The application sought approval for the development of Phases 4 and 5 of the Arisdale Avenue development. Historically, planning permission had been granted to Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corporation (TTGDC) in April 2011. This was to demolish the buildings of the Former Ford Motor Company to enable the erection of 650 homes along with car parks, roads, public open space and landscaping. Phases 1 and 2 were already constructed and construction on Phase 3 was currently underway.

With approval granted for this application, there would be a further 230 homes including associated roads, paths and car parking spaces. The dwellings were considered to be of a high quality and would be an evolution of the earlier site. The Principal Planner mentioned a separate document which highlighted some corrections to the Plan Numbers provided in the application. The application was recommended for approval.

Councillor Little asked for an outline of Thurrock’s requirements on affordable housing and the development would help the Council to achieve their goal. The Principal Planner stated the current policy and core strategy referred to 35% of affordable housing and that the Arisdale Avenue development had begun back in 2011, before the core strategy had been adopted. It had been dealt with by the development corporation at the time and not Thurrock Council. At the time, contained within s106, affordable housing and viability requirements between 10 – 25%, were to be considered at each phase of the development. This application showed 10% affordable homes which would be located in the north side of the development. This was a figure of 23 out of 230 residential dwellings.

Councillor Jefferies questioned whether there would be a proposal for footpaths and roads when Phases 4 and 5 were completed. Referring to s106, the Principal Planner stated there were requirements for footpaths and roads. Councillor Jefferies went on to ask if there would be additional access to the railway station. The Principal Planner answered that there were no plans for this within Phases 4 and 5. However, there was already an existing footbridge on the site.

Councillor Sammons queried if there would be proposals for schools. The Principal Planner confirmed there was a requirement for education at each stage of the development which would be separate to this application. There was an obligation to do so in s106. Following on from this, Councillor Jefferies asked if s106 also had a requirement for healthcare to which the Principal Planner confirmed there had been none at the time of the planning permission being granted for the Arisdale Avenue development.

The Agent, Ms Jo Russell, was invited to the Committee to present her statement of support.

The Chair opened the Committee to debate.

Referring back to the level of affordable housing, Councillor Piccolo mentioned that it had been determined back in 2010 but believed that this could be reviewed as stated. Since then, house sales had risen at a greater rate. He continued on to ask if the number of affordable homes could be looked at again. The Principal Planner answered that it was the outline application in 2010 that had set s106 of the phases for the Arisdale Avenue development. It could not be reverted back or be amended and no-one had seeked to revise that legal agreement or asked to increase the number of affordable homes. However, there would be a separate process to the planning application to discharge planning obligations and would include a viability assessment to explain the 10% given. Councillor Piccolo went on to say that the report stated that the 10% affordable homes could be reviewed when later stages of the development arose. Councillor Jefferies added that he welcomed further development of the Arisdale Avenue site but was disappointed in the number of affordable homes.

It was proposed by Councillor Piccolo and seconded by Councillor Churchman that the application be approved, subject to conditions, as per the Officer’s recommendations.

For: Councillors Steve Liddiard, Colin Churchman, Leslie Gamester, Andrew Jefferies, Terry Piccolo, Gerard Rice and Sue Sammons

Against: Councillor Susan Little

Abstain: (0)

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved, subject to conditions.