Planning Committee

Thurrock: A place of opportunity, enterprise and excellence, where individuals, communities and businesses flourish

Planning Committee

The meeting will be held at 7.00 pm on 17 December 2015

Council Chamber, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL

Membership:

Councillors Terence Hipsey (Chair), Tom Kelly (Vice-Chair), Chris Baker, Steve Liddiard, Brian Little, Tunde Ojetola, Barry Palmer, Gerard Rice and Kevin Wheeler

Richard Bowyer, Thurrock Business Association Representative Steve Taylor, Campaign to Protect Rural England Representative

Substitutes:

Councillors Clare Baldwin, Robert Gledhill and Barry Johnson

Agenda

Open to Public and Press

Page

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Minutes 5 - 10

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 26 November 2015.

3 Item of Urgent Business

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.

4 Declaration of Interests

5 Declarations of receipt of correspondence and/or any meetings/discussions held relevant to determination of any planning application or enforcement action to be resolved at this meeting

6 Planning Appeals 11 - 14

7 Public Address to Planning Committee

The Planning Committee may allow objectors and applicants/planning agents, and also owners of premises subject to enforcement action, or their agents to address the Committee. The rules for the conduct for addressing the Committee can be found on Thurrock Council’s website at https://www.thurrock.gov.uk/democracy/constitution Chapter 5, Part 3 (c).

8 15/01283/OUT: Portland Lodge Brentwood Road Bulphan Essex 15 - 30 RM14 3T

9 15/01155/FUL: Land To Rear Of Fairview Avenue Stanford Le 31 - 48 Hope Essex

10 15/01393/TBC: Car Park Thames Road Grays Essex 49 - 58

11 15/01394/TBC: Cornwall House London Road Purfleet Essex 59 - 68 RM19 1PS

Queries regarding this Agenda or notification of apologies:

Please contact Kenna-Victoria Martin, Senior Democratic Services Officer by sending an email to [email protected]

Agenda published on: 9 December 2015 Information for members of the public and councillors

Access to Information and Meetings

Members of the public can attend all meetings of the council and its committees and have the right to see the agenda, which will be published no later than 5 working days before the meeting, and minutes once they are published.

Recording of meetings

This meeting may be recorded for transmission and publication on the Council's website. At the start of the meeting the Chair will confirm if all or part of the meeting is to be recorded. Members of the public not wishing any speech or address to be recorded for publication to the Internet should contact Democratic Services to discuss any concerns. If you have any queries regarding this, please contact Democratic Services at [email protected]

Guidelines on filming, photography, recording and use of social media at council and committee meetings

The council welcomes the filming, photography, recording and use of social media at council and committee meetings as a means of reporting on its proceedings because it helps to make the council more transparent and accountable to its local communities. If you wish to film or photograph the proceedings of a meeting and have any special requirements or are intending to bring in large equipment please contact the Communications Team at [email protected] before the meeting. The Chair of the meeting will then be consulted and their agreement sought to any specific request made. Where members of the public use a laptop, tablet device, smart phone or similar devices to use social media, make recordings or take photographs these devices must be set to ‘silent’ mode to avoid interrupting proceedings of the council or committee. The use of flash photography or additional lighting may be allowed provided it has been discussed prior to the meeting and agreement reached to ensure that it will not disrupt proceedings. The Chair of the meeting may terminate or suspend filming, photography, recording and use of social media if any of these activities, in their opinion, are disrupting proceedings at the meeting.

Page 1 Thurrock Council Wi-Fi

Wi-Fi is available throughout the Civic Offices. You can access Wi-Fi on your device by simply turning on the Wi-Fi on your laptop, Smartphone or tablet.  You should connect to TBC-CIVIC  Enter the password Thurrock to connect to/join the Wi-Fi network.  A Terms & Conditions page should appear and you have to accept these before you can begin using Wi-Fi. Some devices require you to access your browser to bring up the Terms & Conditions page, which you must accept. The ICT department can offer support for council owned devices only.

Evacuation Procedures

In the case of an emergency, you should evacuate the building using the nearest available exit and congregate at the assembly point at Kings Walk.

