Proof of Evidence of Geoff Clarke on 21st February 2017
Daw Mill Colliery, Tamworth Road, Arley
For the Appellant, Harworth Estates
PINS ref no: APP/R3705/W/16/3149827
Copy 1 of 1
Daw Mill
© 2017 AECOM Limited. All Rights Reserved.
This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.
AECOM
Daw Mill
1. Table of Contents
SUMMARY ...... 4 01 - Qualifications and Experience ...... 5 02 – Introduction & Scope of Evidence ...... 7 03 – The Proposed Development ...... 8 04 – Rail Policy Overview ...... 23 05 – Rolling Stock Demand ...... 42 06 – Daw Mill Site Characteristics...... 52 07 - Alternative Sites ...... 58 9. Appendix I: Additional Site Data ...... 85 10. Appendix II: Expanded Network Map ...... 92
AECOM
Daw Mill
2. SUMMARY
TBA
AECOM 4/94
5.01 01 - Qualifications and Experience
1.1 I am Geoff Clarke, and I am Regional Director of AECOM’s Freight and Logistics team. I am an Adjunct Professor of Transport Studies at Liverpool John Moores University and hold a BSc Honours degree in Business Management and Transport Planning from Aston University. I am a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport and hold an International Certificate of Professional Competence in International Road Freight and Passenger Transport.
1.2 I have over 35 years in the logistics and transport profession, 22 years in operational distribution at BOCM Pauls and United Biscuits and 13 years in consultancy with AECOM, whom I joined in 2003. During that time I have worked on over 40 rail freight studies. Of particular relevance to the freight and logistics issues raised by this inquiry include the following:
1.3 On international assignments, I have advised the Romanian Government on their Transport Masterplan, considering the need for rail freight terminals across the whole country and made recommendations for 12 schemes. I have also assessed demand for Rail Baltica, an 800km new railway line including passenger and freight projections. Finally I developed the business case for an international logistics hub to serve Riga, the capital of Latvia.
1.4 In the UK, I worked with the Department for Transport to develop their Rail Freight Transport Strategy, in which I led a project to forecast rail freight volumes across 14 key sectors as well as identify constraints to that growth and analyse their impact on meeting DfT targets for carbon reduction. This work thereby gives me a strong background on the current state of the rail freight industry, where the potential growth for rail freight lies and what infrastructure is needed to realise that growth.
1.5 I have advised local authorities in Wales as well as the Welsh National Government on the feasibility of various rail freight opportunities in North Wales including for an Intermodal terminal at Deeside, which involved an analysis of train path availability, signalling implications, and operational requirements on site as well as the potential demand for intermodal services from a variety of large businesses.
1.6 In 2011, I advised the East Midlands Development Agency on potential rail distribution sites in the area. This study comprised collating a long list of potential distribution sites that could be rail served, and establishing a weighted scoring
AECOM 5/94
method as a means of choosing the most suitable sites for the needs of the logistics industry. The project concluded with three sites recommended.
1.7 Between 2006 and 2010 I also provided Highways England (then Highways Agency) with planning advice on numerous rail connected terminals including Ince Resource Recovery Park, Cheshire, Howbury Park, Kent International Gateway and Radlett.
1.8 I have been instructed by Harworth Estates (the Appellant) with regard to this site since 21st September 2016). Whilst I was not involved in the outline planning application for the site (reference PAP/2014/0339) I have fully acquainted myself with its contents and process.
1.9 I understand my duty to the inquiry, have complied with and will continue to comply with that duty. I confirm that this evidence identifies all facts which I regard as being relevant to the opinions that I have expressed and that the Inspector’s attention has been drawn to any matter which would affect the validity of those opinions. I believe that the facts stated within this proof are true and that the opinions expressed are correct.
AECOM 6/94
3. 02 – Introduction & Scope of Evidence
2.1 AECOM were instructed by Harworth Estates to provide proof of evidence for an appeal against the refusal of planning application ref PAP/2014/0339 on 3rd November 2015 by North Warwickshire Borough Council for the former Daw Mill Colliery site, Tamworth Road, North Warwickshire.
2.2 The Council identified the following reason for refusal that is relevant to my evidence:
“The site is in the Green Belt. The proposals represent inappropriate development which causes substantial harm to the openness of the Green belt and the purposes of including land within it. There is additional harm caused by adverse impacts on the landscape character, visual amenity, the natural environment and residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers through noise and lighting impacts. There is also considered to be moderate highway impact as a consequence of whether the mitigation proposed has a reasonable prospect of being implemented. The material considerations put forward by the applicant are not of sufficient weight to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to outweigh the harms caused by the inappropriateness and the other harm caused. This is due to the generic nature of the proposal; that it contains alternatives and that mitigation measures are not fully advanced. The proposal does not therefore accord with Policies NW1, NW2, NW3, NW10, NW12, NW13, and NW15 of the North Warwickshire Core Strategy 2014 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.”
2.3 Harworth Estates have appealed against the refusal of planning permission and employed me to address freight and logistics matters. In this proof of evidence I consider the following within the context of the rail transport sector.
2.4 Section 3: Sets out the nature of the development proposed at Daw Mill, and how this would operate.
2.5 Section 4: States how the site proposed sits within the framework of international, national, regional and local policy currently in place regarding the growth of the rail industry.
2.6 Section 5: Considers the need for the types of facilities proposed at the Daw Mill site
2.7 Section 6: Considers the opportunity presented by Daw Mill in terms of its suitability
2.8 Section 7: Looks at alternative sites for the facilities proposed at Daw Mill
2.9 Section 8: I draw my conclusions
AECOM 7/94
4. 03 – The Proposed Development
3.1 In this section I will consider whether Daw Mill can provide an appropriate site for three immediate needs of the rail industry. These are:
Rail Manufacturing and Construction Site
Train Maintenance Facility
Train Manufacturing Facility
3.2 These three uses are closely related and similar in nature and are all growth areas serving the rail industry expansion. As such there are some common themes that run through each of their operational and layout requirements. These shall be demonstrated before I go on to assess the uses separately, where I shall note any important differences from these initial statements. I will set out details regarding an indicative layout of the site for the various uses identified, how that layout fits into the parameters plan as described within the appeal description and specifically respond to the issues raised in the Council’s reasons for refusal and how these are mitigated as well as consider the operational and environmental impacts of such uses.
Commonalities
3.3 The following section outlines features that are in my view common to and apply equally to each of the potential uses of the site.
3.4 The site covers 30 hectares in size, and is a rectangular shaped plot of vacant land with an existing, active rail connection with several sidings. The topography of the location is that it is a stepped site on an incline. The rail and manufacturing operation would take place adjacent to the main line on the lower level. Staff parking and some low rise support buildings would be on the upper level.
3.5 Given the layout of the existing track, all three of the proposed uses have a similar physical design, which involves having an indoor manufacturing facility, sidings to the south west and then either sundry hardstanding or office/technical/distribution developments to the north of the sidings.
3.6 Developing the site in this way with room for expansion will enable current and future demand to be met on the existing footprint, without future requirements for significant earthworks or other intrusive development.
3.7 The site would operate on a 24/7 basis and hence would have a proportion of staff working on shifts as this is the most economical way to run operations of the nature I
AECOM 8/94
propose. The Hitachi train manufacturing site in Newton Aycliffe, County Durham for example will work in three shifts as production accelerates. This spreads journeys to work throughout the day rather than having peaks at traditional rush hour periods (say 8am and 5pm). The site would have appropriately sized employee parking areas depending upon the number of employees. There would be a security fence and gatehouse to monitor and control vehicle movements.
3.8 It is anticipated that any manufacturing B2 type building would be built to modern standards. There could be some support buildings and a vehicle handling area. Establishing a rail sector based industrial activity means that a significant proportion of inputs can be brought to and from the site by rail.
3.9 The environmental credentials of promoting rail over road journeys are well documented. Although it is recognised that with any development there may be sensitivities relating to the site and concerns of local residents around traffic, noise and lighting impacts on the surrounding communities, the proposed uses outlined look to minimise all of these, in particular traffic impacts, by providing options that maximise the use of rail therefore limiting the need for road access. The majority of this work will take place at the northern area of the site, away from the most noise sensitive areas around Daw Mill cottages.
3.10 The majority of noise generation will take place indoors. The hard standing will also allow wheeled, rather than tracked vehicles to be used mitigating noise further. The site will also have strict operational policies and training for all staff working at night in minimising the creation of noise as part of a noise management plan. Additionally, railway maintenance largely takes place overnight. As such, given the use of the site, the majority of loading and unloading will take place during the day, allowing engineering trains to be at their destination in time for railway maintenance possession to start. Detailed lighting and noise considerations are covered in the evidence of Mr Grimshaw and Mr Stephenson respectively. However, in terms of impacts these are my views from an operational perspective.
Majority of noise generation will occur indoors and situated away from sensitive noise areas
Outdoor activities will not be continuous
As sidings may be required to be continuously lit, lighting can be mitigated through new directional lighting technology and adequate shielding
3.11 I will now consider each suggested use in more detail
AECOM 9/94
AECOM 10/94
Railway Manufacturing and Construction Site
3.12 Depending on the needs of Network Rail or a railway maintenance company such as Carillion, the site would likely concentrate on the assembly of prefabricated track panels or production and assembly of sleepers and rail fasteners as per the modern way of track installation in which sleepers, track and fasteners are installed by a single machine, greatly speeding up the time taken to construct rail networks.
3.13 The exact layout of the site will vary depending on the nature of manufacture and the developer’s
individual requirements; however, it Photograph 3.1: Track Laying is possible to demonstrate indicatively the likely nature of such a site and how it is achievable within the parameters set out in the site description of the appeal proposal.
3.14 In line with the parameters plan, the site will not exceed a maximum of 24,652 sqm of built floor space within the B2 Class, as set out in section four of Mr Rolinson’s proof. This would be made up of the sleeper manufacturing plant and ancillary office space. The height of buildings will be kept within a height of 15 metres as per the existing appeal proposals.
3.15 The different use areas will be retained, with the rail services as well as manufacturing being conducted on the site’s lower level, the upper level retaining the majority of office space, as well as car parking.
3.16 Extending along the Eastern boundary of the site, adjacent to the rail line, some hard standing as well as open storage will be created for the ancillary storage of supply materials and finished goods to and from the factory respectively. The hard standing will also provide stable ground to enable the use of loading and unloading equipment. Such equipment may include the use of excavators as well as cranes. Flatbed vehicles and tippers may also be needed to move product around the site though these will not leave the premises onto public roads.
3.17 Existing infrastructure including the existing appeal site vehicular access, connection to the rail head and sidings, national grid connections, and electricity sub-station will be retained and made operational to serve the B2 employment uses. Existing surface
AECOM 11/94
water drainage infrastructure, including the culverts, settlings lagoons and attenuation ponds will also be retained and reconfigured.
3.18 Figure 3.1 shows a possible layout for the site. This is indicative as to the size and location of buildings.
Figure 3.1: Railway Manufacturing Facility
Symbol Name Description
Hardstanding Developed along the length of the sidings to allow for train loading and unloading of
commodities.
Storage Areas Used for the storage of commodities – may need to be covered/secure dependent on use. Sites can also be combined for a larger tenant
Offices/Ancillary Primarily on the upper level of the site, main Buildings: offices for management and administration of site operations. Could also include a visitor’s
AECOM 12/94
centre/classroom functionality if required. Smaller buildings on the lower level used to manage storage areas
Manufacturing Site Area used for the manufacture of Commodities, dependent on site usage, may or may not be directly rail linked.
Employment
3.19 The site should create around 50 jobs and be able to and could be one of several sites that are required across the UK for both rail maintenance/manufacture or electrification of rail lines. Such facilities are regionally based due to the speed of rail construction trains. Such a layout is provided in Figure 3.1, it should be noted that this is not definitive in terms of size and location and indicates my interpretation of the extent of possible options; not all of the layout will be built.
Operating Hours
3.20 Whilst the factory would operate on a 24 hour basis, the loading of train wagons would likely occur between 07:00 and 18:00 on weekdays as periods of railway maintenance are most often overnight or at weekends. The shunting and arriving/departing of trains will be 24 hours a day, seven days a week
Traffic Generation
3.21 The site would likely generate 25-30 trains per week, moving mostly in the early afternoon to travel to the construction site in time for occupation.
3.22 In terms of HGV traffic, around 5 vehicles per day are expected and around 50 cars allowing for permanent employees and visitors.
Stakeholder Comments
3.23 “The current Cemex plant at Washwood heath has to move because of HS2. Another site is needed. NR will want this to be at a local traffic centre (Bescot has been mooted) but Daw Mill would be an alternative possibility. Advantage is that it would be railborne aggregate in and railborne sleepers out”. Rupert Dyer - Rail Expertise. Rupert is ex British Rail and now an independent transport consultant.
