The millennium came and went as the Coneygre site was left abandoned by Mintworth. With the dodgy recycling venture thwarted, it would be a couple of years before another housing development scheme entered the pipeline, this time on the adjacent sports field next to Newcomen Drive.
This application by “Selbourne homes” was for “DC/02/38284 Erection of 32 detached and terraced dwellings and the construction of associated roads and sewers, land off Newcomen Drive, Tipton. ”
It is noted that this developer used a report written by Mintworth’s regular cronies SP Associates (Sladen Peters) that would later be just known as “Sladen Associates.”
The committee report for this application can be read below. It is noted that despite the previous applications associated with housing and the replacement of the sports field (ref BCS315 and BCS851) , no application for relocation of the field was ever made, and the pitch was still being actively used.
DC_02_39284-COMMITTEE_REPORT-181843
Both existing residents at the previous new build as well as businesses on the trading estate were against the extension. Individual letters of objection and a petition were submitted to Sandwell council. The loss of the pitch, without any replacement being provided was also taken up by the quango Sport England.
A site location plan is shown below.
The application with 18 conditions was approved by SMBC on 16th May 2003, with some dubious proviso that a section 106 agreement would tart up the pitches at Victoria Park Tipton. I have to say that I cannot see how this money was ever spent on this location and I am highly dubious that the money totalling over £35,000 was ever transferred for this purpose, despite the section 106 agreement. I wonder where it did go?
DC_02_39284-DECISION_NOTICE-181844
DC/03/41020 Erection of 33 no. houses together with associated road and sewer works. | Land At Newcomen Drive Tipton West Midlands
This subsequent application was for a revised layout of the above application, except that it crammed in 1 additional house to make 33 houses.
The application can be read below.
DC_03_41020-APPLICATION_FOR_PLANNING_PERMISSION-434304
The new site layout can be viewed below, and shows how it would link up to the existing roads.
DC_03_41020-SITE_LOCATION-434309
The application received some objections as before but was passed by Sandwell council who were happy to see this sports pitch disappear.
DC_03_41020-COMMITTEE_REPORT-434236
The houses were built subsequently as the Mintworth site continued to be mothballed with no activity taking place.
The extent of the Newcomen Drive estate as it still stands today is shown below, in context with the historic overlay map of where the former foundry and sports field were. It also shows the abandoned Mintworth land to the left, with its associated untreated limestone cave workings and shafts.
Some five years after this, Mintworth suddenly reappeared with another of their fanciful “remediation” schemes, this time for more housing on the site they had previously despoiled with their tipping operations. Once again, there was widespread opposition to this scheme, both from the Lindley Avenue residents and the Newcomen Drive residents, as well as the existing industrial premises on the trading estate.
DC/08/49278
Demolition of industrial units to enable vehicular access into the site, regrading of the site and stabilisation of the old mine workings, residential development of up to 300 dwellings comprising access alterations onto Coneygree Road and Burnt Tree Road and erection of a landscaped acoustic bund (outline application).
Newcomen Drive open space.
This application has a curious pedigree given that various reports submitted in its support appear to have been prepared for various parties. RPS were dealing with and claim to be acting for a “Peak Properties Limited”.
I am suspicious that this was yet another in the long line of Mintworth guises, after all residents on both estates were well aware of the activities of this waste tipping polluter, yet the leaflet proposals delivered to homes does not mention them at all, except that it had been prepared by “the owners of the site” – I wonder why? 😉
DC_08_49278-COMMITTEE_REPORT___SUPPORTING_DOCUMENTS-332773
The main points from these outline proposals were
- 300 houses.
- No vehicular access from Newcomen Drive
- Demolition of industrial units (two of which appear to have been acquired by Mintworth for this purpose)
- “regrading of the site” and infilling of mine shafts.
- Site levelled to adjoining land estates.
- Buffer of 4.5 meters against the industrial estate to screen it from new properties.
Much of this is of course shifting around the vast amounts of over tipped foundry sand that Mintworth had never cleared when surrendering their licence (SL487) and abandoning the site.
A plan of this site is shown below. It is interesting that this plan still inaccurately shows the football field that had already been built on as an extension to the Newcomen Drive estate in the previous application from 2003.
DC_08_49278-LOCATION_PLAN-318443
Submitted with the application was a report written by Sladen Associates “Ground conditions and mine stabilisation report former Coneygre foundry site. Prepared for Mintworth Transport Limited.” The date of this is February 2007.
