections inbound that can and are / will be served effectively and efficiently from Gateway / Felixstowe / Southampton, and also have direct northbound connections to the main freight route to Scotland. Any Caledonian bound trains from Radlett would have to head south, do a tour of north London, or possibly including a run round, before passing Northampton 3-4 hours later. They would also have roughly 2/3rds the capacity of those using Northampton, ie same cost for 2/3rds the income.

In an industry with margins so wafer thin they make an After Eight look morbidly obese, I personally can’t see how it adds up. Perhaps I‘m wrong.

 

[richieb1971]

The problem is the pre-requisite of a rail connection signoff to get planning permission without Network rail having a tick box for suitability.

Is it just the 35 miles between Radlett and Bedford that is the problem for W10+? Or are we talking north of Bedford/Leicester as well?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Could be, but I can’t see what attraction it has over services from DIRFT or the new Northampton site (also a SEGRO park). The latter two have direct rail connections inbound that can and are / will be served effectively and efficiently from Gateway / Felixstowe / Southampton, and also have direct northbound connections to the main freight route to Scotland. Any Caledonian bound trains from Radlett would have to head south, do a tour of north London, or possibly including a run round, before passing Northampton 3-4 hours later. They would also have roughly 2/3rds the capacity of those using Northampton, ie same cost for 2/3rds the income.

In an industry with margins so wafer thin they make an After Eight look morbidly obese, I personally can’t see how it adds up. Perhaps I‘m wrong.

Land cost them 120m and looks like they will expend north of 100m developing the site so must have some customers lines up to take that sort of risk.

 

[Bald Rick]

Land cost them 120m and looks like they will expend north of 100m developing the site so must have some customers lines up to take that sort of risk.

Oh they have customers all right. Whether those customers are expecting to use rail or not, who knows.

I heard a rumour a few years ago that Royal Mail were signed up, no idea of that is true or not.

I’d be surprised if the rail works cost less than £100m.