AECOM 13/94
3.24 Cemex would still be keen to develop this site should the Bescot yard not be approved for an extension and sleeper factory construction, and could provide additional capacity for HS2, with materials coming from Derbyshire.
3.25 DB Schenker have also looked at the site becoming a local distribution centre for rail materials and construction trains Stuart Neil, Business Manager, CEMEX
AECOM 14/94
Train Maintenance Facility
3.26 A train maintenance facility could include a range of activities from train washing, upgrade and refurbishment of interiors to rail engineering with the servicing and repair of train components and create 100 jobs and be able to maintain 3-6 trains per night or more if just providing light servicing facilities. The area of built floor space will not exceed the appeal description (24,652 sqm) and 15 m in height. as set out in paragraphs 7.62-7.68 of the planning proof A mobile crane/reachstacker (photograph 3.2) may be required in order to move rolling stock on and off the track or this could be Photograph 3.2: Example of a reach stacker done via a bar crane (a type of crane fixed to the roof of a building as opposed to having its own supports) extending outside the building. The hard standing will also provide stable ground to enable the use of loading and unloading equipment. Such equipment may include the use of flatbed vehicles and cranes to move product around the site though these will not leave the premises onto public roads. Figure 3.2 shows a possible layout. This is indicative as to the size and location of buildings. The level of vacant land can offer possibilities for expansion whilst staying within the limits of the appeal description..
AECOM 15/94
Figure 3.2: Rail Maintenance Facility
Symbol Name Description
Hardstanding Developed along the length of the sidings to allow for train loading and unloading. Parallel siding
could also be used as a test track for rail locomotives and wagons Offices/Ancillary Primarily on the upper level of the site, main offices Buildings: for management and administration of site operations. Could also include a visitor’s centre/classroom functionality if required. Smaller buildings on the lower level used to manage storage areas
Manufacturing Area used for the assembly of components, Site dependent on site usage, may or may not be directly rail linked. Could also be combined with maintenance zone.
3.27 Existing infrastructure including the existing Appeal site vehicular access, connection to the rail head and sidings, national grid connections, and electricity sub-station will
AECOM 16/94
be retained and made operational to serve the B2 employment uses. Existing surface water drainage infrastructure, including the culverts, settlings lagoons and attenuation ponds will also be retained and reconfigured.
3.28 Trains would access the site from the existing connection to the mainline, The current siding layout would be maintained to provide stabling facilities. These sidings are long enough for several multiple units to be stabled simultaneously; therefore rakes from passenger service would not need to be split for maintenance. The majority of any noise generating work would take place indoors to mitigate noise disturbances.
3.29 The majority of this work will take place at the northern area of the site, away from the most noise sensitive areas around Daw Mill cottages. The majority of noise generation will take place indoors. The site will also have strict operational policies and training for all staff working at night in minimising the creation of noise as part of a noise management plan. Additionally, train maintenance largely takes place overnight, as such, given the use of the site, the majority of loading and unloading of parts will take place during the day.
3.30 It should be possible to site the noisiest aspects of the maintenance work (depending on the level of maintenance undertaken) on the site in such a way as to minimise their impact. Furthermore, operational parameters can be set to reduce train noise from horns and air conditioning units, whilst enclosures around train washing and wheel lathe facilities will minimise noise.
3.31 Lighting will similarly be designed, although Network Rail guidance will result in some mast lighting where technical and safety reasons demand, such as over areas with conflicting pedestrian/road and rail movements. It should be noted that the site layout will be designed to minimise conflicting movements. This could however be directed where needed to reduce lighting spill and potentially be switched off when not required.
AECOM 17/94
Employment
3.32 The site is expected to generate around 100 jobs across the site in three shifts, though it’s likely that night shifts will be much greater in size
Operating Hours
3.33 The site would run 24 hours, the majority of work taking place overnight therefore maximising train availability during operating hours
Traffic Generation
3.34 The vast majority of goods into and out of the site would be via rail and therefore the amount of vehicular traffic would be kept to a minimum HGV movements would range between 5 and 10 per day. Cars will largely be for the transport of employees as public transport is currently unavailable for the site, and generate around 100-150 vehicles though this could be mitigated through the use of a works bus. The shift nature of the work will also negate the typical AM/PM commuter peaks seen with many other commercial developments.
3.35 Rail traffic is likely to be in the region of 5-6 per night given the number of sidings, though this may increase if it’s used for train washing, fuelling or light servicing.
Stakeholder Comment
3.36 “As far as rail applications might be concerned think it might make a better location for rail stock maintenance/HS2/track maintenance etc. rather than freight as such”. Julian Heathcote - Transport consultant specialising in steel but not exclusively.
AECOM 18/94
Train Manufacturing/Assembly Facility
3.37 Depending on the requirements of train manufacturers, the site could be used to build trains from their initial components i.e. full manufacture, this could include the construction of bogeys, carriages and interiors as well as installation of electrical, air conditioning and fuel systems. It is likely that engines will be pre-built and installed on site. Other options could include assembly of prebuilt major components in a ‘modular’ fashion. Trains would also undergo extensive testing both on and off track prior to delivery.
3.38 Whilst the exact layout of the site would be similar in layout to the potential maintenance use and it is therefore possible to demonstrate indicatively the likely nature of such a site. The level of development may be reduced in comparison to the railway track manufacturing site and the level of built floor space would be within the 24,652 sqm parameters plan as set out in Section four of Mr Rolinson’s proof, but without the need for extensive storage areas. It will be prudent to build ancillary office space either adjacent to or within one building, rather than separate offices on the upper portion of the site. The hard standing will also provide stable ground to enable the use of loading and unloading equipment. Such equipment may include the use of. flatbed vehicles and cranes to move product around the site though these will not leave the premises onto public roads.
3.39 The existing sidings to the west of the site would be retained to provide adequate stabling capacity, the required length of which would be informed by the nature of the rolling stock to be built at the location. The eastern side of the site, alongside the existing rail alignment would also provide space for a short length of track (around 900m) for stock testing purposes. This track could be electrified to enable the testing of electric trains prior to delivery. This approach has already been adopted at Hitachi in Newton Aycliffe. There would be need potentially for a mobile crane or reach stacker (see photograph 3.2) to add flexibility when moving rolling stock (in various stages of completion) as well as potential shunter operation. Road access for the site would remain at the existing location, serving manufacturing facility, with a car park for the rolling stock manufacturer’s employees relatively close to the site entrance. Existing infrastructure including the existing vehicular access, connection to the rail head and sidings, national grid connections, and electricity sub-station will be retained and made operational to serve the B2 employment uses. Existing surface water drainage infrastructure, including the culverts, settlings lagoons and attenuation ponds will also be retained and reconfigured.
AECOM 19/94
Figure 3.3: Train Manufacturing Site Layout Symbol Name Description
Hardstanding Developed along the length of the sidings to allow for train loading and unloading of commodities. Parallel
siding could also be used as a test track for rail locomotives and wagons Offices/Ancillar Primarily on the upper level of the site, main offices for y management and administration of site operations. Buildings: Could also include a visitor’s centre/classroom functionality if required. Smaller buildings on the lower level used to manage storage areas Manufacturing/ Area used for the manufacture of commodities, Maintenance dependent on site usage, may or may not be directly Site rail linked. Could also be combined with maintenance zone. Test Track: To enable testing of products and components. 3.40 The majority of this work will take place at the northern area of the site, away from the most noise sensitive areas around Daw Mill cottages. The majority of noise generation will take place indoors. The site will also have strict operational policies and training for all staff working at night in minimising the creation of noise.
AECOM 20/94
3.41 Light pollution would be limited as nearly all work would be carried out inside, which will also enable the noise to be minimised. Where possible, lighting with shielding would be used outside (as in the other options) in order to minimise the amount of light which escapes the site. Sensible operational policies such as controlling noise from train equipment such as horns and air conditioning units can be implemented to minimise external noise from train movements utilising the stabling tracks. Such policies and design features would be developed with all key stakeholders as part of the development process.
Employment 3.42 The site is estimated to provide 300-400 jobs including but not limited to fitters upholsterers, metal workers, mechanical and rail engineers as well as support and administrative staff if the site reaches full capacity ostensibly working in three shifts.
Operating Hours 3.43 Similar to Daw Mill colliery the depot would operate in shifts of eight hours, with either two or three shifts per day,
Traffic Generation 3.44 The vast majority of goods into and out of the site would be via rail and therefore the amount of vehicular traffic would be kept to a minimum. The number of HGVs would be around ten per day and well within the limits described in the highways proof of evidence.
3.45 Cars will largely be for the transport of employees and could total around 300-400 per day. Given the number of possible jobs the use of a works bus may provide further mitigation.
3.46 Trains are expected to enter and exit the site around 1-2 times per day and this could be at any time.
AECOM 21/94
Stakeholder Comments 3.47 “Siemens, Stadler, CMC (China) and CAF all have plans for new UK manufacturing facilities for rolling stock, and the site might be close enough to the West Midlands to be attractive”. Rupert Dyer - Rail Expertise. Rupert is ex BR and now an independent transport consultant.
Summary
3.48 All of the proposed uses are beholden to the current geographic layout of the site. However, they can all be accommodated within the approved envelope and none of the potential uses of the site should result in significant levels of HGV traffic, whilst staff movements will (due to shift patterns) not be concentrated at the ‘traditional’ peaks. Noise should be limited both through design and operational practice, whilst it is possible to minimise any required external lighting impacts.
3.49 Having established the minimal impact of the potential uses, it is necessary for me now to consider whether policy and markets identify a demand for these uses.
AECOM 22/94
5. 04 – Rail Policy Overview
4.1 In this section I shall lay out what the current policy framework is regarding rail. I will then demonstrate how these policy goals are already resulting in a demand which is currently unmet. I shall first consider the policies surrounding passenger rail movements and then those concerning rail freight.
4.2 The classic UK rail network is going through a period of renaissance apart from the well-publicised schemes such as Crossrail 1 & 2, and the Northern Hub. A new railway service started in December from Oxford to London Marylebone on a partially new route. This new railway building is part of a new Oxford to Cambridge route (East West Rail Link) that will be built. The Chancellor announced a further £110 million of funding for this in the Autumn Statement on November 23rd 2016.
Passenger Market
4.3 Analysis in 2015 by the Rail Delivery Group, which represents train operators and Network Rail, and is based on data from the auditors KPMG found that people make an average of 24.7 train journeys a year, a 60% increase from 1998, when private operators took over running UK train services from British Rail. The growth in journeys is faster than in France at 25%, Germany at 23% and the Netherlands at 10% over the same period.
4.4 This growth in rail passengers is causing serious levels of overcrowding on certain routes. London commuter trains are often quoted as some of the most overcrowded but it is not just the capital. The city outside London with the highest number of passengers overall on board trains heading into the city in the morning peak is Birmingham, with 39,000 people. The trains for these services all need to be staffed, stabled and serviced within close proximity to the city they serve.
4.5 Birmingham New Street station saw its highest number of people using the station in a day ever with 230,000 on 19th November. This is more than in any previous period of railway history showing the growth in passenger numbers.
AECOM 23/94
4.6 To address this, Transport Focus, the rail sector’s passenger watchdog called for more investment to increase space for passengers. David Sidebottom, Passenger Director at the independent watchdog, said in an article for the Guardian newspaper in 2015: 1
“We know that only about half of commuters are satisfied with the amount of room they have to sit or stand on their journey. We have long called for the rail industry to deliver the much-needed increase in capacity. This will require continued investment in new and longer trains to meet existing demand, as well as ensuring that overcrowding doesn’t get worse as passenger numbers increase.”
4.7 Responding to the figures, the government said it was renewing its commitment to provide more seats and services across the rail network. The rail minister, Claire Perry, said:
“I know how frustrated customers are with overcrowding and I expect the rail industry, including operators, to continue to develop innovative proposals to meet the capacity challenge head on.”
4.8 However, the industry has already done much to improve the situation, Edward Welsh, a spokesman for the Rail Delivery Group, said the rail network was better able to serve passengers and businesses because of its transformation over the past two decades into what he called a great British success story. He said:
“Crucial to this success has been the partnership between the private and public sectors, working together to deliver better value to passengers, freight customers and the nation. There is much more we need to do to improve services for our customers. Our greatest challenge is to plan and build for the ever growing demand for rail by increasing capacity cost effectively and generating revenue to support investment in more and better services.”
4.9 Indeed, Government and private industry are investing in the railways to deliver a generational change, creating a network and services fit for the 21st Century using new technologies and innovative ideas. The future of the rail industry must be one in which it uses this era of opportunity to become ever more customer focussed. Passengers want reliable, frequent and fast services in comfortable trains with modern features. Everyone who works on the railway, from frontline customer facing staff to train drivers, signallers, telecoms experts and others need to be given the skills to make new rolling stock and signalling equipment work for passengers.
