Bescot sleeper factory refused planning permission

[Greg13]

Sandwell Council have refused the planning application from Network Rail to build a new concrete sleeper factory on Bescot yard.

Whilst, to me, it seemed a badly designed project initially (road access through a quiet housing estate with 60 lorry movements a day a particularly bad idea) the latest plans seemed pretty reasonable so I'm somewhat surprised Sandwell have given in to the public pressure.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/2019/12/17/railway-sleeper-factory-refused-by-council-planners/

Network Rail wanted to build the factory to produce 600,000 sleepers a year on the Bescot sidings freight yard on the Wednesbury and Walsall border.

But the scheme was met with fierce opposition from residents, while prominent politicians including Tom Watson had called for it to be scrapped.

The application was refused by Sandwell Council's planning committee at an extraordinary meeting to the relief of locals who have campaigned against the scheme for more than two years.

 

[furnessvale]

If NR appeal and win, the costs have to be paid by Sandwell Council so the same residents will be paying at the end of the day.

 

[randyrippley]

Daft place to put it really, you have neither the cement or aggregate on site so both would have to be trucked in.
Better to co-locate it with an existing rail connected cement kiln, like Clitheroe - which also has local supplies of aggregate

 

[Ianno87]

Daft place to put it really, you have neither the cement or aggregate on site so both would have to be trucked in.
Better to co-locate it with an existing rail connected cement kiln, like Clitheroe - which also has local supplies of aggregate

Conversely, Bescot is centrally located on the rail network so is better placed for onward distribution of sleepers by rail.

 

[GB]

Daft place to put it really, you have neither the cement or aggregate on site so both would have to be trucked in.
Better to co-locate it with an existing rail connected cement kiln, like Clitheroe - which also has local supplies of aggregate

Clitheroe is nearly 120 miles away...I am sure if NR wanted it there that's where they would have planned it to be. Also, Tallington seems to cope ok not having its own local aggregate.

 

[edwin_m]

If somewhere has good rail connections then bringing in cement and aggregate shouldn't be a problem. In fact it's better to be nearer the main sites of use than near the quarry, because worksites also generate material that can be brought back and recycled for new sleepers.

Bescot has rail lines in about six directions, depending how you count them, most of which have reasonable capacity available. Having plenty of alternatives is particularly important because sleepers are likely to be needed during engineering hours, when other lines may also be shut.

 

[swt_passenger]

So what’s the predicted date for projects to start being cancelled due to a national shortage of sleepers?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Having a factory at a cement works effectively ties you in to a single supplier.

The site at Washwood Heath (being taken for HS2-related works) had its stone brought in by rail. I am unclear why Bescot would have to see it come in lorries. Can anyone clarify?

 

[furnessvale]

Having a factory at a cement works effectively ties you in to a single supplier.

The site at Washwood Heath (being taken for HS2-related works) had its stone brought in by rail. I am unclear why Bescot would have to see it come in lorries. Can anyone clarify?

The intention always was that stone would come in by rail as well as finished sleepers out by rail. The 30 HGVs daily would probably be transfers from nearby rail served cement and steel terminals.

As for noise and dust, I'm sure the ELEVATED M6 alongside the site will overshadow anything this plant could produce.

 

[The Planner]

Daft place to put it really, you have neither the cement or aggregate on site so both would have to be trucked in.
Better to co-locate it with an existing rail connected cement kiln, like Clitheroe - which also has local supplies of aggregate

That happens now though with Washwood Heath, with loaded trains from Peak Forest.

 

[furnessvale]

That happens now though with Washwood Heath, with loaded trains from Peak Forest.

Buxton limestone is also of excellent quality for concrete which is why it is now railed to destinations as far away as Southampton. Not all limestones are of that quality.

 

[randyrippley]

Clitheroe is nearly 120 miles away...I am sure if NR wanted it there that's where they would have planned it to be. Also, Tallington seems to cope ok not having its own local aggregate.

Clitheroe was just an example of one I knew, there are many others as shown in this listed from Network Rail dated 2013

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...cted-cement-handling-depots-February-2013.pdf

 

[furnessvale]

Clitheroe was just an example of one I knew, there are many others as shown in this listed from Network Rail dated 2013

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...cted-cement-handling-depots-February-2013.pdf

If you re going down that route, the quality of the limestone for concrete making is the first consideration. Bescot was chosen for its potential in distribution of the finished product

 

[AndrewE]

If you re going down that route, the quality of the limestone for concrete making is the first consideration. Bescot was chosen for its potential in distribution of the finished product

It certainly is... limestone isn't generally a very hard rock, and apart from that some of it can even cause Alkali Silica Reaction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkali–silica_reaction - even if it does give a hard-enough aggregate.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

If NR appeal and win, the costs have to be paid by Sandwell Council so the same residents will be paying at the end of the day.

Not necessarily, you have to have unreasonably refused the planning application to be awarded costs against you. Many aspects of a planning application will be subjective. That disturbance to residents is created is not in itself a reason for refusal. It's a matter of degree, a balance of impacts on residents (or others) and benefits to wider society of the project going ahead.

 

[yorksrob]

Were there any 'runner-up' locations which may now be reconsidered ?

