The application sought planning permission for the redevelopment of the site to construct a 6 form entry secondary school for 1,150 pupils, including 250 sixth form pupils in 8,850m² new school building. The Principal Planning Officer advised that there were suggested slight amendments to conditions 20 and 21 and minor revisions to a number of submitted plans as detailed below:

Plan no. 17075-LSI-A1-RF-DR-A-1304 now Revision A

Plan no. 17075-LSI-A1-ZZ-DR-A-1350 now Revision A

Plan no. 17075-LSI-A1-ZZ-DR-A-1351 now Revision A

Plan no. 17075-LSI-A1-ZZ-DR-A-1370 now Revision A

Plan no. 17075-LSI-A1-ZZ-DR-A-1371 now Revision A

Plan no. 17075-LSI-A1-XX-DR-A-1400 now Revision A

Condition no. 20: insert “of the playing pitch” after “development”.

Condition no. 21: substitute “above finished ground level” with “of the MUGA”.

Councillor Ojetola felt that it was good to see applications for new schools in the borough, but expressed concern at issues regarding highways and access.  London Road was not wide and this might cause problems regarding turning in and out of the site, similarly the access was in close proximity to the railway station and he was worried there would be tailbacks during peak hours when the barriers were down at the crossing.  The Committee was advised that the site had previously been used by HGVs which had ingressed and egressed the site with the current road layout and width; it was therefore deemed acceptable.  The Transport Assessment had also included a traffic count and predicted movements relating to the proposed use which gave no indication of great impact.  The existing use of the site was greater than the proposed use.

Councillor Ojetola continued that he felt more should be done to encourage alternative travel to the site and to reduce the number of vehicle movements, however he accepted that presently there was not a complete cycle route to the site.  Members heard that there were two bus routes within 300m of the site.  The modal share of cycling would be monitored through the Travel Plan condition and addressed if not met.  There were also physical measures within the transport assessment such as the introduction of a puffin crossing immediately outside the entrance to the site and the proposed drop off facility at Cornwell House.  The site was deemed to be fairly accessible to secondary school pupils and the traffic plan was a starting point.  There were aspirations to enhance sustainable travel including a mode shift star system managed by road safety officers which would push the school to improve its sustainable transport modal figures.  Similarly the Council could look at highway improvements for better cycling and other options.

Councillor Jones sought clarity around the bus drop off points in relation to the site, and whether the Cornwall House car park would continue to be available in the future.  The private school coach drop off point would be within the site itself, which was in place to facilitate the relocation of pupils from the temporary Chafford campus.  There were also local bus routes nearby and the Cornwall House car park was a 370m walk from the site.  Cornwall House was owned by the Council however it fell within the proposals for the Purfleet Centre Regeneration and therefore there were no guarantees that it would be available permanently.  In the long term the Cornwall House site would not be available however the school’s catchment area would potentially be more specific to Purfleet by that time.  The Assistant Director for Planning and Growth summarised that the application proposals as they stood were deemed to be acceptable.  Purfleet would be in a state of flux in the near future however the car park was not likely to be part of the earlier phases of the regeneration and the issue could be kept in mind as part of the development.  Councillor Jones agreed it was necessary to be mindful as schools were often causes for concern with regards to traffic impact on the local area.

Councillor Hamilton stressed that the level crossing at Purfleet was very different from that in Grays, and there would be vehicles as well as pedestrians crossing.  The pathway was very narrow and he was concerned that conditions could be hazardous for pedestrians at peak times.  He added that he would not personally wish to cycle along such a busy road and given the narrow, traffic intensive nature of the road there was no possibility of a cycle lane.  He asked whether there might be any additional parking than proposed to the western part of the site, which was proposed to be for ecological purposes.  The land had been left for ecology purposes, to enhance the biodiversity interest of the site and to offer habitat improvement.  To the west of the site the angle became more acute which would prove difficult for manoeuvring cars, and would be closer to residential properties, therefore causing increase noise and disturbance.  As the school did not permit 6^th form students to park at school the provision was deemed acceptable.