1 (Source: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/09/government-names-overcrowded-train-journeys-rmt)
AECOM 24/94
4.10 But government wants to see Train Operating Companies (TOCs), and Rolling Stock Companies (ROSCOs), manufacturers and suppliers doing much more in the years ahead, investing for themselves, taking their own risk-based decisions on procuring the train capacity needed now and in the future. The competition for new trains that HS2 Ltd is planning to start in 2017 provides a great opportunity for manufacturers and designers to show that they can realise the vision for a state-of-the-art, high- speed rail network of the future. For conventional services the message is to use space as efficiently as possible, to reduce crowding on intercity, regional and outer suburban journeys and, on shorter distance journeys allow passengers to travel in reasonable levels of comfort. The government is looking for innovation and creative thinking to address the challenges of capacity, including options such as double deck trains and seat layouts that can be quickly altered according to changes in demand.
Passenger Rail Policy Documents
4.11 The rail passenger business structure in the UK, typically consists of manufacturers, leasing companies (ROSCOs) and Train Operating Companies (TOCs, franchise operators) who are awarded contracts to deliver services on a set route for normally 7-10 years. This chapter discusses the rail passenger market and how the sector is rapidly expanding in response to record passenger numbers. This will be followed by sections examining the companies that operate, manufacture, lease and maintain the trains and also the sites required to service this sector.
Passenger Rail Usage
4.12 The rail industry has been undergoing a transformation since privatisation in 1990s. The number of train journeys made each year has more than doubled since the late 1990s and according to ORR (Office of Rail and Road) Statistical Release in May 2016, passenger journeys in Great Britain reached 1.69 billion in 2015-16. This is the highest recorded figure since the series began and an increase of 129.8% from the 735.1 million recorded at privatisation in 1994-95. Franchised passenger journeys saw an increase of 2% on the 1.65 billion recorded in 2014-15 as can be seen in Figure 4.1 below.
AECOM 25/94
Figure 4.1 Rail Passenger Journeys (Source ORR)
4.13 There are several other key performance indicators in the rail passenger market and all of these are showing upward trends and all are the highest recorded figures since data was first collected in 1986-87.
Passenger kilometres totalled 64.4 billion.
Passenger revenue totalled £9.3 billion an increase of 4.7% compared to 2014-15.
Passenger train kilometres for all operators have increased every year totalling 521.8 million in 2015-16.
4.14 Such growth as well as the environmental benefits of rail travel over road means that policy at all levels is focussed on enabling the growth to continue. I will briefly lay out the key policies from all levels: international, national, regional and local.
AECOM 26/94
European Policy
4.15 The 2011 EU Transport White Paper provides a roadmap to reducing the continent’s dependency on carbon based fuels and therefore consequential transport emissions by 60% by 2050. To achieve this, it recommends tripling the length of the existing high-speed rail network by 2030 so that, by 2050 the majority of medium-distance passenger transport should go by rail, high-speed rail should outpace the increase in aviation for journeys up to 1000 km. All airports should also be rail connected (preferably by high speed rail). Such aspirations clearly indicate the need for a network of infrastructure to support the construction of rail throughout Europe. The growth in rail usage and networks also increases the need for new rolling stock and associated maintenance facilities. These will require strategically located, rail connected sites across the network.
National Policy
National Policy Statement for National Networks: 4.16 The NPS has recognised the growing market in passenger rail and the need of modal shift in the UK transportation system. A total of 60 billion kilometres and 1.6 billion journeys were undertaken by rail passengers on the network in 2013/14. Passenger demand is predicted to continue to grow significantly. A total demand growth of 50.15% by 2033 was estimated based on current GDP trend forecasts and fares policy. To address the growing demand of rail markets, policies are being implemented and considered across government.
4.17 Some of this growth can be accommodated by making more efficient use of the existing railway infrastructure and rolling stock, such as by running more or longer trains, or encouraging passengers to travel at less congested times of the day. Signalling and power supply improvements, and more modern electric rolling stock, as well as providing a more comfortable and reliable passenger experience are all thought to assist. In the longer term, substantial investment in infrastructure capacity – particularly on interurban routes between our key cities, London & South East routes and major city commuter routes – will be needed. There is a need to support measures that deliver step change improvements in capacity and connectivity between key centres, by speeding up journey times and encouraging further modal shift to rail.
4.18 Finally, to reduce the rail’s environmental impacts, the Government’s strategy is to provide for increasing use of efficient and sustainable electric trains for both passenger and freight services. The environmental performance of the railway will be improved by continuing to roll out a programme of rail electrification. To reduce the
AECOM 27/94
risks of passenger and workforce accidents, the government will consider the introduction of new technologies and risk management techniques to improve safety performance in a more efficient and cost-effective way.
Department for Transport 2016 Passenger Rail Strategy: 4.19 The UK government sees rail as vital to the UK’s economic prosperity. If rail services are inefficient and do not meet people’s needs for routing or frequency, business and jobs suffer. Rail links with airports and ports are business opportunities for travel, tourism and the transportation of goods. They are also continuing to encourage people to use trains rather than cars, as well as reducing carbon emissions from trains and stations themselves, reducing carbon fuel usage and associated emissions, in line with European policy.
4.20 To facilitate this growth, the government has indicated investment across several aspects of the railway to extend and upgrade the UK rail network, the vast majority of which is shared by both freight and passenger services. This includes2:
Electrify and upgrade so that nearly three quarters of passenger traffic is on electric trains
£38 billion of upgrades of existing stations and track to increase capacity with an extra 140,000 commuting journeys each day into our key cities
Complete Crossrail and Thameslink, with new trains and a strong network of new routes
Introduce brand new intercity trains on the East Coast and Great Western routes
Complete the Northern Hub – a large programme of electrification and capacity works right across the north
2 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-rail-network/2010-to-2015-government-policy- rail-network
AECOM 28/94
4.21 This is in addition to the HS2 programme to bring high speed rail connections to the Midlands and North of England. Such expansion again implies the need for a network of supporting infrastructure to enable the roll out of new rail connections and rolling stock such as rail track construction and maintenance depots, rolling stock manufacture and complimentary rolling stock maintenance sites.
4.22 In December 2016, the Department for Transport announced proposals to alter the way the network is run, with the private sector taking a greater role in the construction and maintenance of infrastructure as well as the operation of rail services. This is spearheaded by the new integrated franchise for East-West Rail. The implications of this will become clearer in the near future but could lead to greater demands for track maintenance infrastructure required by different private operators rather than a single operator in Network Rail. This means additional sites may be required.
ORR Passenger Rail Usage 2016-17 Q1 Statistical Release. 4.23 This statistical release is the official publication describing railway passenger numbers each quarter. The data is provided directly from train operating companies. The release indicates that passenger journeys in Great Britain reached 418.5 million in 2016-17 Q1, an increase of 1.6% from the 412.0 million recorded in 2015-16 Q1.While franchised passenger journeys recorded an increase, the non-franchised passenger journeys recorded a drop of 1.3%.
4.24 Looking at annual figures, there were 1.7 billion passenger journeys in the UK in 2015. This is the highest number of journeys reported of all the countries that have supplied data to Eurostat. Since 2006 the number of passenger journeys on the UK rail network has increased by 48.9%. This is second only to Luxembourg where there has been a 52.1% increase in journeys on a comparatively much smaller network.
4.25 By comparing the 2016-17 Quarter 1 data with 2015 and historical national data as well as European data, this report demonstrates strong market growth in the UK in terms of passenger journeys, passenger kilometres, passenger revenue and train kilometres. The results are consistent with the 30-year forecasts for passenger miles growth in the Long Term Passenger Rolling Stock Strategy 2013, mentioned below, and further confirm the necessity of strengthening rail passenger services and the importance of modal shift in a low carbon plan for the UK.
AECOM 29/94
4.26 As such it is likely that the infrastructure and rolling stock requirements outlined to enable the growth of passenger will need to be realised in order to meet the ambitions of European and National Policy. It will therefore be critical that local policy facilitates this growth.
Long Term Passenger Rolling Stock Strategy for the Rail Industry (2013): 4.27 The fourth edition of the Long Term Passenger Rolling Stock Strategy (RSS). sets out a range of forecasts for the likely size and mix of the national rolling stock fleet to accommodate future passenger numbers over 30 years. It is fully consistent with the rail industry’s Long Term Planning Process This summarises the emerging conclusions from the initial phase of work to develop a high level national passenger Rolling Stock Strategy. A key objective of the Strategy is to promote better value for money from the rail industry. The Strategy indicates the manner in which it might reduce not only rolling stock unit costs and wider industry costs, but also increase train capacity, route capacity and industry revenues. The strategy models and documents scenarios for the size and composition for the national passenger fleet over a 30-year horizon in the context of demand growth, infrastructure enhancements including electrification and HS2, and the need to achieve better value for money from the rail industry.
4.28 Table 4.1 illustrates the ‘all-day’ 30-year passenger-mile rates of growth forecast by market. These figures include exogenous factors (GDP, employment etc) and also the growth in demand that the current scheduled Network Rail projects will stimulate, but do not include the impact of longer term capacity improvements such as HS2 or other capacity enhancements that might be implemented beyond those scheduled improvements. The modelled scenarios indicate that between 13,000 and 19,000 new electric vehicles will be required by 2042, an average build rate of between 8 and 12 electric vehicles per week over this period. The total could be higher, depending on individual decisions by franchise bidders and funders about the relative merits of life extension and replacement for individual fleets. Requirements for new non-electric vehicles will be smaller by comparison, dependent on the success of the electrification programme.
AECOM 30/94
Market Passenger Miles Growth Average Rate per Year 2009-2039
L&SE +103% 2.4%
Long Distance +104% 2.4%
Regional (England & Wales) +161% 3.3%
Scotland +103% 2.4%
Total +111% 2.5%
Table 4.1: Forecasts of Passenger Miles Growth (2009-2039)3
4.29 However, when the annual vehicle miles that might be electrified in each of the illustrative scenarios of this report are combined with the rolling stock related cost savings per vehicle mile the gross rolling stock related savings that would result are as shown in Table 4.2: It is these savings that illustrate why Network Rail are pursuing a programme of electrification, that enable trains to have greater speed, acceleration and performance characteristics enabling more trains to be on existing lines. Without such measures, overcrowding and line congestion is likely to get much worse damaging passenger experience, reducing journey time reliability and the costing the wider economy. Electrification also has environmental benefits through reducing carbon emissions.
Annual Rolling Stock £ pa (millions) % of Total Rolling Stock Savings from Related Costs Electrification
Annual Saving by 2042 346 14% (Low Scenario) Annual Saving by 2042 438 18% (Medium Scenario) Annual Saving by 2042 479 20% (High Scenario)
Table 4.2: Projected Annual Rolling Stock Related Cost Savings from Electrification by 2042
3 Network Rail 2011 RUSs and ‘Planning Ahead’
AECOM 31/94
Regional and Local Level
West Midland and Chilterns Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) (2011)
4.30 The RUS sets out priorities for rail investment over the next 30 years in the West Midlands and on the Chiltern route between Birmingham and London Marylebone. The industry believes the options recommended provide a robust strategy both to meet the forecast increased passenger and freight demand and help support the growth of the regional economy.
4.31 The main passenger markets for rail within the RUS area can be identified as local commuting, interurban, and long distance. The journey demand levels and travel patterns within these markets reflect the concentrations of population and economic and social activity.
4.32 Passenger growth in the RUS area over the past decade has been significant and this continues despite the recent economic recession which saw Gross Domestic Product contract for six consecutive quarters during 2008 and 2009. In 2009/10, approximately 73 million passenger rail journeys were made within, to, and from the West Midlands and Chilterns RUS area. Passenger demand in the RUS area increased by around 60 per cent between 1998 and 2009, which is equal to an average growth rate of 4.5 per cent per annum
4.33 The number of passenger rail journeys made to, from and within the West Midlands region of the RUS area is predicted to increase by 30 per cent between 2008/09 and 2020/21, equivalent to a 2.2 per cent increase per annum. Transport for West Midlands (formerly Centro) – the combined authority for passenger transport in the region also commissioned consultants to develop their own set of passenger rail forecasts at a more disaggregated level (eg. by station, corridor and time of day) under various scenarios (e.g. with and without uncommitted schemes) for their multimodal transport appraisal purposes. In particular:
AECOM 32/94
The West Midlands Local Transport Plan (LTP) 2011 – 2026 4.34 The LTP sets out the region’s transport strategy across all modes for 15 years from 2011. This Plan places a clear emphasis on delivering what the West Midlands is already committed to, striking a balance between transport modes, concentrating only on strategic transport interventions and moving towards the development of smarter travel choices, and the better management and maintenance of existing transport networks. To maintain a clear long-term direction to help with difficult decisions over priorities and future resource allocations, the plan developed ten Long Term Themes, which underpin the region’s policies, programmes and other interventions. The key themes relevant to Daw Mill include:
Long Term Theme 4 – Asset Management and Maintenance – A foundation for Growth: Development of the network for all transport modes must be founded on a sound asset base, providing for both current and future maintenance requirements. This includes asset management of other transport infrastructure by partners, including public transport operators, Network Rail and Highways England.
