Apologies were received from the Chair Councillor Fletcher, Councillors J Maney, Councillor Halden, and Councillor Polston. Councillor Heath attended as a substitute in Councillor Polstons’ place.

Vice- Chair Councillor Liddiard chaired the meeting in Councillor Fletcher’s absence. 

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 19 November 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2024 were approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

To receive additional items that the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no items of urgent business.

Councillor Kelly advised he would be recusing himself from item 10 on the agenda due to work interests.

There were no declarations of receipt of correspondence, and or any meetings/discussions held relevant to any planning application or enforcement actions.

Members noted the planning appeals. There were no further questions.

The Principal Planner presented this item to the Planning Committee. Advising the application seeks full planning permission for the residential development of the site for 24 flats (in 2 blocks) and 21 houses. The Committee were advised that part of the site was most recently used sporadically for commercial purposes (the area fronting Broadway) and for a scrapyard (the area fronting Manor Road). The proposed scheme would provide for a mixture of dwelling sizes with shared parking & amenity space for the flats and private parking & amenity areas for the dwellings. The scheme would make best use of a highly sustainable site which is in close proximity to local schools and a local parade and would reuse in a positive way land which is presently underused and derelict. Approval is therefore recommended subject to conditions and s106 Agreement. The principal planner added that on page 54 of the application there is a duplication of a condition 30 is a refuse and recycling condition. This is duplicated as it already exists under condition 9. Therefore, this has been struck out and sought agreement from members.

·       Speaker gave statement to the committee.

Members sought further clarification regarding the different points of access. Members were advised there are three key access points in the proposal the first is to the north adjacent to the existing access, there are two other access points to the southern end via Manor Road. The Principal Planner confirmed there would be no access through Cherry Tree Close, officers are aware of the resident concerns regarding unauthorised access. Members were advised to review condition 21 on page 51 which covers reinstating a wall along the south-western edge of the site which residents are supportive of.

Members stated that currently there is no affordable housing included and queried whether this will be reviewed. Members also queried the impact on local schools and GPs. It was confirmed that normally for an application of this size they would expect an element of 35% of affordable housing to be included. Adding that the proposal is subject to viability assessments and the most recent viability appraisal indicated that the appropriate route includes a review mechanism agreed by both parties within a legal agreement where the costs of can be assessed and if there is scope to provide affordable housing or education contributions that would be secured. It was confirmed that this would be an independent review to ensure consistency.

Members expressed concerns regarding GPs being able to manage number of residents moving into the area. It was confirmed by the officer, and by the agent who spoke, that the applicant has agreed to provide the healthcare contributions required. The officer advised that the healthcare contribution was included in the heads of terms for the legal agreement but needed to be added to the recommendation under part 16 of page 44 of the agenda.  Members also queried whether, following the review mechanism, if there would be an opportunity to bring the application back to Committee.  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

The Principal Planning Officer presented this item to the Committee. Advising this planning application (which is retrospective) seeks permission for the installation of two pétanque terrains on land adjacent to Orsett Cricket Pavilion. The application site forms part of a larger outdoor sports and recreational facility and is identified as such in the Thurrock Core Strategy. The application has been brought for determination at Planning Committee as the proposal is on land that is in the ownership of the Council and submitted by the Orsett Community Forum. Given the additional recreational facility created and the limited external changes proposed, the application is recommended for approval.

·       Speaker gave statement to the committee.

Members had no questions regarding the application and skipped the debate.

Recommendation: That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT permission for the development subject to those items set out in section 16 of this report - A) Conditions

Proposed: Councillor Liddiard

Seconded: Councillor Kelly

For (7): P Arnold, G Byrne, Heath, Kelly, Liddiard, Shinnick, Sisterson

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

Recommendations approved.