How to view this agenda on a tablet device

You can view the agenda on your iPad, Android Device or Blackberry Playbook with the free modern.gov app.

Members of the Council should ensure that their device is sufficiently charged, although a limited number of charging points will be available in Members Services.

To view any “exempt” information that may be included on the agenda for this meeting, Councillors should:

 Access the modern.gov app  Enter your username and password

Page 2 DECLARING INTERESTS FLOWCHART – QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF

Breaching those parts identified as a pecuniary interest is potentially a criminal offence

Helpful Reminders for Members

 Is your register of interests up to date?  In particular have you declared to the Monitoring Officer all disclosable pecuniary interests?  Have you checked the register to ensure that they have been recorded correctly?

When should you declare an interest at a meeting?

 What matters are being discussed at the meeting? (including Council, Cabinet, Committees, Subs, Joint Committees and Joint Subs); or  If you are a Cabinet Member making decisions other than in Cabinet what matter is before you for single member decision?

Does the business to be transacted at the meeting  relate to; or  likely to affect any of your registered interests and in particular any of your Disclosable Pecuniary Interests?

Disclosable Pecuniary Interests shall include your interests or those of:  your spouse or civil partner’s  a person you are living with as husband/ wife  a person you are living with as if you were civil partners where you are aware that this other person has the interest.

A detailed description of a disclosable pecuniary interest is included in the Members Code of Conduct at Chapter 7 of the Constitution. Please seek advice from the Monitoring Officer about disclosable pecuniary interests.

What is a Non-Pecuniary interest? – this is an interest which is not pecuniary (as defined) but is nonetheless so significant that a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts, would reasonably regard to be so significant that it would materially impact upon your judgement of the public interest.

Pecuniary Non- pecuniary

If the interest is not already in the register you must Declare the nature and extent of your interest including enough (unless the interest has been agreed by the Monitoring detail to allow a member of the public to understand its nature Officer to be sensitive) disclose the existence and nature of the interest to the meeting

If the Interest is not entered in the register and is not the subject of a pending notification you must within 28 days notify the Monitoring Officer You may participate and vote in the usual of the interest for inclusion in the register way but you should seek advice on Predetermination and Bias from the Monitoring Officer. Unless you have received dispensation upon previous application from the Monitoring Officer, you must: - Not participate or participate further in any discussion of the matter at a meeting; - Not participate in any vote or further vote taken at the meeting; and - leave the room while the item is being considered/voted upon If you are a Cabinet Member you may make arrangements for the matter to be dealt with by a third person but take no further steps

Page 3 Vision: Thurrock: A place of opportunity, enterprise and excellence, where individuals, communities and businesses flourish.

To achieve our vision, we have identified five strategic priorities:

1. Create a great place for learning and opportunity  Ensure that every place of learning is rated “Good” or better  Raise levels of aspiration and attainment so that residents can take advantage of local job opportunities  Support families to give children the best possible start in life

2. Encourage and promote job creation and economic prosperity  Promote Thurrock and encourage inward investment to enable and sustain growth  Support business and develop the local skilled workforce they require  Work with partners to secure improved infrastructure and built environment

3. Build pride, responsibility and respect  Create welcoming, safe, and resilient communities which value fairness  Work in partnership with communities to help them take responsibility for shaping their quality of life  Empower residents through choice and independence to improve their health and well-being

4. Improve health and well-being  Ensure people stay healthy longer, adding years to life and life to years  Reduce inequalities in health and well-being and safeguard the most vulnerable people with timely intervention and care accessed closer to home  Enhance quality of life through improved housing, employment and opportunity

5. Promote and protect our clean and green environment  Enhance access to Thurrock's river frontage, cultural assets and leisure opportunities  Promote Thurrock's natural environment and biodiversity  Inspire high quality design and standards in our buildings and public space

Page 4 Agenda Item 2

Minutes of the Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 26 November 2015 at 7.00 pm

Present: Councillors Terence Hipsey (Chair), Tom Kelly (Vice-Chair), Chris Baker, Steve Liddiard, Brian Little, Tunde Ojetola, Barry Palmer, Gerard Rice and Kevin Wheeler

In attendance: Andrew Millard, Head of Planning & Growth Matthew Ford, Principal Highways Engineer Jonathan Keen, Principal Planner Curtis Smith, Highways Engineer Sarah Williams, School Capital and Planning Project Manager Janet Clark, Strategic Lead Operational, Resources and Libraries Unit Amanda Nauth, Planning Lawyer Jenny Shade, Senior Democratic Services Officer

Before the start of the Meeting, all present were advised that the meeting may be filmed and was being recorded, with the audio recording to be made available on the Council’s website.