Long Term Theme 5 – A Rail and Rapid Transit Network ‘Backbone for Development’: Development of a Rail and Rapid Transit Network is an ambitious approach, matching the deep economic and environmental challenges faced by the UK’s second largest urban area. The network requires forms of public transport which have higher passenger capacity than local bus services for main flows of movement, typically for corridors of over 12,000 passengers per day.
4.35 Overall, the LTP is ambitious in its outlook and seeks to provide a major catalyst for the economic growth and regeneration that the Metropolitan Area requires in order to meet the challenges it faces to 2026, and recognises transport’s major role in this task. However, it also promotes the delivery of these transport solutions within a sustainable, low-carbon framework. Based on this vision, it will require a well- structured Long Term Rail and Rapid Transit Network to support the growth of passenger rail market and meet the targets of CO2 Emissions, air quality as well as passenger safety and efficiency of public transport.
AECOM 33/94
The North Warwickshire Core Strategy (2014) 4.36 The Core strategy contains a vision and strategic objectives for the Borough, as well as Core Policies that will set the basis for directing development for the next 15 to 20 years. Within the strategy, the council have committed to pursue transport improvements through development, alongside seeking mitigation where necessary. They also seek to improve rail access to Birch Coppice and Kingsbury to facilitate new and enhanced passenger services on the Birmingham to Tamworth rail corridor. The strategy also expresses a desire to minimise HS2’s road traffic impacts.
Summary of Passenger Rail Policy
4.37 Policy at all levels clearly indicates the need to address the rapid growth of rail passenger demand, as well as the need to promote modal shift from cars to more sustainable forms of transport, primarily rail, for medium and long distance journeys. High Speed rail also has a role to play in replacing aviation for short to medium haul flights. To realise this, significant infrastructure development as well as new rolling stock is required across the UK, The DfT is engaged in a significant investment programme for both its conventional and high speed infrastructure.
4.38 Additionally, the UK’s rolling stock is aging rapidly and considerable investment in its renewal is underway. All of these aspects require support from the regions and the West Midlands; at the centre of the country has long term ambitions to provide modern, well maintained rail assets for the region. Such plans affect the North Warwickshire area directly, especially given its proximity to the planned HS2 route.
AECOM 34/94
Freight Policy Documents
4.39 In the UK, the current trend in terms of total rail freight tonnage lifted over the past twenty years has been negative (see Figure 4.2). This decline has been brought about mostly due to structural changes in the UK’s heavy industrial sectors and recently the decline of coal as a result of changing power generation methods towards less polluting alternatives.
Figure 4.2: Freight Tonnes Lifted 1985 - 2016
4.40 As a result, there is an ambitious policy framework to try and increase rail freight by making good use of embedded resources, such as locomotives, wagons and existing terminals. This section provides an overview of the existing policies in place from European level down to the local authority, as well as incorporating insights from recent academic papers on the subject.
AECOM 35/94
European Commission
4.41 The European Commission has stated that by 2030, 30% of all road freight journeys over 300km should be switched to more sustainable modes, and that this should increase to over 50% by 2050. 4 This ambition is framed thus due to the fact that as distance increases the advantages of rail freight also increase commensurately; short “hops” are unlikely to ever shift mode due to the cost of transhipment operations if the final destination is not rail connected.5 Another stated ambition of the EU roadmap document is to ensure that all core seaports are connected to rail freight to increase the modal share of movements by rail from ports to the goods’ final destination. This will need an increase in the capacity of the railway industry for freight movement.
National Level
4.42 The UK Government also has stated clear, unambiguous goals to grow rail freight in absolute terms as well as to increase its modal share across a range of sectors. This has been codified in a number of recent documents which are assessed here.
DfT Rail Freight Strategy6 4.43 The Rail Freight Strategy sought to reflect the Government’s thinking upon the future of rail freight, incorporating the Freight Carbon Review and the Government’s emission reduction plan. The former document seeks to reduce the contribution of road freight movements to emissions, including through increased use of rail freight terminals for a number of commodities, where capacity is required, particularly for the non-container sector. As such this will require significant refurbishment of existing rolling stock to enable this increase or to refurbish coal wagons to enable them to carry alternative commodities.
4 EC, Roadmap to a Single Transport Area (2011) 5 Bottani & Rizzi (2007) 6 DfT, Rail Freight Strategy, (2016)
AECOM 36/94
National Policy Statement for National Networks
4.44 This document sets out the Government’s policies regarding significant rail infrastructure projects in England. The NPS recognizes that railways are a vital part of the UK’s transport infrastructure. Specific to freight and in the context of the Government's vision for the transport system as a driver of economic growth and social development in the UK, it states the railway network must:
“…provide for the transport of freight across the country and to and from ports, in order to help meet environmental goals and improve quality of life.”
4.45 Whilst the main focus of the policy is on the development of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFIs) such as Four Ashes and Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT), which are suited to cater for containerised intermodal traffic, this also applies to other commodities not served by these rail interchanges such as bulk flows and rolling stock or infrastructure applications.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
4.46 The NPPF echoes the national documents which state the role that rail freight could play in the reduction of greenhouse gases:
“Local authorities should work with neighbouring authorities and transport providers to develop strategies for the provision of viable infrastructure necessary to support sustainable development, including large scale facilities such as rail freight interchanges”
4.47 This presumption in favour of supporting the development of rail freight interchanges, whilst not directly applicable to Daw Mill, is relevant as the lack of suitable terminals was identified by the DfT (see DfT Market Review & Modal Shift Assessment below) as one of the key barriers to the wider adoption and expansion of rail freight across a number of commodities. As this barrier is removed, there will be a resultant increase in demand across a range of commodities, all of which will utilise these new terminals (the track construction plant) and new or converted rolling stock.
AECOM 37/94
Carbon Budgets 4.48 The Climate Change Act established a target for the UK to reduce its emissions by at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. This target represents an appropriate UK contribution to global emission reductions consistent with limiting global temperature rise to as little as possible above 2°C
4.49 To ensure that regular progress is made towards this long-term target, the Act also established a system of five-yearly carbon budgets, to serve as stepping stones on the way. Part of the national effort to reduce freight’s contribution to carbon emissions is the move from road to rail, as supported by HMG’s carbon budgets. In particular, schemes such as the Mode Shift Revenue Support Scheme are part of the government’s plan to support movements by rail which would otherwise have gone by road. There are a number of large businesses in the vicinity of Daw Mill including Jaguar Land Rover, Tarmac and Network Rail that are looking to expand capacity and increase rail movements.
Network Rail Freight Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) 4.50 The Freight RUS suggests a number of ways of accommodating increased freight growth on the network. Given a total increase in tonne miles of 50% over a ten year period, some of the key approaches is the understanding of routing alternatives (as opposed to existing facilities and routes), train lengthening (to approved industry standards)7 and bespoke infrastructure (such as terminals to enable increased use of rail freight).
7 For intermodal trains this is 775m, including locomotives, whilst for bulk trains it is approximately 450m, or 2,000 tonnes trailing weight (that is, of the product being carried).
AECOM 38/94
DfT Market Review & Modal Shift Assessment 4.51 The Department for Transport (DfT) commissioned the report to understand the future growth potential in the UK rail freight market, in particular the scope for modal shift from road to rail. One of the key supporting documents for the Rail Freight Strategy which identified a lack of terminal capacity, in particular for growth commodities including domestic intermodal, construction material and other bulk traffic as a key constraint on rail freight growth. Whilst the Midlands population centre is well-served in terms of intermodal terminals, there is scope for terminals in other commodities to enable an increase in rail freight, which will require construction within the region. As such the development of the Daw Mill site to support the development of infrastructure through track or rolling stock manufacture/maintenance would assist with meeting the ambitions stated elsewhere to bring down the transport and freight sector’s carbon emissions.
HM Government (2017) Building our Industrial Strategy Green Paper 4.52 Green paper has been written to set out the UK’s new industrial strategy in the wake of the decision to leave the European Union. The strategy is designed to improve living standards and economic growth by increasing productivity and driving growth across the whole country. The strategy is divided into 10 pillars to drive growth across the whole country and infrastructure has been identified as one of the 10 core pillars. This will include digital, energy, water, flood defence and transport infrastructure. It identifies that the quality of UK infrastructure has been rated second lowest within the G7 and World Economic Forum surveys have identified that our overall infrastructure falls behind that of our competitors. To this end, a further £2.6 billion pounds have been identified for transport infrastructure investment as part of the National Productivity Investment Fund.
Local and Regional Level
4.53 Given the location of the West Midlands at the centre of the UK’s rail and road networks, there are a number of local and regional documents which seek to assist in the movement of goods and other freight on these networks, in terms of both origin/destination traffic and material that is passing through the region (on the West Coast Main Line for example). These are assessed below.
Midlands Connect: Movement for Growth 4.54 A publication from the West Midlands combined authority, the document was written in the wake of new powers to manage transport devolved from Central Government. This document replaces the West Midlands Local Transport Plan P and sets out a vision, priorities, approach and a commitment to building a world class, sustainable,
AECOM 39/94
infrastructure system: and demonstrates a commitment to grow rail freight both through growing existing freight interchanges and encouraging market-led development of both strategic and other rail freight interchanges. These are developed more fully in the separate Freight Strategy (below).
4.55 Furthermore, the document contains ambitious plans to improve air quality across the West Midlands, which as the DfT Modal Review and Modal Shift Assessment states can be achieved through the movement of goods by rail rather than road, as each train can take the equivalent of 43 individual HGVs off the roads.
Midlands Connect Freight Strategy 4.56 This document was refreshed in 2016 and retains the growth and improvement of rail freight as a core theme throughout. In particular, three of the eight key objectives for the region are relevant to the proposed development of Daw Mill:
Providing Capacity for Rail Freight
Encouraging the development and growth of Rail Freight Interchanges
Improving access to rail freight for industry
A Rail Vision for the West Midlands (2014) 4.57 The vision sets out objectives for a network that is dependable and able to deliver high quality services that are among the leaders in the UK rail industry Daw Mill is located on the Water Orton corridor which was re-signalled between 2009 and 2012 to help cater for ambitions to increase rail freight movements on the corridor to up to 100 freight trains a day by 2030 (from 50 a day currently).8 As such it is well-placed to benefit from future investment in rail in the region, and help to meet national, regional and local ambitions to boost rail freight movements in the region.
The West Midlands and Chilterns RUS (2011) 4.58 Network Rail predict an increase in both passenger and freight tonnes in the area in the period to 2043, in particular there is a need to accommodate growth not just in intermodal container movements on the railway but also other commodities which are currently not well-served, which will require new infrastructure or new/refurbished rolling stock.
8 Further schemes on this section to meet the predicted capacity demand are currently included for development and implementation in Network Rail’s Control Period 6.
AECOM 40/94
West Midlands Cross-LEP Statement on Transport 4.59 As well as supporting the move to increase rail freight generally, and to encourage investment in the region as a result of sustainable, better transport links, the statement re-iterates the need to develop not just intermodal capacity but also to enhance rail freight’s offer across all commodities and industry sectors, supporting investment in improving infrastructure and rolling stock availability.
Warwickshire Local Transport Plan 2011 – 2026 4.60 The Warwickshire Local plan, setting out the county’s strategic vision across all modes of transport, acknowledges that rail freight will mostly be serving the West Midlands conurbation, although other sectors for heavy movements (such as oil, coal and stone) are also rail friendly. As such, the document commits to support the development of rail connected sites where suitable. This is because connecting sites to the rail network where the connection has either been left in disrepair, purposely cut or never existed is a major source of expense and delay.
Summary
4.61 This overview of the European, national, regional and local policy framework demonstrates a clear need to develop sites such a number for rail uses in order to meet the regional, national and international ambitions regarding increasing rail, reducing road traffic as a result, encouraging development and ensuring that rail continues to offer a good service across a range of industrial sectors for a variety of users. In particular sites which can support Network Rail’s need to renew and refurbish the infrastructure or the need of train manufacturers, operators and ROSCOs for manufacturing and maintenance facilities. HS2 contractors are actively looking for sites in the vicinity.
4.62 Given this desire, the relative merits of an opportunity to develop a site with existing rail connections should be explored, especially as its development will support the development of the rail network elsewhere in the region and country especially as it is immediately available.