DC_08_49278-TECH._APP_-_APPENDIX_2_-_GROUND_CONDITION_MINE_STABILITY_REPORT_PART_1_OF_2-320028
Strangely this includes a desk study report prepared by another consultant Arup, written for “Peak Properties Limited” in 2001. The give away connection to Mintworth is that in this document it states that they are considering a residential development on the site through their solicitors Haliwell Landau. This company were acting in every sense of the word for Mintworth in all matters relating to the shambles at the adjoining rattlechain lagoon lands at this time. It is also the case that in the planning application DC/03/40538 for the 99 houses on the former sewage works (application by John Hurst Limited), that a form B is submitted with the application for the Jersey registered “Peak Properties Limited” who supposedly owned part of the land.
It is interesting that this Arup report is vague on the fill materials on the site- of course put there entirely by Mintworth and which their former director Frank Pomlett appeared to be so knowledgeable about in 1984 when proposing another application. The report is also very vague as to how the mine shafts and limestone workings would be overcome.
Indeed the most useful thing that RPS submitted with this application- for whoever they were actually acting for, is their argument that the Coneygre site was unviable for employment land end use. They appear to have gone to great lengths to emphasise this point.
DC_08_49278-EMPLOYEE_SITE_VIABILITY_ASSESSMENT-330157
Their tally of costs for redevelopment for industrial use included
Road construction, junction costs, service provision, Canal wall and site compaction, and professional costs (eg consultants ). THIS 2008 ESTIMATE TOTALLED £9.7 MILLION.
By contrast the value put on the site for end employment use (FOR MINTWORTH) was estimated at £4.7 MILLION.
Though RPS may have been keen to contrast these figures to suggest the land was useless for industrial use, they offer no equivalent figures for the costs and the value for residential end use. The likelihood is that the costs associated with this use would be far greater, particularly in ensuring compliance with health and safety issues with the dire constraints such as mine shafts and ground conditions, and that is before you get to issues of potential landfill gas. IT IS ALSO WORTH POINTING OUT THAT THESE FIGURES ARE OUT OF DATE, AND SO THE COSTS WILL NOW BE FAR GREATER.
I would also like to point out that this cost and all the constraints were Mintworth’s problem and not that of anyone else. So why should it be that any outside body should pay for the issues at this site, caused in part by the failures of them to ever conduct proper remediation of a problem of which they were always fully aware of?
Not worth a mint
The committee report for the application is shown below
DC_08_49278-COMMITTEE_REPORT___SUPPORTING_DOCUMENTS-332773
This proposed a tentative recommendation of the application , yet the planning committee at the council would in fact turn it down. The committee report for 30th July 2008 records “it was felt that there would be unsatisfactory highway access, the development would lead to an increase in crime and there would be inadequate accessibility to public transport. The proposal was also a departure from the Council’s Unitary Development Plan.”
Despite this, the decision was overturned by a bureaucrat from Bristol. The arguments within this are not for this post and I have no interest in debating them here. What is more crucial is the fact that despite the planning inspector overruling the council, NO PLANNING APPLICATION AND NO REMEDIATION OF THIS SITE HAS EVER TAKEN PLACE SOME 14 YEARS ON.
DC/12/54472
Renewal of extant planning permission DC/08/49278: Demolition of industrial units to enable vehicular access into the site, re-grading of the site and stabilisation of the old mine workings, residential development of up to 300 dwellings comprising access alterations onto Coneygree Road and Burnt Tree Road and erection of a landscaped acoustic bund (outline application). | Newcomen Drive Open Space Newcomen Drive Tipton
The application had not started by 2012, and so Mintworth’s favourite ruse of the time extension was used again in this renewal.
DC_12_54472-COMMITTEE_REPORT_AND_SUPPORTING_DOCUMENTS-589708
This extended time for start of works for seven years. To date nothing has happened on this site, and the area has grown derelict. Stray horses appeared on the abandoned site, prompting local residents to approach the council as reported in this Express and Star Article from January 19th 2013.
Said councillor Derek Rowley at the time “It is not safe for the horses, and to be quite frank they are in a bad state. It is particularly bad in such freezing weather. We as a council have contacted Mintworth, and informed them they have liability for the horses.
“We have also contacted the RSPCA.”
The article finishes with the following.
“The Express & Star contacted the registered address for Mintworth Transport Ltd, on Compton Road in Wolverhampton, but was informed the company is based offshore and is unavailable for comment. “
This statement concerning “based offshore” was a total lie, though of course, “Peak Properties Limited” were.