The Committee were advised that the planning application seeks permission for the erection of a two storey, two-bedroom dwelling house at the site with associated parking to its frontage and private rear garden space. The application was Called In for determination at Planning Committee by Councillors Fletcher, Shinnick and G Byrne in order to consider matters relating to loss of light to neighbours, the proposed width of the development and lack of external access to the private rear garden space, and the impact upon the character of the area. The principle of development is considered acceptable. While the dwelling would be the full width of the plot, the overall design and layout of the dwelling, together with the marked improvements to the appearance of the street scene through the loss of the large fences in Marlborough Avenue, on balance, would not result in any detrimental harm to the character or visual appearance of the street scene. Any loss of light or outlook experienced by No. 54 Marlborough Avenue would be towards a window serving a non-habitable room and would be at a level generally accepted for such uses. As a consequence, there would be no significant harm to neighbour amenity which would warrant recommending refusal. The highways, internal living space provisions and ecology impacts of the proposal would be acceptable. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with the relevant policies contained within the Core Strategy and the NPPF and is therefore recommended for approval.

·       Speaker gave statement to the committee.

Members queried if the applicant would live in the property. It was confirmed they will move into the property.

Members proceeded to the debate and questioned why the application was called in. All members were in favour of the application.

Recommendation

That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT permission for the development subject to those items set out in section 16 of this report – A) Conditions.

Proposed: Councillor Kelly

Seconded: Councillor P Arnold

For (6): P Arnold, G Byrne, Heath, Kelly, Liddiard, Sisterson

Against: (1) Councillor Shinnick

Abstain (0)

Recommendations approved.

Councillor Kelly left at 18.50pm.

Associates from Adams Hendry Chartered Town Planners presented this item to the committee. They advised that Local Development Orders (LDOs) provide permitted development rights for specified types of development in defined locations. The original LDO for London Gateway Logistics Park was made in 2013 (known as ‘LDO1’). Following its expiry in 2023, an interim LDO was made in February 2024 (known as ‘LDO1.5’). LDO2 is now proposed to continue to help accelerate the delivery of appropriate development on the remainder of the Logistics Park. This will allow up to 733,776 m2 of commercial floorspace and amenity uses on the site of which 412,326m2 is already completed or committed under LDO1 and LDO1.5, with 321,450 m2 of commercial floorspace remaining to be consented.

As the “competent authority” the Council under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) is required to determine if a plan or project may have an adverse impact on a site designated under the same (or preceding Regulations) prior to any consent or permission being determined. The process of undertaking this assessment is known as a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). The ‘Report to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment: London Gateway Logistics Park Local Development Order 2.0’ dated August 2024 has been prepared to provide information to the competent authority and has been scrutinised by Natural England as the statutory nature conservation body. It is recommended on the basis of the information available, that the Council formally determines that the proposed development to be permitted by LDO2 will not adversely affect the integrity of a European site or a European offshore marine site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.

Members queried whether there were any provisions to manage constructors’ behaviour on site and being respectful of surrounding residents. It was confirmed that conditions would be reviewed during the next decision.

There were no further questions and members skipped the debate.

Recommendations

Note the content of the “Report to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment London Gateway Logistics Park Local Development Order 2.0” dated August 2024 and the consultation responses received; b) Formally determine, on the basis of the information available, that the development proposed by LDO2 will not adversely affect the integrity of a European site or a European offshore marine site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.

Proposed: Councillor Byrne

Seconded: Councillor Shinnick

For (6): P Arnold, G Byrne, Heath, Liddiard, Shinnick, Sisterson

Against: (0)

Abstain (0)

Recommendations approved.

Associates continued to discuss the LDO2. Advising that the London Gateway Logistics Park is a world leading logistics centre sitting alongside the London Gateway Port, the UK’s fasted growing deep-sea container terminal, located on the north bank of the River Thames just 25 miles from central London. The two components together, form London Gateway. Local Development Orders (LDOs) provide permitted development rights for specified types of development in defined locations. Members were advised the original LDO for London Gateway Logistics Park was made in 2013 (known as ‘LDO1’) and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.