AECOM 41/94
05 – Rolling Stock Demand
5.1 With passenger numbers continuing to grow strongly, an industry steering group comprising operators, financiers, Network Rail and industry associations such as the Rail Delivery Group estimated the UK heavy-rail industry (not including London Underground) will need to grow the total passenger train fleet by between 53% and 99% over the next 30 years. This Long Term Passenger Rolling Stock Strategy published in February 2014 stated there will be a need for between 13,000 and 19,000 new electric vehicles on top of the existing national fleet of 12,647 vehicles. This presents challenges and opportunities surrounding financing rolling stock in the UK, and how the marketplace needs to keep up with demand.
5.2 The current rail investment period 2014-2020 is marking the most sustained period of train building for over 50 years. It is expected that 6,000 new railway carriages will come into service by 2020 according to the Rail Delivery Group. This compares with the early 1990s when impending privatisation meant no new trains were ordered for three years. Many trains will approach their 40th birthday in the next decade. Many of these are unsuitable for further refurbishment either because of the need for easy access or because much new stock needs to be electric traction to meet environmental improvements.
5.3 This demand will include the need for a limited amount of self-propelled i.e. Diesel rolling stock as well as electric locomotives. The government wants to see a choice of suppliers of rolling stock and the opportunities could be quite considerable. For example the Class 15X fleet, comprising of some 1,000 plus vehicles, will approach 35-40 years old by the middle of the 2020s. Many of the routes they operate on, will still require self-powered trains for years to come and are currently experiencing a growth in passenger numbers
5.4 In the last year 1,000 new vehicles have been ordered, half of which are for the new Northern and TPE franchises and the remainder joining the network from the West of England to the Midlands and the North. The award also enabled the refurbishment of rolling stock in the North, to provide better facilities for passengers.
AECOM 42/94
5.5 The public sector has been heavily involved in the rolling stock market recently. The 866 carriages forming the Intercity Express Programme (IEP) order, which will replace high-speed trains stock on the East Coast and other lines, were specified and procured by the Department for Transport (DfT) using a public-private partnership (PPP). Similarly, for the Thameslink routes, the DfT led the way on procuring a fleet of 1,140 new cars for the new Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern (TSGN) franchise, together with their lifetime maintenance, and the related finance. For Thameslink, DfT turned to a hybrid PPP/asset finance arrangement under which bidders were invited to provide a bundled finance, manufacture and maintenance package. In similar vein, Transport for London (TfL) led the procurement of new trains for the Crossrail concession.9
5.6 The implications of the resurgence in rail travel is that more trains need to be built and maintained and older trains need refurbishment which includes repainting, and fitting out with modern décor, seats and electronic systems. This ideally requires rail connected sites to be able to facilitate this process in a timely and economic way.
5.7 In order to provide further information around this opportunity, I undertook some analysis on rolling stock and its replacement:
Rolling Stock Replacement Analysis
5.8 Using the Long Term Passenger Rolling Stock Strategy for the Rail Industry document (March 2016)10 - that sets out current and future rolling stock requirements by broad typology for the network based on demand growth, current fleet profile, and committed infrastructure changes (Crossrail, electrification, etc.). At the same time, the DfT 2016 Rolling Stock Perspective11 sets out the planned withdrawal dates for existing rolling stock by operator. Combining the two (and a few other sources) gives a reasonable estimate of the overall rolling stock replacement programme going forward.
9 http://www.europeanrailwayreview.com/22143/rail-industry-news/financing-rolling-stock-uk-issues-challenges-opportunities/) 10 http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/2016-03_long_term_passenger_rolling_stock_strategy_4th_ed.pdf). 11 (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524445/rolling-stock-perspective.pdf)
AECOM 43/94
5.9 The fleet is forecast to grow rapidly – 15% by 2019 and 50% by 2034. However, the actual replacement schedule is determined by rail franchisees and therefore large purchases are ultimately made at the time of refranchising. All but one of the franchises (Chiltern) in the vicinity of Daw Mill are subject to refranchising in the next few years (West Midlands Regional in 2017, West Coast Intercity and East Midlands in 2018, Cross Country in 2019), meaning significant rolling stock purchases may be made. Table 5.1 sets out the numbers of rolling stock belonging to franchisees running services around Daw Mill due for replacement each year:
East Cross London West Year Chiltern Total Midlands Country Midland Coast
By 2019 207 90 16 0 0 313
By 2024 282 96 52 110 0 540
By 2034 344 604 258 261 150 1617 Table 5.1 Rolling Stock Replacement Schedule (AECOM estimate)
5.10 I will now turn to consider if rolling stock is an opportunity. Whilst in the five years to April 2014 just four rail vehicles were built per week, the industry now requires up to 12 new vehicles per week for the next 30 years. Similarly a contract has just been released by the DfT. Due for award by 2019 sets out a requirement for 60 train sets with a value of £2.75 billion. A site of Daw Mill’s size could manufacture 2-3 of the required trains per week, meaning it would meet the need for one of a possible four to five sites of a similar size to Daw Mill required nationally.
5.11 The rail industry went through a period of rationalisation and globalisation in the 1990s and early 2000s which resulted in the closure of many UK rail manufacturing and maintenance plants, notably at Derby and Washwood Heath. The remaining limited capacity was in the ownership of three internationally based companies, Alstom, Bombardier and Wabtec. In the last five years as the need for replacement and additional rolling stock for the UK market has become more urgent, several foreign companies have investigated production facilities in the UK. A significant move was made by Hitachi Rail who established their European office and assembly plant at Newton Aycliffe, near Darlington. Alstom who have some depots already in the UK are building a new facility at Widnes.
5.12 There are several train manufacturers operating in a competitive world market:
Alstom Transport
Bombardier
AECOM 44/94
CAF
CRRC Corporation
Hitachi Rail
Hyundai Rotem
Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company
Siemens Mobility
Škoda Transportation
Stadler
Talgo
Wabtec 5.13 Some of these manufacturers (Bombardier and Hitachi) have, or may be looking to have interests in premises in the UK. Bombardier, despite a recent spate of closures in the UK was awarded a £1.3 billion contract to provide 65 Aventra trains for Crossrail, and included the building of a maintenance depot at Old Oak Common.
5.14 China Railway Rolling Stock Corporation (CRRC) has announced that its overseas orders in the first half of 2016 were up a 126% increase on the same period in 2015. Looking forward, CRRC said it foresees a positive trend in the rail equipment sector, and it aimed to ‘explore more markets, reduce costs, improve efficiency and support innovation’ in the second half of the year. The CRRC Industrial Investment Co subsidiary of Chinese rolling stock manufacturing conglomerate CRRC has opened a European office in Budapest. The company said it is aiming to ‘explore European state-of-the-art technologies and industries’, and invest in them though technical co- operation ventures.
AECOM 45/94
5.15 The Spanish company CAF has won several rolling stock orders for the UK market including production of 66 coaches for use by TransPennine Express. Although this order is being manufactured at CAF’s factory at Beasain in Spain this company has plans to establish a factory in the UK for future orders. Similarly, Stadler (a Swiss company) has recently won a contract to build new rolling stock for MerseyRail in Liverpool, and in bidding for further work they are thought to be looking for a potential UK location.
5.16 The order is being financed by Beacon Rail, and maintenance is to be undertaken by another train manufacturer, Alstom in Manchester and Liverpool. In 2018- 20 TransPennine Express is also to introduce 12 CAF electric multiple- units and 19 Hitachi Rail Europe
AT300 electro-diesel multiple- Photograph 5.1: New Train Maintenance units. depot for Northern Rail
5.17 No UK manufacturers took part in this tender, as Bombardier’s Derby plant is at capacity building Crossrail EMUs and Hitachi’s Newton Aycliffe site is busy supplying the Intercity Express Programme fleet and units for ScotRail. The implication of this is that there is insufficient rail manufacturing capacity in the UK.
5.18 There are a number of ways in which this rolling stock could be delivered, including full UK manufacture, import of components and UK assembly, or import of finished articles. Clearly, the first two have much greater benefits to UK jobs and the economy, but also make sense from a logistics point of view, in that rolling stock is heavy, of high value and vulnerable to damage during transport. Photograph 5.2 New Trains for Merseyrail manufactured by Stadler. As such manufacturing close to the point of use is often considered preferable and hence the development of the Hitachi site and the interest of a number of 4 other companies in establishing new manufacturing sites immediately. As such the availability of a site that can be developed immediately will be a significant benefit over other sites.
AECOM 46/94
Rolling Stock Maintenance
5.19 As well as new trains, refurbishment of existing trains is required approximately every 10 years of service as well as regular maintenance at more frequent intervals. Table 5.2 forecasts the numbers of rolling stock due for refurbishment over the next 18 years.
Year East Cross London Chiltern West Total Midlands Country Midland Coast
During 2019 43 46 64 26 78 257
During 2024 46 50 68 28 83 274
During 2034 56 60 83 34 101 334 Table 5.2 Rolling Stock Refurbishment Schedule
5.20 However, train operating companies, often don’t own their assets. Passenger rail operators continue to face the challenge that they typically don’t have the tenure or balance sheet to buy an expensive asset with a design life of 30 years or more. Rail franchisees are thinly capitalised Special Purpose Vehicles (SPV) i.e. a limited partnership) created to fulfil narrow, specific or temporary objectives, and are continuing to receive no more than 7-10 year franchise awards. Open access operators get track access contracts for a maximum of 10 years, except in exceptional circumstances. Asset finance therefore remains the chief model for procurement and ownership of trains. It involves a rolling stock leasing company buying trains and renting them to the train operator. This aligns the financing more effectively to asset life, and allows the operator to keep an interest only as long as it needs. As such, the responsibility of purchase and specifically, maintenance of the asset is not always clear cut and depend on the agreements between operating and leasing companies. 12
5.21 There are several rolling stock leasing companies (ROSCOs) active in the market although three marked with an asterisk still own 80%-90% of the UK fleet.
Angel Trains*
Beacon Rail Leasing
12 Martin Watt (2014) Franchising Rolling Stock in the UK: Challenges and Opportunities http://www.europeanrailwayreview.com/22143/rail-industry-news/financing-rolling-stock-uk-issues-challenges-opportunities/
AECOM 47/94
Porterbrook*
QW Rail Leasing
5.22 The implications for Daw Mill are that the train operating companies may not be the only ones looking to develop train maintenance facilities in order to serve new rolling stock.
High Speed Two
5.23 A tender document for the trains for HS2 has just been launched, worth £2.5 billion. China and CRRC are keenly interested in the UK’s HS2 plans and at least for the first phase of the project, CRRC plans to work with British firms to provide a tailor-made service for the project with specially made rolling stock technology and equipment. Meanwhile Alstom’s HS2 director said that his company would base its train manufacturing in the UK if it won the HS2 rolling stock tender.
5.24 The Chinese have plenty of relevant experience as its first high-speed line was opened in 2003. Since then 11,800 miles of high-speed lines have been built (roughly 60% of the global total). This figure is forecast to reach 18,600 miles by 2020. The high-speed locomotives in China have been developed with the likes of Siemens, Hitachi and Bombardier have a maximum operational speed of 380 kmph, slightly higher than the proposed top speed of HS2, at 360 kmph.
5.25 China is also able to lay track at a cost of between $17m (£11.7m) to $21m per kilometre, according to the World Bank. This compares with a range of $25m to $39m in Europe.
AECOM 48/94
5.26 When George Osborne was Chancellor he urged Chinese investors to bid for contracts to build the high-speed rail line HS2. There are seven contracts worth £11.8bn covering the first phase of HS2, between London and Birmingham. There are also plans for £24bn of investment in northern England. As such, Chinese investors may be looking to develop infrastructure within the UK, whether for infrastructure or rolling stock. Figure 5.1 shows the planned route in relation to the Daw Mill site. It is near the strategic hub of all three phases in the Midlands and is well located for rail facilities.
Figure 5.1 Planned Route of High Speed 2 and Daw Mill’s Location (Orange)
5.27 The initial plan is for a new railway line between London and the West Midlands carrying 400m-long trains that would operate at speeds of up to 225mph (362km/h), and would travel up to 14 times per hour in each direction. This would be followed by a V-shaped second phase taking services from Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds. Intermediate stations in the East Midlands and South Yorkshire are also planned.
5.28 It could be that due to its lower cost base that China gains a share of the HS2 work and having a base on the east side of the West Midlands is geographically a good location for work on three different stages of the build-out programme, London- Birmingham, Birmingham-Crewe and Birmingham-East Midlands and North East. Also going forward this area will be at the centre of the HS2 network.
AECOM 49/94
Summary
5.29 In line with policy, it is clear that there is a need for rolling stock in order to support the growing demand for rail travel and economic need for ever greater connectivity. Such facilities are likely to include new rolling stock maintenance facilities in the majority of regions across the UK split between the various leasing companies or train operators due to growing numbers of new trains and the increasing need to refurbish the existing stock. This also is the case if ambitions to grow rail freight come to fruition. Similarly, there may be a need for facilities to manufacture new locomotives for a number of train manufacturers in order to win contracts such as the recently let £2.5 billion rolling stock contract for HS2. With a possible 12 manufacturers bidding for this and other contracts, and at least four companies known to be actively seeking sites for manufacturing facilities. In the next section, I shall consider whether Daw Mill is a suitable location for the construction of such a facility.
