The Major Application Manager presented the application and highlighted the following points:

·       The application relates to the demolition and clearing of all existing buildings on the site for redevelopment of 28 units.

·       39,636sq metres of employment land floorspace. The site covers an area 13.79 hectares, of which 9.12 hectares is usable. The site sits 17 metres lower that the surrounding ground level.

·       The proposal seeks to build small, medium and two large sized business units for general industrial, storage and/or distribution usage. Area is designated as an employment area.

·       The application is recommended for approval.

Members asked the following questions to the Major Application Manager and Highways Principal Engineer:

·       Councillor Arnold asked if there would be any improvement to the junction on Hogg Lane

o   Highways team is seeking improvements.

o   Models show it would not impact on the junction at Hogg Lane, there would be an impact at the site, but queues are not expected.

·       Councillor Arnold further asked if the well-established trees on the site would be protected.

o   No plans to remove trees. Plans to increase trees.

o   Tree lined avenue would remain.

·       Councillor Polly had concerns regarding site access and asked if the Fire Brigade had been consulted and what the emergency evacuation plan would be.

·       Councillor Polly further inquired about the travel plan and asked if a shuttle bus service to the unit could be added to the lease agreement.

o   Only one vehicle access

o   Units would be built to meet fire safety regulations.

o   Evacuation procedures fall under health and safety legislation.

o   Site is a flood zone, and a flood evacuation plan would need to be put in place.

o   Car club places proposed onsite.

o   If there is a requirement for a shuttle bus a service could be set up in the future.

o   Site will have better pedestrian access to town centre and railway station.

·       Councillor Liddiard asked if the area is currently derelict and what the net increases of jobs would be.

o   Business operations in the area are low.

o   86 jobs on site currently, with a predicted increase to 650 jobs.

·       Councillor Maney asked how close the existing houses were to the site and if there would be an impact.

o   All buildings would be in the confines of the quarry, with nothing projecting above the cliff face.

·       Councillor Watson overall liked the plan but had a few concerns. One concern was regarding possible future flooding and asked if there was a flood would there be any contamination coming from the units and how it would be managed. A second concern was regarding the road network and asked what the impact would be with increased HGV traffic. How far out did the traffic model look. Councillor Watson also asked if only £50,000 had been highlighted for pedestrian work.

o   In high-risk floodplain but there is no objection from the Environment Agency.

o   Site has contamination at present and would be decontaminated before any occupation of the site.

o   The road network has been assessed as part of the application. Planned modification at the Treacle Mine roundabout, an additional lane will come down from North Stifford interchange to improve traffic flow.

o   A contribution has been asked of the applicant towards pedestrian improvements.

o   A Lorry routing management plan would be put in place to ensure lorries and HGVs would have to enter in left and exit right.

·       Councillor Shinnick asked if the HGVs will be able to turn right and if it would be better for the HGVs to use the roundabout.

o   Only able to turn right, road is wide enough.

·       Councillor Piccolo noted there would be increased traffic to the site and asked if access would be made easier if a yellow box junction was set up.

o   Modelling shows it would not be necessary.

·       Councillor Piccolo further asked who would be monitoring the junction.

o   Improvements would be made as necessary.

·       Councillor Arnold had seen issues at the junction and fears backups on Hogg Lane would cause issues in the area. Councillor Arnold is not confident that HGVs would follow set out travel plans.

·       Councillor Arnold further asked if there were any provisions in place for solar panels to be put in by the applicant.

o   Applicant produced an energy statement. At least 20% of energy from used by units would be from renewable sources.

·       Councillor Watson asked if there was an asbestos plan.

o   Not known, asbestos sits outside of planning legislation.

·       Councillor Polley asked who would monitor the site to make sure operators at the site respect residents.

o   Conditions are in place for developer to respect residents.

o   If residents complained, it would be investigated.

·       The Chair, Councillor Kelly noted the possibility of increased business rates due to increased floor space and asked if there is a commitment timeline.

o  Business rates are not a material planning consideration.

o   Conditions would be, start in 3 years, phasing arrangement with demolition in May 2024 with development completion in September 2025

Speaker Statements were heard from:

Statement of Support: Alastair King of Chancerygate

During the debate the following was highlighted:

·       The Chair welcomed the plan and noted it would be a good regeneration opportunity for Grays including: the new pedestrian access, jobs, boost to economy. Councillor Kelly also understood the concerns with HGV movement but was content with the traffic modelling. CCTV could be added at the access point to monitor HGV movement if there was an abuse of left hand turns.

·       Councillor Arnold identifies there could be a loss on natural habitat and had concerns regarding HGV traffic, its cumulative effect and possible gridlock in the borough. Highway issues cannot be disregarded. Councillor Arnold also added that the scheme was fantastic, and the pedestrian access to the town centre could improve business. The current site looks tired and welcomed regeneration to the area.

·       Councillor Polley agreed with Councillor Arnold. Councillor Polley welcomed job creation and hoped the development would bring life and energy to Grays High Street. Councillor Polley also shared her concerns regarding the road network. Councillor Polley noted she would not like the security barrier by the entrance potentially blocking traffic on Hogg Lane.

·       Councillor Watson shared her worries regarding the road network but liked the development, its training plan, the consideration to biodiversity. Councillor Watson noted the loss of 43 trees but appreciated the gain to the area: increased footfall and the opportunity to bring more life into Grays.

·       Councillor Piccolo thinks the development is great, it would be well hidden, and any noise would be mitigated. Councillor Piccolo shared his concerns with the impact the site would have on the traffic on Hogg Lane. There are no residents on Hogg Lane to lodge a complaint. Monitoring on Hogg Lane would need to be put in place and the entrance and exit of the site.

·       Councillor Maney noted it would be a good development for Grays but also shared the same concerns regarding the road network and local wildlife.

·       The Chair closed the debate and summed up the concerns of the members and asked what options are available for CCTV monitoring the site exit and entrance.

·       The Major Application Manager answered questions that came up in the debate.

o   With regards to the environment, conditions for detailed landscaping, tree planning, and biodiversity are in place and it would improve the ecology of the site.

o   Security barrier would be at the bottom of the access.

The Chair, Councillor Kelly recommended approval.

Councillor Polley seconded it.

For: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), Georgette Polley (Vice Chair), Paul Arnold, Steve Liddiard, Jacqui Maney Terry Piccolo, Sue Shinnick, and Lee Watson.

Against: (0)

Abstained: (0)