FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Here you’ll find some of the more common questions we are being asked about our proposal. If you have a question which isn’t addressed here then please contact us and we’ll do our best to respond by adding additional FAQs to the list
Why do we need another concrete plant here when there is already one at Bow West?
It is common – in fact preferable – to have two plants on a rail-linked site like Bow to meet local demand while minimising vehicle movements. There are currently gaps in the market which today have to be supplied from further afield, or from sites that are not rail linked, requiring more vehicle movements and longer journeys. Each train delivery keeps 75 lorries off the roads, so a plant at Bow East is preferable to a plant which requires aggregates to be delivered by road. Bow East is the only rail freight terminal in central east London so it’s a unique location to bring in the construction materials required for the continued regeneration of this area.
Will working hours be changing?
How do you proposed to address traffic issues?
Careful consideration has been given to vehicle movements to and from the proposed plant.
The new proposal includes measures to improve highway access, making it safer for pedestrians and road users; is on a smaller scale – about half the volume of material currently permitted, and about a 30% reduction compared to the previous proposals – that’s already a lot less trucks. It also stipulates that trucks and drivers based at the site would be FORS compliant, and trucks would have ‘Euro 6’ engines which are cleaner than many older lorries and cars already using the local roads.
The short- to mid-term proposal is to use the current site entrance onto Marshgate Lane, with highway improvements to keep pedestrians and cyclists separate. Longer-term we propose to switch access onto Wick Lane and route directly onto the A12 (excepting the most local deliveries). Land is being provided by the site owner Network Rail to enable this once other current uses cease.
Regeneration will require concrete from somewhere, and bringing in materials by train represents a huge reduction in overall road miles which means less trucks on the road and less pollution.
How do you propose to prevent material becoming airborne?
Several measures are proposed to address air quality concerns through containment within walls and buildings, suppression systems that prevent material becoming airborne, and a rigorous management regime to maintain a clean site.
The site has been designed to minimise the likelihood of material entering the air as a result of vehicle movements. The design includes enclosures to inhibit the flow of wind across stored materials.
Rainwater would be ‘harvested’ for use in an automatic spray system to dampen stored materials and operating areas to prevent dust generation. Within the plant itself, finer material that could become airborne would be contained or filtered.
Monitoring would be undertaken at multiple points within and around the site to ensure the effectiveness of these measures.
Compared to concrete plants from 20 or 30 years ago a modern concrete plant similar to the one we’re now proposing is much cleaner with much better controls on things like dust.