AECOM 50/94
5.30 .
AECOM 51/94
06 – Daw Mill Site Characteristics
6.1 In this section of my evidence I shall consider whether Daw Mill is able to provide an attractive, suitable site. To determine this I shall be looking at eight key attributes as follows;
Site Location (good geographic location in Central UK with good 4 directional connection to the “Classic” rail network and HS2)
Recent Track & Signalling Upgrade
Rail network capacity (there would be train paths available to/from the site)
Site Size and Shape (the site is suitable in terms of operational practicality)
Site Availability (Site is available; connection is live which can save 5 to 10 years in the planning and build process)
Cost Effective Reinstatement (connection is there which is worth £2-3million, internal works are straightforward compared to live railway / connection works, little remedial work required on site)
Proximity to a trained and knowledgeable workforce
Potential Demand (Proven Rail industry uses and interest – high deliverability)
Site Location
6.2 Daw Mill is located in the West Midlands, centrally to the strategic highway network which includes the M6 to the south, the M42 to the west, A5 to the north and the M69 to the east. The location is at the heart of the classic railway network, with good connection to the rail network in all four directions. Situated on the Birmingham to Nuneaton line, it is the only direct railway link between the West Midlands and the East of England. It is also strategically important for freight, allowing container trains to travel from Felixstowe to the Midlands and beyond, though Daw Mill is not being required for containers. As in paragraph section 3 of Mr Rolinson’s proof of evidence, the site is situated between a number of towns such as Coleshill, Kingsbury, New Arley and Old Arley.
AECOM 52/94
6.3 The site is also located 4 miles from the proposed route for HS2, and in particular at the triangular junction between London, Birmingham and the northern routes. As such this demonstrates significant value for railway construction use, not only during the construction stage of Phase One to Birmingham, but also Phase Two further north and then the ongoing maintenance of the route. Figure 6.1 shows the site’s, proximity to HS2 and other mainline routes
Symbol Meaning
Location of Daw Mill
Birmingham – Nuneaton Line
Planned route of HS2
West Coast Mainline
Midland Mainline
Figure 6.1: Daw Mill’s location on the network
AECOM 53/94
Recent Track & Signalling Upgrade
6.4 The track in the area has been recently upgraded to create extra capacity and was re-signalled with modern equipment in the period 2009-2012. This means that the area will not be subject to localised disruption for years to come. The site still has active colour light signals protecting access to and from the reception sidings, this can shorten the construction time compared to a site with no active connections and reduce the construction costs by £2-3 million.
Rail network capacity
6.5 Many rail lines in the West Midlands are operating at full capacity and this effectively prevents new services commencing on these routes. Importantly, the Daw Mills site location is connected to one of the few lines in the West Midlands, the Water Orton section of the Birmingham to Nuneaton line which has substantial spare capacity for additional rail movements. The previous train services to/from Daw Mill only finished relatively recently in 2012/2013, and there were train paths available to/from the site around the clock. Although these train paths have now lapsed the important point is that there is spare capacity on the Birmingham to Nuneaton line as traffic accessing Daw Mill from across the wider network will concentrate onto that line. It will also allow slower freight trains to still use the line despite requirements for faster passenger services.
Site Size and Layout
6.6 The site is well-sized for the developments outlined in Section 3, and does offer an attractive, rectangular shaped plot of vacant land, 32 Hectares in size, with an existing, active rail connection – one of the primary obstacles to developing a site from new in terms of cost, timing and practicality. The rectangular shape is important in that it enables longer trains to be accommodated within the site without splitting. It is envisaged that the current track layout would remain similar to that used in the past. The current layout keeps rail movements completely separate from road movements and as such this provides a safe operating environment.
6.7 The site comprises the former operational land within the colliery land ownership. Section 4 of Mr Rolinson’s proof demonstrates that within this there is opportunity for a maximum of 24,652 square feet of built space for B2 use. This can include manufacturing facilities, storage areas, service yards, crane gear and ancillary offices.
AECOM 54/94
6.8 The site is based on two levels, with the rail sidings on the lowest level, meaning that rail operations can be partially hidden from view, reducing their impact on the surrounding countryside; the upper level can house offices and ancillary buildings.
Site Availability
6.9 Currently the only body able to approve new connections to the rail network is Network Rail, and the process for this can take a significant element of time. By the time that the process has been followed for developing a rail connection including planning, funding allocation, projects prioritised and capacity to implement the works identified, it can often be many years after the initial impetus that the connection is finally made. Importantly a connection like that at Daw Mill, which is “live” can save 5 to 10 years in the planning and build process, meaning far fewer risks to deliver and more certainty for developers.
6.10 An example of this would be the developments of Parkside and East Midlands Rail Freight Interchanges. The former was first conceived in 2002 with detailed feasibility only undertaken within the last two years. It’s estimated that the timeline for completion is at least another 5-10 years. The latter, East Midlands terminal similar to Radlett and Slough strategic freight interchanges have a 10 year timeline to expected completion. Whilst this isn’t solely down to the rail connection, this and other issues such as site clearance, also not required at Daw Mill, add up to reduce the business case and delay vitally needed infrastructure.
6.11 Already there have been doubts about Network Rail’s ability to deliver the large number of projects it has scheduled for this investment period, Control Period 5 (2014 – 2019). Electrification of the Transpennine route from Liverpool to Hull, for example, has been recast as Liverpool to Selby to try and fit within available capacity for major works. Other schemes have been postponed and there is no certainty as to how long it would take for a new site to be connected to the network.
Cost Effective Reinstatement
6.12 The fact that the Daw Mill connection to the network is still live and signalled means that potentially £2-£3 million can be saved from a typical overall development cost of £15-20 million. There are various stages of study required in the process called, Governance for Railway Investment Projects (GRIP) which describes how Network Rail manage and control projects that enhance or renew the national rail network. GRIP divides a project into eight distinct stages that cost money. Fees can vary depending on the circumstances found. It is a fact that internal works on a site are straightforward compared to live railway connection works. Network Rail’s position was that Daw Mill was their first choice for a facility, prior to the refusal of the sites
AECOM 55/94
planning permission, meaning it may also be suitable for other rail maintenance companies.
Proximity to a trained and knowledgeable workforce
6.13 Alstom employed 1,900 people in a rail manufacturing plant at Washwood Heath until closure in 2003. Also LDV vans employed many skilled automotive tradesmen in the area until the local company went into receivership in 2009. Although there has been good news for example new jobs at the BMW engine plant at Hams Hall it is believed that 29.7% of jobs created would be taken up by residents within a 30 minute drive of Daw Mill and 22% from within North Warwickshire itself.
Potential Demand
6.14 It is clear that there is a need for sites of this nature here and now to meet developments in the rail industry and this interest needs urgent deliverability given increasing demand. There is a significant need to develop sites that are suitable for the construction and/or maintenance of both rail infrastructure and rolling stock in order to meet planned targets and policy goals. In particular, there is a significant element of time pressure in developing a site so that it can meet the demands for near term projects such as HS2 or franchise rolling stock renewal programs. As such, suitable sites are required that allow for development immediately. Daw Mill is a ready to go site, already connected to the national rail network and located at the strategic heart of the both the existing and planned network.
6.15 The appeal of the site has been clearly demonstrated through interests of a number of construction companies and Network Rail that had sought a facility at Daw Mill prior to outline planning permission being refused. There are a number of railway construction companies such as Carillion and VolkerRail who bid to Network Rail for contracts. This type of organisation needs operational depots in order to do their business. It is likely that successful contractors for the Midlands elements of HS2 railway construction will need facilities in the area and Daw Mill is only four miles from the proposed route of HS2. The Appellant has been approached regarding a possible rail manufacturing opportunity.
6.16 Building suppliers such as Cemex are known to be looking for sites in the Midlands. In addition the Government’s electrification programme aimed to make the railway more “low carbon” is likely to need sites for contractors. So it is probable that two or three railway construction sites will be needed in the Midlands over the next five years to meet the needs of the growing market.
AECOM 56/94
6.17 In terms of a train maintenance facility capable of serving either the freight or passenger markets. This could be of interest to at least five passenger operators, five freight companies, several rolling stock leasing companies and possibly four train manufacturers all with operations in the West Midlands. It is often with the letting of new train franchises that Train Operating Companies seek to establish new depots and place orders for new trains. It is likely that around three sites will be required for train maintenance in the next few years to cater for the growth in numbers of rolling stock. If passenger numbers are set to grow by 50% then extra trains are required.
6.18 There are known to be four train manufacturers looking for sites to erect manufacturing facilities in the UK. Daw Mill would enable these companies to build their trains locally, contributing around 2-3 trains of the 10-12 required per week as outlined in Section 5. Clearly there could be a need for up to four new sites nationally to cater for the biggest demand for new trains in 50 years.
6.19 If the potential demand for all three types or rail activity above is accumulated there could be a need for up to 10 new sites over the next 10 years (this is shown in Table 6.1). As the West Midlands is centrally located the region should be well placed to capitalise on the economic benefits this railway renaissance brings. Daw Mills can play a part in fulfilling this opportunity.
Potential Uses of the Site Estimated Rail Market Need
Railway Infrastructure Construction 2 – 3 new sites Train Maintenance and Refurbishment 3 new sites Train Manufacture 4 new sites Total Requirement for New Sites 10 Sites Table 6.1: Requirement for Suitable Sites
AECOM 57/94
07 - Alternative Sites
7. 7.1 It is important to assess whether other sites across the region and railway network offer better options than Daw Mill for the three outlined developments. Therefore a comparison of other potential and/or available sites has been generated, and compared to Daw Mill in terms of its rail connection, availability, location and several other factors.
Site Assessment
7.2 In order to review and assess the range of alternative sites for a rail based manufacturing site in the West Midlands it is useful to adopt a set of relevant criteria to aid the analysis.
7.3 The provenance of the methodology is a system developed by AECOM, based on elements of the DfT’s Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG). The method uses a three phase sifting process to eliminate the unsuitable sites:
Identify Options
Initial Sift to identify any immediate show stoppers and unavailable sites
Development and Scoring Assessment of Potential Options – further detailed analysis used to score alternative sites across a range of criteria
7.4 The technique has been used on three previous occasions to help with site assessments;
Tursdale Freight Terminal for Durham County Council – reviewed 24 sites
Rail Freight Feasibility Study for South Derbyshire Council – reviewed 8 sites
Strategic Distribution Site Assessment Study for the Three Cities Sub-area of the East Midlands for EMDA to identify preferred locations for large scale strategic distribution. AECOM undertook a study of 32 different sites and went through a sifting process and recommended a short list of three potential sites. The methodology to rank the sites has been demonstrated and approved by the East Midlands Development Agency and aimed at a workshop to developers, local authority offices and other stakeholders.
AECOM 58/94
7.5 This assessment methodology will now be applied to sites within the vicinity of Daw Mill.
Identify Options
7.6 A long list of possible alternatives has been drawn up based on sites within the vicinity of Daw Mill with a rail connection according to pages 41 and 42 of the Rail Atlas of Great Britain and Ireland, 14th edition by SK Baker that sets out the railway network within the West Midlands. (figure 7.1). The Baker Atlas is recognised as the leading rail mapping reference publication by industry professionals. The atlas identifies 28 rail freight or rail engineering/maintenance locations within the area.
Figure 7.1: Rail Network in proximity to Daw Mill
Initial Sift
AECOM 59/94
7.7 15 of the 28 sites are privately owned and are mainly used by one company for a single commodity such as an oil terminal and hence are unlikely to be available for one of the three uses outlined in Chapter 3. Some of the sites are multi-user with potentially some spare capacity but if they serve intermodal or construction based rail services they have been eliminated from the sifting process at this stage for the reasons mentioned below including the fact that market economics will dictate that vacant land on those sites will be needed for their expansion.
7.8 In the 2016 DfT Rail Freight Strategy the freight growth areas were highlighted and these can be seen in Figure 7.2. As the coal industry declines rapidly the two main growth sectors are intermodal and construction. Additional terminal capacity for these sectors is needed as will be explained. It should be reiterated at this stage that Daw Mill is not suited to be a SRFI.
Figure 7.2: Rail Freight Market Sector Trends & Volumes in Billion Tonne Kilometres
AECOM 60/94
7.9 Intermodal is the movement of goods by container and to facilitate this there is a need for a national network of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFIs). Network Rail’s Freight Market Study (FMS) published in 2013 said that the intermodal market would grow by 5% per year to 2043.13 To achieve this there needs to be additional inland SRFIs developed across the country. The West Midlands has three of these within its catchment area namely at Daventry International Railfreight Terminal (DIRFT) which is expanding with DIRFT 2 and 3, Hams Hall and Birch Coppice. In addition there are other intermodal sites at Freightliner Lawley Street Birmingham, ProLogis Park and Telford with a further site planned at Four Ashes near Stafford.