 

[Bald Rick]

The intention always was that stone would come in by rail as well as finished sleepers out by rail. The 30 HGVs daily would probably be transfers from nearby rail served cement and steel terminals.

As for noise and dust, I'm sure the ELEVATED M6 alongside the site will overshadow anything this plant could produce.

The 30 HGVs a day are more likely to be the delivery of ancillary items in for sleeper fabrication (reinforcing wire, clips, nylons, housings etc), and perhaps some sleeper deliveries out in low volumes for local maintenance work where it is much cheaper to use road than rail.

 

[Amlag]

Bescot is clearly the location preferred by NR ..the planners could have put conditions on that required much greater use of rail to almost make road transport very negligible.

The only possible alternative central location I can think of is Crewe.

 

[yorksrob]

Bescot is clearly the location preferred by NR ..the planners could have put conditions on that required much greater use of rail to almost make road transport very negligible.

The only possible alternative central location I can think of is Crewe.

There are at least plenty of goods yards and sidings you could build it on there.

 

[AndrewE]

There are at least plenty of goods yards and sidings you could build it on there.

I wondered about that option (Basford Hall) too, but actually (and having cross-checked on Google earth aerial view) I think most of it is in use.
However there is poor quality farmland available east of the running lines as far south as the A500 (with no nearby housing, but with direct main road / bypass access already built.) As it currently floods badly then building it up a metre with waste (from Blaenau?) would provide a relatively sensible location - apart from the fact that all sorts of planning people hope for other more lucrative uses.
It's not so good for access to the East of the UK or the NE-SW spine though.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Were there any 'runner-up' locations which may now be reconsidered ?

From the Planning Statement accompanying the planning application.

28 potential sites looked at. Narrowed down to a shortlist of 6:
Bescot Sidings
Daw Mill Colliery, Warwickshire
Northampton Castle Yard, Northamptonshire
Washwood Heath Up Yard, West Midlands
Kingmoor Depot, Carlisle
Eastleigh Depot, Hampshire

Link to the application:
https://webcaps.sandwell.gov.uk/pub...s.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=PVNL23NRL3C00

 

[yorksrob]

From the Planning Statement accompanying the planning application.

28 potential sites looked at. Narrowed down to a shortlist of 6:
Bescot Sidings
Daw Mill Colliery, Warwickshire
Northampton Castle Yard, Northamptonshire
Washwood Heath Up Yard, West Midlands
Kingmoor Depot, Carlisle
Eastleigh Depot, Hampshire

Link to the application:
https://webcaps.sandwell.gov.uk/pub...s.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=PVNL23NRL3C00

There's a few to go at then.

 

[The Planner]

Washwood Heath Up Sidings has been lost to another development, Daw Mill stood no chance due to objections by locals. Its down to the other 3, arguably 2 seeing as it would be for the Western side of the country supply of sleepers so I don't see Eastleigh being high up the list.

 

[Elecman]

Cant see why the locals would object at Daw Mill, the site is large, still contaminated with coal and slack waste, so hardly suitable for housing development. Plus it has a rail connection.

 

[The Planner]

Cant see why the locals would object at Daw Mill, the site is large, still contaminated with coal and slack waste, so hardly suitable for housing development. Plus it has a rail connection.

They don't want any redevelopment of the site at all, except back to nature. No more appeals allowed apparently.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/local-news/daw-mill-colliery-decision-15182975

 

[MML]

Was the site of the former rail marshalling yard and TMD at Healey Mills near Wakefield ever considered ?
I know it is located towards the eastern side of the country and a more westerly location was being sought to join an existing site at Doncaster.

But this location does have:
- good East/West rail access for both inbound delivery of raw materials and outbound finished sleepers.
- the site is a brown field site located in a dip in the Calder river valley, so there is likely to be minimal environmental impact to the surrounding area.
- close proximity to high voltage electric power supply.
- an area of high unemployment.

Could Healey Mills be an alternative site as it's location certainly satisfies the government's leveling up agenda by bringing new employment to the North ?

 

[The Planner]

Was the site of the former rail marshalling yard and TMD at Healey Mills near Wakefield ever considered ?
I know it is located towards the eastern side of the country and a more westerly location was being sought to join an existing site at Doncaster.

But this location does have:
- good East/West rail access for both inbound delivery of raw materials and outbound finished sleepers.
- the site is a brown field site located in a dip in the Calder river valley, so there is likely to be minimal environmental impact to the surrounding area.
- close proximity to high voltage electric power supply.
- an area of high unemployment.

Could Healey Mills be an alternative site as it's location certainly satisfies the government's leveling up agenda by bringing new employment to the North ?

No real use for the LNW/Western side of the country.

 

[Spartacus]

Was the site of the former rail marshalling yard and TMD at Healey Mills near Wakefield ever considered ?
I know it is located towards the eastern side of the country and a more westerly location was being sought to join an existing site at Doncaster.

But this location does have:
- good East/West rail access for both inbound delivery of raw materials and outbound finished sleepers.
- the site is a brown field site located in a dip in the Calder river valley, so there is likely to be minimal environmental impact to the surrounding area.
- close proximity to high voltage electric power supply.
- an area of high unemployment.

Could Healey Mills be an alternative site as it's location certainly satisfies the government's leveling up agenda by bringing new employment to the North ?

I understand there’s one in the works East of Castleford.