The Sandwell Chronicle 24/1/2013 also reported the same story of the poor trotters.
Sandwell council later launched its ludicrous “Dudley Port Supplementary Planning Document”, thus now apparently acting as agents for this longstanding polluter of the land who had done nothing with it. The SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis for this land, identified only through an FOI request, still identifies why the site is unsuitable for residential development, yet despite this, taxpayer cash is expected to pay for Mintworth’s scheme.
The residential properties of Newcomen Drive, always living in the shadow of an abandoned pile of foundry sand with geological faults underneath it.
By 2019, the land registry details for this site , title number WM417427 Land to the North West of Coneygre Road indicate that it had been sold to a “Coneygre Redevelopments Limited” on 5/6/2018, who are based at an address in Hampton in Arden. The two brothers listed as the only officers of this company (incorporated on 10/4/2018), Irish nationals Patrick and Desmond Kelly are also directors of a “Rattlechain Redevelopments Limited” – you can probably see therefore that they also have an interest in buying another “crap site for residential” on the former Mintworth despoiled tipping ground of the former Duport’s Tip- another major problem site to rectify. We shall look at that one in a future post……
The price said to have been paid for this land was £2 million!
Retrieved 17TH JUN 2019
These two companies may be part of a bigger one, or I had my doubts at first if they may on the basis of previous history be yet another ruse and guise of Mintworth. See below!
It is noted that all previous planning permissions for this site have now lapsed, and there is no planning permission for residential development granted for this site. It is a disgrace that Sandwell taxpayers money was lost at the planning appeal for a scheme that the applicants never had ANY intention of ever starting, except perhaps unless a large tax payer handout was given for allowing them to restart by stealth, the shambolic foundry sand dumping decanting that had plagued the area in the 80’s and 90’s. Presumably, the brothers Kelly were told of all the major issues of this site before the purchase, and that the former owners had done absolutely F. all about any remediation and restoration of the site . 😛
It is bizarre, that given the assessments in 2008, this company say the exact opposite to the Mintworth/RPS position concerning industrial use viability, and submitted a scoping plan, as well as another planning application for change of use in contravention of the SMBC land plans, and also the Black Country Core Strategy (now Black Country Plan) and the Dudley Port Supplementary Planning Document.
Compare and contrast the statement made by their agents, Elias Topping with the earlier Mintworth paid one, and there is some head scratching to do as to why two totally contrasting opinions were reached, and why the local authority were idiotic enough to even entertain the earlier one.
“It can therefore be demonstrated that housing use is not economically viable on the site and allowing the site to remain in employment use would help to meet the significant shortfall of High Quality Employment land in the borough.”
THE COSTS SHOULD NOT BE MET BY THE TAXPAYER !!!
It is interesting to note that the only “developments” that have appeared at the site since their purchase have been some of their fellow countrymen leaving behind a few welcome gifts. 😛
Once a tip, always a tip……..
Even worse than this, Sandwell council tax payers appear to be paying for a remote cctv monitoring of the entrance to this site, long abandoned by foundry sand tipping merchants, with no intent of doing anything with the land unless a public body paid for the remediation. Perhaps with the long line of failure from this local authority in the planning process of how that materialised, they should perhaps have done more to monitor that abomination instead, FFS! 😳
Are SMBC watching the highway, or private land?
According to Sandwell council, there are complaints regards this site in terms of its dumping ground eyesore status.
DC_21_66125-COMMITTEE_REPORT-1195785
“7.3 The council has also dealt with two enforcement cases on the site
regarding issues with the boundary wall and untidy land (GS/13/9065
and GS/19/10965 respectively). Whilst those issues have been
addressed, a further complaint (case GS/21/11567) has recently been
received for untidy land.”
Even more bizarrely, in the Call for sites process, which I understand finished AFTER THE “CONEYGRE REDEVELOPMENTS” purchase , the following appears, and we appear here to not be dealing with “Coneygre Redevelopments Limited” but rather someone else, in this case the agents of Mintworth- RPS 😉 It is not clear as to when this form was submitted, or IF it took place BEFORE the purchase, but it appears highly dubious.
Black Country Core Strategy – OC2 version of form
Note that RPS claim to be the “Sole owner” of the site. WTF!?
No they are not!
Respondents answers in red.
“Site ID #124
What is your / your clients interest in this site? If you are an agent please answer on behalf of your client only. Please select all that apply.
Not Provided.
Does the other owner(s) support your proposals for the site?