7.10 Policy at both the national and regional level highlights the need to support sustainable development and transport, hence it is important to avoid considering other potential uses for sites either operating or planned to operate as SRFIs. To do so would limit the potential for modal switch from road to rail. As the Strategic Road Network around the West Midlands is congested, further interventions to encourage modal switch to rail would result in economic and environmental benefits. Overall the rail freight sector is estimated to remove 9.9 million Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) journeys and 1.5 billion HGV kilometres (kms) from the roads annually. 14
7.11 The construction sector is growing in line with new investment in transport infrastructure, housing and other industrial expansion. Construction volumes have increased by about 3.5% per annum since 2011.15 With major road and railway schemes including HS2 there will be a need for additional flows of aggregates, cement, metals and other building materials and the use of rail is the sustainable way of moving these goods to the various construction sites in the Midlands. Each of the major building material supply companies need installations near major conurbations as transport costs are a large element of the selling price of their products. Hence it is economically essential to have well located terminals. So where one of the major building suppliers has ownership of a site, it is assumed that they are likely to not only want to keep it, in a growth market, but potentially expand their operations in light of forthcoming major engineering projects in the Midlands. Train maintenance or manufacture is unlikely to be suitable for sites adjacent to construction sites due to dust laying on newly painted or clean trains, hence the need for careful site selection.
13 Network Rail, Freight Market Study, (2013) 14 ORR, Freight Rail Usage 2015-16 Q4 Statistical Release, (2016) 15 Network Rail, Freight Market Study, (2013)
AECOM 61/94
7.12 Kingsbury Oil Terminal is fully occupied; it may also fall under COMAH/HSE regulations that limit the level of development within the immediate vicinity of the site.
Name Sector Owner/Operator TNT-VW logistics Terminal Automotive TNT Kineton Military MOD London Road Stone Terminal (Worcester) Construction Bardon Hill Construction Bardon Aggregates Stud Farm Construction Tarmac Humberstone Road Sidings Construction NR Croft Aggregates Industries Construction AI Mountsorrel Construction Tarmac Telford International Railfreight Park Intermodal DBS Daventry International Railfreight Terminal Intermodal ProLogis ProLogis Park Intermodal ProLogis Hams Hall Intermodal ABP Birch Coppice Intermodal Maritime Rugeley Energy International Power Willington Power Station Energy RWE npower Ironbridge Energy E.ON Bedworth Energy Murco Kingsbury Oil Terminal Energy BP/Shell Mid Cannock Opencast DP Disused NR Anglesea Sidings Disused NR Mantle Lane Disused NR New Bilton Disused NR Central Rivers (Burton) Engineering Bombardier Wabtec (Brush Loughborough) Engineering Wabtec Washwood Heath Engineering NR Bescot TMD Freight DB Schenker EMR Kingsbury Disused EMR Daw Mill Disused Harworth Estates Table 7.1: Possible Sites for facilities similar to Daw Mill
7.13 Table 7.1 lists all considered sites and those that are discounted at this first stage are marked in red. Those eliminated include private sidings and those in intermodal or construction sectors. This leaves 13 sites, primarily comprised of disused power stations, coal mining infrastructure or rail engineering facilities.
Development and Assessment of Potential Options
AECOM 62/94
7.14 There are a number of sites that may offer possible excess land or track capacity for operations similar to those proposed at Daw Mill. Each site is discussed and later scored according to a site assessment framework.
Energy Sites
Iron Bridge
7.15 Ironbridge power station closed in January 2015 with the site scheduled to be decommissioned and demolished over 2017. The site therefore will have adequate vacant land and rail connections to enable a site similar to Daw Mill. However it is situated in Shropshire, 35 miles to the North West of Birmingham, some distance from major rail hubs and West/East coast mainlines. Due to this geographical separation from the industrial heartland of the Midlands it is believed that this site is much less attractive as a location to serve the immediate needs of the rail industry. Evidence for this is the fact that the nearby Telford Terminal has not attracted regular rail business. Although this site has been scored later in this chapter, it is this locational factor which effectively precludes it being considered as a suitable site for a rail business.
Photograph 1: Ironbridge site layout
AECOM 63/94
Rugeley Power Station
7.16 Rugeley Power Station (55ha) closed in June 201616 and the site is undergoing decommissioning and subsequent demolition, which is scheduled for completion in 2019 at which point the site will become available. As such if a rail facility was granted, it would be unlikely to be operational before 2021 at the earliest. A number of commercial, residential and industrial uses have already been discussed for the site17 including the construction of a gas power station, utilising existing infrastructure. With the potential shortage of energy supplies it is thought that the site may be safeguarded for this purpose.
Photograph 2: Rugeley Site Layout
7.17 Although uncertain, there may be an opportunity to host a facility like that proposed at Daw Mill. The site does benefit from dedicated branch lines and sidings that are still connected to the mainline. Connectivity to the West and East Coast main line is also good with connections via Walsall or Lichfield Trent Valley. However, demolition of the existing power station is not scheduled for completion until 2019, at which point planning permission and development could commence. Therefore the site may not be operational until 2021 at the earliest. The site attributes are scored in the sifting analysis later in this chapter.
16http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2016/06/08/rugeley-power-station-closes-weeks-earlier-than-expected/ 17http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2016/04/29/rugeley-power-station-plans-put-on-the-table/
AECOM 64/94
Willington Power Station
7.18 The 38ha site, near Derby is home to a former coal power station closed and demolished in the mid-1990s. The power station has gone, but the cooling towers remain. The site was earmarked for residential development in 2011 but the application was rejected and permission for a new power station was granted18. The site is currently owned by RWE npower19. It could offer a possible location, although the sidings appear to be dismantled and. there would be a need to rebuild and connect the railways.
7.19 The show stopper for this site is that although there might once have been an opportunity for a rail based application, as there is a need for power generation it is believed that this site will be converted to a gas fired energy plant. In light of this it is deemed unavailable and not scored in the matrix at the end of this chapter.
Photograph 3: Willington site layout
18 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willington,_Derbyshire 19http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/en/353410/rwe-generation-se/fuels/location-overview/uk/willington-power-station/
AECOM 65/94
Engineering Sites
Washwood Heath
7.20 Washwood Heath is a 50ha plot owned by Network Rail in Birmingham and is formerly a site of Alstom and LDV. Part of the site is understood to be ring-fenced for use by HS2 for the main train stabling facility for their new trains. Tarmac are to submit a planning application for an Asphalt depot directly opposite the rail line to the north of the site.
Proposed Tarmac WC Plant Mainline
Washwood Heath Sidings
Photograph 4
7.21 According to HS2 the site footprint will be equivalent to 2000m x 500m meaning that much, if not all of the site would be occupied by the facility. As such, it is unlikely that the site will be available for other uses but nevertheless is scored in the following analysis.
Bescot
7.22 Operated by DB Schenker Rail (UK), the 25ha yard has been the major freight yard of the region, handling rail freight movements in the West Midlands. To the North West is Bescot Train Maintenance Depot, which is currently vacant but retains an active rail connection. It is on the Walsall line between Walsall and Birmingham New Street thereby offering good connections to the mainline network. Its availability is uncertain however part of the site is already used by Network Rail and further development would require significant demolition of existing facilities. It is also close to residential areas that may be sensitive to noise and lighting impacts.
AECOM 66/94
Photograph 5: Bescot Site layout
Central Rivers
7.23 Based at Burton upon Trent and owned by Bombardier, the site provides Fleet maintenance for the Voyager (Class 220) and Super Voyager (Class 221) fleet for Arriva Cross Country and Virgin West Coast20 The site is large, and there is vacant land adjacent to the site (15ha), though not adjacent to the sidings, which are dedicated for Bombardier. Other land holdings in the area are not rail connected and hence not readily available.
Photograph 6: Central Rivers Site Layout
7.24 As such, it is unlikely to be a viable site but provides an example of the sort of facility Daw Mill may provide, albeit on a smaller scale
20http://uk.bombardier.com/en/about-us/bombardier-in-country/sites/site.transport-central-rivers.html
AECOM 67/94
Wabtec
7.25 Webtec, formerly Brush Traction at Loughborough has a 28ha rail connected site with a number of sidings designed for the maintenance of freight and passenger rail vehicles and enjoys a direct connection to the Midland Mainline. Key services include overhaul and refurbishment, engineering, new build and testing. There is some vacant land adjacent to the sidings though this appears to be within the boundary of the Wabtec site. Expansion at this site will be at the discretion of Wabtec.
Photograph 7: Wabtec Site Layout
Disused Sites
7.26 There are a number of freight sidings marked as ‘disused’ and therefore may be suitable for new developments including:
EMR Kingsbury
New Bilton near Daventry
Mantle Lane Sidings near Coalville
Anglesea Sidings
Mid Cannock Sidings
7.27 These sites therefore have been explored further in order to ascertain their potential suitability for uses similar to those proposed for Daw Mill, therefore having rail infrastructure already in place.
AECOM 68/94
EMR Kingsbury
7.28 Whilst the rail sidings are disused, the surrounding land is taken up by a functioning scrap yard. Anecdotal evidence suggests the sidings are used infrequently for storage or transport of locomotives for scrapping.
Photograph 8: Kingsbury Layout
7.29 Satellite photographs suggest there is some vacant land between the EMR facility and the Kingsbury oil terminal, approximately 10Ha in size. However this would require a new rail connection or cooperation with EMR Kingsbury to change the layout of both sites, in order to access the existing sidings adjacent to the EMR site that are around 300m long. Access to the West Coast Mainline is also limited and there is little spare capacity on the line, making Daw Mill a better prospect. Also with the volatility of both the oil and scrap metal markets that could see commodity prices escalate, both neighbouring companies might want expansion land safeguarded. It is also believed that inward investors would not want a site between a scrap metal merchant and an oil terminal for safety reasons after the Buncefield fire in 2005 and also contamination from scrap metal movements.
AECOM 69/94
New Bilton
7.30 The 18ha site has vacant sidings adjacent to the Cement Works at Rugby, belonging to Network Rail. However the sidings are development constrained and there is no vacant land in order to access them. There may be an opportunity to produce sleepers in the cement works adjacent and load them onto trains but this would require significant facilities development on an already constrained site.
Photograph 9: New Bilton Site Layout
AECOM 70/94
Mantle Lane
7.31 An 8ha site in Coalville was a former British Rail depot that closed in 1990, the sidings were last used by the now defunct FM Rail. Network Rail recently replaced point mechanisms on the loop and relief lines near to the sidings, which had been out of use for 20 years until FM arrived, and Freightliner now stables its stone wagons here between trips. Otherwise the sidings are disused and many have fallen into disrepair, requiring significant remedial works.
Photograph 10: Mantle Lane Site Layout
7.32 The sidings are also constrained by parkland and surrounding industrial units, leaving little opportunity for further, rail related development adjacent to the sidings. It would however provide good connectivity, able to access the mainline network at Leicester or Burton upon Trent. However it is not as well located and would be more expensive to establish and operate from.
AECOM 71/94
Anglesea Sidings
7.33 A 2ha site with sidings, located between Cannock and Lichfield, formed part of the now disused South Staffordshire line and were originally built for the movement of coal from Cannock Chase Colliery. The line was closed in 2003 but parts of the sidings are currently used by a rail engineering plant company for training and promotions and land opposite the sidings is used by residential and light commercial developments. As such, there is little scope for expansion unless the Quattro site is purchased and may require a change of use. Connectivity is relatively poor and additional capacity on the line is low. Additionally, residential areas in close proximity make this particularly sensitive to any noise and lighting impacts.
Photograph 11: Anglesea Sidings Layout.
AECOM 72/94
Mid Cannock
7.34 Mid Cannock is an 8ha site of a former coal disposal point that received, cleaned and sorted coal from across the West Midlands including Cannock Chase and Daw Mill Collieries. The site closed in 2000 and is now a container depot for Pentalever. It offers good connectivity to the mainline network with numerous routing options including use of the Star Valley line, which has excess capacity.
Photograph 12: Mid Cannock Site Layout
7.35 The original intention, according to the Network 2011 Rail Route Utilisation Strategy was for the Pentalever site to incorporate the use of the rail sidings. However, it can be seen from the satellite photograph that much of the original sidings have been removed or covered in the construction of the goods yard making this a HGV only operation. This combined with surrounding development means that the site is unsuitable for the uses proposed at Daw Mill. Additionally in the last three months Pentalever has been bought by Freightliner who is the market leader in intermodal traffic.
