News

Plans to build lorry parks that provide drivers with safe, secure overnight facilities in Suffolk are being bogged down by concerns over their commercial viability because of their (small) size. Despite being the location of the largest deep sea container terminal in the UK, with major plans to expand its operations over the next few years, lorry drivers in Suffolk are no better off than in much of the rest of the UK. They are faced with a desperate lack of parking facilities available.

However, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act reveal Mid-Suffolk District Council (MSDC) and Suffolk County Council (SCC) are now engaged in attempts to reverse this situation, "in the absence of a government policy to provide or encourage the development of new sites", as SCC claimed in one letter to MSDC in January. Ambitious proposals include the building of truck parks every 20 to 30 miles alongside the trunk road network. But what has also emerged is that local authorities are reluctant to give the green light to plans by developers unless they offer at least 250 spaces, because truckstop operator Nightowl claims this is the minimum needed to make the business financially viable.

This decision has left SCC and MSDC struggling to balance the needs of the road freight industry with developers' attempts at providing essential lorry parking facilities - albeit on a limited scale. This situation is compounded by the government's refusal to subsidise truckstops.  In the meantime, drivers are forced to seek out spaces at fewer lorry parks and hoping not to break drivers' hours rules. A knock-on effect is that hundreds of Suffolk residents have complained to the council since 2005 about trucks parking overnight on industrial estates and in lay-bys.

A countywide parking survey in 2007 showed that there was a demand for almost 650 parking spaces in Suffolk, with 500 of these along the A14. SCC said it had a need for 172 spaces and Mid-Suffolk believed it required an extra 95 HGV parking spaces. But these figures are now being drastically altered due to the local authorities' concerns over financial viability, as well as an expected 75% increase in movement of goods vehicles by 2021 due to regeneration in south Felixstowe. SCC and MSDC deny they are taking into account the financial business model of a developer's plans. Both insist the success or otherwise of a potential truck park is a matter for the individual developer and (ITALS)not(ITALS) the planning authority.

But in a letter dated 28 January 2008 from a senior engineer within SCC's integrated transport group to the planning policy officer at MSDC, which discusses plans to build a 39-space truck stop along the A14 at Creeting St Peter, it states: "This is not a sufficient number to cater for the current demand between Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich, and will be unable to accommodate the expected growing demand I would also query the site's commercial viability given its proposed size."

An e-mail from MSDC to SCC three weeks' later highlights the growing unease within the councils regarding developers' plans to offer small-scale-yet-secure overnight parking facilities. It admits the developer WH Jardine might question why SCC claimed less than four months earlier that there was a need for 95 truck spaces in Mid-Suffolk, which it planned to provide, but that had now increased to 250. "If I were Jardines, my first question would be, 'is this a change in the strategy/policy and what is the evidence to support it. Incidentally, Jardines has been promoting their site for more than 10 years and are unlikely to roll over either for an allocation or an application unless the evidence is clear-cut."

Another e-mail, heavily censored, but thought to have been sent from the Highways Agency to one of the Suffolk councils on 14 February this year, refers to land in Trimley that a client of property consultants Strutt & Parker wants to turn into a lorry park. Highlighting the authorities' concerns about developers not considering the long-term financial implications, the e-mail says: "I can formally set out the HA's position, which is no objection in principle. But I did say think seriously about viability. There is no point in having parks which fold within a few years, or if there are too many sharing a limited market in a particular area."

The MSDC e-mail admits that it is now "playing catch-up", presumably because of its realisation that lorry drivers are suffering because of a lack of parking areas. When (ITALS)Commercial Motor(ITALS) asked the council to explain why it is struggling with this policy reversal a spokesman explains: "The council has previously prevented development of this sort in its open countryside because of protective policies in the structure and local plans. Now we must develop a fair and equitable process to agree which of the sites suggested are appropriate to build into the local planning documents - but these must also respect the need for other sites to be developed beyond Mid Suffolk."

The spokesman adds: "We don't do financial matters when it comes to deciding planning matters. Operators may see 250 as a financial threshold, and wish to submit proposals at that scale, but we will not require it or deny it because of that reason." For now, both MSDC and SCC say they are engaged in regular meetings and briefings on the availability of truck park land. MSDC says a "number of sites will need to be properly assessed," but that "this work remains to be commenced". SCC says it set up an LGV steering group in 2005 and, since then, it "has been working with its district councils, freight and haulage groups and private developers to look at potential areas for development as lorry parks along the network. Ultimately, these would need to be taken forward by developers."

When SCC was asked if its official view was that the government has no policy for providing or encouraging development of lorry parks, a spokeswoman quoted a Department for Transport (DfT) circular, which states: "The full cost of any works within the motorway or trunk road boundary, including traffic management, will be met by the developer" But questions remain over how many more plans for small-scale, vital overnight lorry parking sites will be cast aside on the grounds of potential commercial failure before the government changes this policy.