Members were informed that the application sought full planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of new buildings and infrastructure.  The application included the erection of a car storage building on the former Paper Mill land adjacent to the current site.  The application included land which overlapped with existing permission for the Purfleet Centre however the land was currently under ownership of the applicant and there were no formal plans in the public domain regarding the Purfleet Centre Regeneration revised masterplan and therefore  there were insufficient grounds to object to the application.

The Principal Planner advised that, since publication of the agenda, the Health & Safety Executive had responded regarding development of the Paper Mill site.  Due to the proximity to fuel storage on the Esso site the application should be dependent upon an additional condition requiring details of suitable cladding for the ground floor to all elevations of the car storage building to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

The Chair queried the impact on the local highways network of traffic movements between the south park site and the car storage to be erected on the Paper Mill site.  At present there was no through route and so vehicles would travel via London Road.  He asked if there were any way to monitor movements and also to ensure that transporters would exit the site using the new roundabout, to avoid Jarrow Cottages.  The Committee was assured that the purpose of the new access was to divert HGVs from London Road, the movement along London Road to the Paper Mill site would principally be cars.  The applicant had sought potential access to a through route via the Esso terminal but at present the land belonged to a 3^rd party and thus was not included within the application. 

The Principal Highways Engineer informed the Committee that the Transport Assessment contained an extensive review of the application, particularly the car storage facility to the West.  The sites were not a considerable distance apart, there was currently no HGV weight limit on that stretch of road and it was not in close proximity to the air quality area.  Condition 25 outlined HGV routing and ensured that the HGVs would not pass Jarrow Cottages.

Councillor Piccolo asked for clarity on the location of the Paper Mill site in terms of the Purfleet Centre application.  The paper mill site had been included in the Purfleet Regeneration plan however the proximity to the large scale fuel storage on the Esso site placed severe limitations on its usage and it had never been shown to be developed for conventional buildings.  Permission had also been previously granted for car storage on the site and so the principle of commercial use was established. 

A Ward Councillor, Councillor Gerrish, was invited to the Committee to present his statement of objection.

The applicant, Joost Rubens, was invited to the Committee to present his statement of support.

Councillor Ojetola asked if it was possible to prevent traffic movements on London Road.  The Committee was advised that as there was no agreement by the third party for use of the Esso land to connect the two sites it was not included in the application and the application should be considered as presented.  The application was not considered objectionable from a highways point of view.

Councillor Ojetola referred to the Ward Councillor’s comments around the impact on the Purfleet Regeneration Plan and asked how likely this application could be to have an impact.  Officers confirmed they were happy with both the individual and cumulative impact on the objection points raised within the application. In particular the Environmental Statement considered cumulative impact including the approved Purfleet Centre masterplan.

Councillor Rice interjected that the site had been earmarked as regeneration land for employment but it was impossible to assess the impact without an updated application for the Purfleet Centre and it was unwise to jeopardise businesses within the area.  He would support the application and felt the recommended planning conditions protected residents.

Councillor Ojetola agreed that Thurrock should support and encourage business within the borough but that should be balanced with the impact on residents.  Though there could be some impact on future plans it could only be assessed on the facts presented.

Councillor Piccolo expressed his opinion that, in light of the job generation opportunity and use of the site, he could see no reason not to accept the Officer’s recommendation. 

Councillor Churchman urged the applicant to continue to pursue the possibility of access links through the land currently owned by a 3^rd party.

The Chair expressed support for the application.  It was positive regeneration for that part of Purfleet and while the Committee was right to be cautious of the overall impact the application had to be assessed on its own merit.  The proposed development would allow for over 250 job opportunities and he welcomed the application in terms of the local economy.  He echoed desires for the access road, if possible.

It was proposed by the Vice Chair and seconded by Councillor Churchman that the application be approved subject to conditions as per the Officer’s recommendation and the additional condition required by the Health & Safety Executive.

For:                  Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), Kevin Wheeler (Vice-Chair), Chris Baker, Colin Churchman, Steve Liddiard, Tunde Ojetola, Terry Piccolo, David Potter and Gerard Rice.

Against:           (0)

Abstain:           (0)

The Chair adjourned the meeting at 20:13 and resumed at 20:20.

The Committee agreed to suspend Standing Orders and extend the meeting so that all applications could be heard.