AECOM 73/94
7.36 Table 7.2 shows each of the 28 reviewed and their current status. It illustrates that there are only a small number of potentially vacant plots suitable for the facilities proposed at Daw Mill.
Name Sector Owner/Operator Status TNT-VW logistics Terminal Automotive TNT Protect for Growth Kineton Military MOD Protect for Growth London Road Stone Terminal Construction Protect for Growth (Worcester) Bardon Hill Construction Bardon Protect for Growth Aggregat es Stud Farm Construction Tarmac Protect for Growth Humberstone Road Sidings Construction NR Protect for Growth Croft Aggregates Industries Construction AI Protect for Growth Mountsorrel Construction Tarmac Protect for Growth Telford International Railfreight Park Intermodal DBS Protect for Growth Daventry International Railfreight Intermodal ProLogis Protect for Growth Terminal ProLogis Park Intermodal ProLogis Protect for Growth Hams Hall Intermodal ABP Protect for Growth Birch Coppice Intermodal Maritime Protect for Growth Rugeley Energy International Under Demolition Power Willington Power Station Energy RWE npower Track Removed Ironbridge Energy E.ON Under Demolition Bedworth Energy Murco Protect for Growth Kingsbury Oil Terminal Energy BP/Shell Developed Mid Cannock Opencast DP Disused NR Developed Anglesea Sidings Disused NR Developed Mantle Lane Disused NR Developed New Bilton Disused NR Developed Central Rivers Engineering Bombardier Developed Wabtec Engineering Wabtec Developed Bescot TMD Freight DB Schenker Vacant Washwood Heath Freight NR Vacant EMR Kingsbury Disused EMR Vacant Daw Mill Disused Harworth Vacant Estates Table 7.2: Residual Candidate Sites for Rail Facilities Proposed at Daw Mill
Scoring
AECOM 74/94
7.37 Based on the above detailed background as to the location, key advantages and disadvantages associated with each site, a more detailed assessment of the sites, across a wider range of criteria was undertaken via a scoring matrix.
7.38 The DfT suggest that analysts use a three or seven point scale in providing a qualitative assessment of the scale of impact. This provides compatibility with the requirements of the corresponding Practitioner TAG Units. A prudent approach to scoring should be taken that reflects the quality of information on which scores are being based, but ensures any key risks associated with options are highlighted.
7.39 We selected a three point scoring method relating closely to the objectives. A simple spreadsheet-based approach involves: factoring demand and using unit values to estimate the scale of benefits; use of benchmark costs and unit rates.
7.40 There are a wide range of factors influencing decision making in the choice of which site is most suitable but typically rail based sites must have: -
Availability
Planning availability – development land available;
Timeline of development – short enough to meet the immediate needs of industry Accessibility
Good rail access – considering gauge, full length trains, available capacity and full operational flexibility;
Good quality access to the highway network – served by the national road network; Flexibility and Impact
A suitable design configuration
Development cost, railway sidings and parking facilities for goods vehicles;
Environmental Impact;
AECOM 75/94
Operational Practicality
Good access to available workforce with appropriate skills;
The distance between the site and the likely available workforce is reasonable
Not located near incompatible neighbours, so allowing 24 hour operations;
A cost profile making it attractive to inward investors; and
Proximity to Market
7.41 The site scoring parameters are detailed in table 7.3
Site Criteria Assessment Table Scoring Criteria 1 2 3 Availability Planning Availability 5+yr 3-4 yr Within 2 yr Timeline of Development 15yr 10 yr Within 5 yr Accessibility Rail Access Poor Average Good Road Access Poor Average Good Flexibility and Impacts Design Opportunity Poor Average Good Development Cost High Medium Low Environmental Impact High Medium Low Operational Practicality Workforce Availability Low Medium High Commute Distance Far Medium Close Operational Potential (24/7) Poor Average Good Proximity to Market Far Medium Close Table 7.3: Site Scoring Parameters
7.42 The site scoring criteria are explained in table 7.4
Availability This refers to the likely suitability of the site to the proposed use as well as the likely availability of the site in the future: Planning Availability those sites which were discounted at Stage One are better suited to other uses.
This refers to the ability for the site to be developed within a Timeline of Development short term timeframe. Accessibility This assesses, at a high level, the quality of rail access to Rail Access the site, in terms of capacity and ease of access This looks at the suitability of the local road network for Road Access commuting workers and HGV movements Flexibility and Impact This looks at the flexibility of the existing site layout and the Design Opportunity ease with which the proposed options could be implemented
AECOM 76/94
on the site. This looks at the cost of developing the site, including any Development Cost additional rail work required Whether largescale earthworks or environmental Environmental Impact degradation would be required for the site’s successful operation from the location’s current status. Operational Practicality Workforce Availability The number of suitable workers in the surrounding area Commuting Distance The ability of those workers to easily get to and from work The level of impact that operation of the site would have; for Operational Potential example a site in a heavily residential area would score (24/7) poorly Whether the site is well suited for the target market and Proximity to Market centrally located Table 7.4: Criteria Definition & Explanation
7.43 Using this process it is therefore possible to score the sites against these high-level criteria to assess their suitability, the results displayed in table 7.5 overleaf. The top 5 sites have then been taken forward for further discussion in the final results section.
7.44 Five sites have been scored equal to or greater than 20:
Daw Mill (25)
Bescot Train Maintenance Depot (23)
Washwood Heath (23)
Kingsbury (20)
Rugeley (20)
AECOM 77/94
Final Results
7.45 The availability of Washwood Heath and Bescot are uncertain but it is understood they are both to be earmarked for other rail uses. Washwood Heath is currently in HS2 plans as a depot and train stabling facility. Bescot is believed to be allocated for Network Rail’s infrastructure support plans.
7.46 Kingsbury would require agreement with EMR for use of the sidings and significant layout changes to the recycling facilities to provide access to the sidings, this will take time and increase the cost of any facility. Access and line capacity are also poorer than at Daw Mill. Importantly after consideration the vacant land may form part of an exclusion zone around the oil terminal site to mitigate the consequences of any incident, such as that at Buncefield Oil Terminal which in 2005 was the scene of a large explosion affecting over 630 businesses in the area as far as 8 kms away.
7.47 The Rugeley site does benefit from dedicated branch lines and sidings that are still connected to the mainline. Connectivity to the West and East Coast main lines are also good with connections via Walsall or Lichfield Trent Valley. However, demolition of the existing power station is not scheduled for completion until 2019, so the site would not be operational until 2021 at the earliest. There are various potential uses for the site being considered ranging from use as a gas fired power station to use for residential housing. Due to it not being available for at least 4-5 years it does not meet the immediate needs of the rail industry.
7.48 It is clear, when reviewing the various factors involved in site assessment including timeliness, size and shape of the site and that the fact that the site is broadly cleared with a functioning rail connection that the Daw Mill site is a valuable opportunity for the rail industry. With the urgent need to find around 10 sites to support the strong growth of the rail business, both passenger and freight, it is essential to develop those that can offer immediate occupation. Daw Mill is one of few sites able to provide the necessary infrastructure required in a timely manner to meet the needs of the West Midlands and wider UK economy.
AECOM 78/94
Mid Bescot Daw EMR Central Mantle New Cannock Anglesea Washwood Wabtec Rugeley Ironbridge TMD Mill Kingbury Rivers Lane Bilton Opencast Sidings Heath DP Availability Planning Availability 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Timeline of Development 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Accessibility Rail Access 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 3 Road Access 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 Flexibility and Impact Design Opportunity 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 Development Cost 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Environmental Impact 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 Operational Practicality Workforce Availability 3 2 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 Commute Distance 3 2 2 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 Operational Potential 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 1 (24/7) Proximity to Market 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 3 Total 23 25 20 19 18 13 15 20 16 16 19 23 Table 7.5 Alternative Site Scoring
AECOM 79/94
Summary
7.49 In this section of my evidence I have considered the relative merits of the Daw Mill site and whether it’s a suitable opportunity for development. Policy at all levels indicates there is a need to both improve the current rail network as well as expand into new lines and capacity. To do this, new track as well as new trains are required to replace aging stock and meet forecasted growth for both freight and passenger services. This implies the immediate need for perhaps as many as 10 additional sites and developments to support these needs such as track servicing and manufacture, as well as rolling stock manufacture and maintenance. Daw Mill is one of only three possible sites in the vicinity that would be suitable and have rail connections intact thereby providing a rare opportunity for a development that is essential to the future growth of the sector and to meet the needs of passengers and freight alike. A major consideration is that Daw Mill is the only one in which I can be certain of its availability, with Bescot and Washwood Heath earmarked for uses by Network Rail and HS2 respectively.
AECOM 80/94
8. 08 – Conclusion
8.1 In Section 1 I demonstrated my qualifications to give evidence towards the use of this site for development. In particular I demonstrated my understanding of both the passenger and rail freight market. Utilising this knowledge, I set out the scope of evidence for the Daw Mill site.
8.2 Section 3 laid out how the developments proposed at Daw Mill would look and operate, given the uses to which the land could be put. These are broadly similar across the three uses considered, and are based on the immediate need of the rail industry to meet rising passenger and freight demands and develop both existing and new infrastructure as well as additional rolling stock. To this end, I have proposed three possible uses, all of which fit within the existing appeal proposal and parameters plan. All three proposals will minimise road traffic, taking account of residents’ concerns that the local road infrastructure is not suitable for large numbers of vehicles, particularly HGVs. Furthermore, each use will enable for continued growth and expansion without the need for significant further intrusive work.
8.3 The rail construction yard would take advantage of Daw Mill’s strategic location and would enable the manufacture and distribution of rail components for both the classic network and HS2 developments. It is not just Network Rail that needs site for railway infrastructure work, there are building material suppliers, and major railway project contractors such as those involved with electrification and new railway building. The bulk of material and finished products would enter and egress by rail. The site would run 24 hours a day but with few train movements overnight.
8.4 A train maintenance facility capable of serving either the freight or passenger markets could be of interest to at least 5 passenger operators, 5 freight companies, several rolling stock leasing companies and possibly 4 train manufacturers all with operations in the West Midlands. A facility could enable the repair, refurbishment and testing of trains, again minimising the amount of road traffic accessing the site. The majority of work would take place overnight enabling trains to be operational during the daytime.
AECOM 81/94
8.5 The train manufacturing facility would enable train manufacturers to build their trains locally, contributing around 2-3 trains of the 10-12 required per week, with finished products egressing directly by rail and the opportunity for inbound components to travel by rail from ports, again minimising road traffic.
8.6 Across all three sites, the vast majority of activity will take place adjacent to the sidings at the Western end of the site, furthest away from noise and light sensitive areas such as Daw Mill cottages. Additionally, the use of the latest directional LED lighting would minimise light spill. A lot of the work will also take place indoors or undercover.
8.7 Section 4 showed how current policy supports the utilisation of the site for the purposes identified. Furthermore, it shows that there is a clear and immediate demand for sites to help develop Britain’s rail infrastructure and rolling stock. European and UK National policy identifies the importance or rail in order to meet the country’s carbon targets. The government therefore is engaged in a period of heavy investment, the largest in 50 years, to improve the existing network as well as create new infrastructure and invest in rolling stock. To realise these investments, supporting infrastructure is needed in the immediate term. Regional policy identifies the importance of rail within the West Midlands – the UK’s second largest urban area. Trains have a vital role to play in the regional economy moving people to their place of work and beyond. Local policy outlines the need to pursue transport improvements whilst seeking mitigation where necessary and minimising the impacts of HS2.
8.8 Section 5 illustrates the immediate need for new rolling stock and attendant maintenance facilities in order to meet the growth in rail demand over the next decade as well as replace an increasingly aging fleet. With franchise agreements ending in the next three years, signalling the most likely time for any large rolling stock procurement exercises, the need to develop this capacity is urgent.
8.9 Section 6 outlined Daw Mill’s attributes of having a good location, usable shape and size plot, proximity to a skilled labour force and importantly the live rail connection which is often a barrier on cost, timing, resourcing and securing line capacity – all of which are known to be available here.
AECOM 82/94
8.10 Section 7 has demonstrated that Daw Mill is one of only three sites in the region that is suitable for these sorts of development in order to meet a need of perhaps 10 sites across the country and the only one to have definite availability. Given the region’s location, this means it is well placed for these uses. Furthermore, the nature of the site means that it is the only site of which I know which could be developed in the timeframe required to serve current demand.
8.11 Therefore, it is my considered opinion that Daw Mill provides a strategic opportunity for a developer seeking an immediately available rail connected site for a wide range of rail industry uses. It is one of only three in the region, offering an attractively sized, rectangular shaped plot of vacant land with an existing, active rail connection – one of the primary obstacles to developing a site from new in terms of cost, timing and practicality, and the only one with definite availability.
8.12 If the Daw Mill site is not reactivated for a rail application it would be a major loss for the whole rail industry.
AECOM 83/94