Yes
Is there direct vehicle access to the site i.e. from a public road?
Yes
Site
CONEYGRE
Site Address
LAND AT CONEYGRE, NEWCOMEN DRIVE, SANDWELL
Site Postcode
Not Provided.
Site Area in Hectares
9.16
Site Area in Hectares of land suitable for development, if different to above
Not Provided.
Please provide a brief summary of the current use(s) of this site or last known lawful use(s)
Historical landfill site. Designated in the Site Allocations DPD for employment uses.
Site Area: 9.16 – WILL REDUCE BELOW THIS FOLLOWING REVISED ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS AND REMOVAL OF ADJOINING LAND
Site Area suitable for development: TBC
What use or mix of uses do you propose for this site? Please tick all that apply.
Not Provided.
If housing or employment is proposed, please specify how many homes or how many hectares of employment land you think could be accommodated on the site.
TO BE ESTABLISHED BY MASTERPLANNING BUT THE POTENTIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 8HA OF EMPLOYMEMNT LAND ON LAND CONTROLLED BY MINTWORTH TRANSPORT 😡
What services are currently available at this site? Please tick all that apply.
Not Provided.
What constraints, if any, affect this site? Please provide details below for each constraint.
Not Provided.
Please provide supporting details for each constraint identified above.
separate technical reports are all publically (sic) available and demonstrated the suitability of development for residential purposes in 2009 and the further renewal application.
Is the site agricultural land? If so, then what is the agricultural landclassification? Please provide survey results, including mapping.
No – the site is previously developed land.
If there is a current use of the site that needs to be relocated what arrangements are required to achieve this relocation? e.g. manufacturer currently on the site needs to move to a building of xx square meters with good access to the motorway.
The employment uses at the site entrance would be retained and access for new commercial Land would come direct off the existing access on Coneygre Road.
What new infrastructure do you think will be required to support the development of the site?
Not Provided.
Please provide supporting details for the above.
Following securing planning permission at appeal in 2009 for 300 dwellings and a subsequent renewal application, the landowner has marketed the site, via professional agents to numerous housebuilders. Due to the cost of addressing the prevailing ground conditions and existing mines under the site along with its market location, no housebuilder/developer has taken the site forward.
Some interest has been provided from the development sector for commercial uses on the site, which the landowner advises will not require the same extent and costs associated with securing suitable and deliverable land platforms for B Class employment land.
For this reason Mintworth Transport would welcome the opportunity of having discussions with the Local Planning Authority over the potential for an employment allocation on the land.
Are there any existing or historic planning permissions on the site? If yes please include any details e.g. application reference number.
Yes
If yes, please provide details.
DC/08/49278
Is the land available immediately for development (subject to obtaining any necessary planning permissions)?
Don’t know
If no, please explain why not and give an estimated timescale for when it will become available.
Subject to further dialogue with commercial land developers.
Is there any current market interest in the site, other than from you / your client? Tick all that apply.
Not Provided.
Please provide further details of the market interest in this site.
Site has been marketed for several years for residential development. This has not lead to any viable proposals coming forward.
Once started how many years do you think it would take to develop the site?
Not Provided.
Do you think it is likely that there will be viability issues with developing the site that will require the use of external funding?
Possible. (lol ed)
Have you previously contacted a Black Country or neighbouring authority about this site?
Yes (ed who exactly are we talking about here?)
If yes, please provide brief details e.g. who you contacted and when and the current position of discussions.
Not Provided.
Please provide any additional comments you may have that are relevant to the site you are putting forward.
Not Provided.”
So it looks as though no house builder is interested in this site due to the known constraints. But who exactly are the owners of this site, when “Mintworth Transport” appear to be putting in a call for sites submission via “RPS! ? We know what “Coneygre Redevelopments” interest is in the site, given that they paid £2 million for the land, but as for Mintworth in submitting this form?
“What is your / your clients interest in this site? If you are an agent please answer on behalf of your client only. Please select all that apply.
Not Provided.”
Is there really a business case for employment land at this site, when the board on the Coneygre Industrial Estate appears to to suggest a great deal of vacancy, including the two units which Mintworth never demolished to kickstart their abandoned applications in 2008 and 2012.
Abandoned dereliction
The vagueness of many of the answers (not provided) is reminiscent of the voids in the limestone and mine workings left behind on this land. Just fill them with “any old shite will do” and leave the victims of industrial pollution with dirt in their eye thanks to sandmen pipedreams….