Councillor Hamilton asked whether a footpath might be created to the rear of the housing to provide increased safety for pedestrians.  Members were advised that there was currently a private right of way which would require negotiation with the landowner.  Similarly a change to the proposal would require a new consultation with residents, and there would likely be increased objections if pupils were expected to walk along the back of residents’ gardens.

Councillor Redsell agreed that Thurrock needed additional schools however stated that if the Cornwall House car park were no longer available there would be problems.  She asked whether the timber company to the east of the site had a separate access.  It was confirmed that there was existing access roughly 300m away from access to the proposed school site.

Councillor Churchman referred to the possibility of the railway station relocating as part of the Purfleet Centre Regeneration and whether it might be possible to improve access and egress.  The existing outline permission for the Purfleet Centre Regeneration included relocating the railway station.  The emerging master plan, which had not yet been officially submitted, appeared to retain that aspiration and there were hopes to bridge London Road which could provide an opportunity for pedestrian improvements.

A resident, Mr Phélut, was invited to the Committee to present his statement of objection.

The agent, Laura Meyer, was invited to the Committee to present her statement of support.

Councillor Hamilton questioned whether access to the car park would be prohibited to prevent parents being tempted to drop children off on site.  It was confirmed that a car park management scheme would be in place, as per condition 26.

Councillor Ojetola sought assurance that the width of the entrance was sufficient for coaches, as there were examples across the borough of coaches being forced to stop on the main highway as they could not turn into school sites.  The access width was 6.2m, as wide as the carriageway and therefore ample for coaches to turn into and access the site.  There was a controlled parking zone along London Road and therefore no coach would be able to stop on the main highway.

Councillor Ojetola agreed that good schools were hard to come by and the Committee would want to encourage them so commended Harris but reminded Members that this was an opportunity to start from scratch and address concerns which arose at schools across Thurrock.  He was not objecting to the application but hoped to improve the proposals to reduce challenges of vehicle impact on the local area.  The Assistant Director of Planning and Growth agreed that the situation could be monitored and reviewed over time, as the area would undergo significant flux.

Councillor Rice expressed that the prospect of a new school was exciting, and that it was particularly nice to see facilities developing ahead of homes.  He accepted there were some issues however officers had worked closely with the applicant to rectify them and he would support the application.

Councillor Redsell agreed that all Members wanted new schools for Thurrock, and so she would support the application, but reiterated the need to address issues around parking, given the number of schools in the borough with problems at present.  She felt officers had addressed most of the issues but more could be done around parking.

Councillor Snell supported Councillor Ojetola’s concerns regarding traffic but had faith in the short term.  He was worried that the Committee was somewhat blinded by the prospect of a new school, as he felt the design itself was uninspiring and he hoped future schools might be more impressive.  He also expressed concern around the football pitch which would soon become unplayable.  There were slight issues with the application which he felt could be missed because the application was for a new school.

Councillor Hamilton remained concerned regarding the safety of pedestrians as he felt the situation was somewhat unsafe.

The Chair stated that it was a fantastic opportunity.  He agreed that there were a host of concerns however the officers’ recommendation was for approval.  The car park was important and he could foresee issues for residents with parents parking in the surrounding areas and on double yellow lines.  He would like to see London Road to the North East of the site widened to provide drop off bays however accepted there were funding issues.  He also wished for the private school bus to remain a permanent option.  He accepted there were enough positives to vote in favour of approval but stressed he would like officers and the applicant to take comments regarding re-evaluation seriously.

It was proposed by Councillor Jones and Seconded by Councillor Jones that the application be approved, subject to amended conditions, as per the Officer’s recommendation.

For:                  Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), Steve Liddiard (Vice-Chair), Colin Churchman, Roy Jones, Tunde Ojetola, Gerard Rice and Joy Redsell.

Against:           (0)

Abstain:           Councillors Graham Hamilton and Graham Snell

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved, subject to conditions.