82. Minutes

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 29 October 2015 were approved as a correct record.

83. Item of Urgent Business

There were no items of urgent business.

84. Declaration of Interests

There were no interests declared.

85. Declarations of receipt of correspondence and/or any meetings/discussions held relevant to determination of any planning application or enforcement action to be resolved at this meeting

There were no interests declared.

86. Planning Appeals

The report before Members provided information with regard to appeals performance.

Page 5 Councillor Ojetola commented and expressed his thanks to the Planning Officers for their hard work on an appeal on the report.

RESOLVED:

The report was noted.

87. Public Address to Planning Committee

The Planning Committee may allow objectors and applicants/planning agents, and also owners of premises subject t enforcement action, or their agenda to address the Committee. The rules for the conduct for addressing the Committee can be found on Thurrock Council’s website at https://www.thurrock.gov.uk/democracy/constitution Chapter 5, Part 3c.

88. 15/00833/FUL: 46 Lucas Road Grays Essex RM17 5AJ

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application to the Committee for permission for the partial demolition and reconstruction of No. 48 Lucas Road to form an access road and the construction of three two-bedroom houses with associated parking facilities. The Officer confirmed that this application had been deferred from the 29 October 2015 meeting to allow a site visit to take place which took place on the 16 November 2015.

In accordance with the report the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Members also noted, that following discussions at the last meeting three additional conditions were being recommended:

 A site levels condition  A highways management plan  A construction management plan.

These additional conditions would provide additional comfort in relation to amenity issues post construction and highways and amenity issues during construction.

The Chair apologised that he was unable to attend the site visit.

The Chair stated that Councillor Ojetola could no longer be part of the debate or vote on this application as his apologised had been received when the application was original heard.

During the debate the Committee, the members commented on the following points:

 Concerns on the vast amount of soil that would need to be removed from the site and the use of heavy vehicles to do this.

Page 6  Concerns on how this development work will affect and disturb local residents.

 Concerns on the road access for existing residents and how this application will affect the amount of traffic using this road.

 Concerns that the hours of work should be limited.

Councillor B. Little further commented that a foliage screen could be erected to screen off the proposed development from the existing homes.

The Officers confirmed that landscaping was already part of Condition 6.

Councillor Ojetola asked Officers how refuse collections will be undertaken. The Officer confirmed that there will be a storage area for bins which residents will be expected to bring onto the street for collection.

It was proposed by Councillor Hipsey and seconded by Councillor Palmer that the application approved.

For: Councillors Terry Hipsey, Barry Palmer, Brian Little and Steve Liddiard (4)

Against: Councillors Chris Baker, Gerald Rice and Kevin Wheeler (3)

Abstain: Councillor Tom Kelly (1)

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved with conditions.

89. 15/00643/FUL - The Bricklayers Arms Bridge Road Grays Essex RM17 6BZ

The Principal Planning Officer stated that this item had been deferred to allow for the applicant to gather evidence re the marketing of the site and that the application will be brought back to a future Planning Committee.

All members agreed to defer this application.

RESOLVED:

That the application be deferred.

Page 7 90. 15/01036/TBC - Thameside Primary School Manor Road Grays Essex RM17 6EF

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application and advised Members that the application sought permission to extend and adapt the existing school buildings to formally amalgamate Thameside Infant and Junior schools by creating a single four-form entry school. The proposal seeks to create a ground floor link between the existing school buildings providing a centrally located new entrance/reception area. Other work proposed included ground floor extensions and internal alternations to enlarge the school complex to improve circulation and functionality and the extension and reconfiguration of the existing parking area to the front of the site to allow improved access and parking within the site.

The proposed development would result in a 4 form entry school with a total of 29 classrooms. The proposal would result in the number of staff increase to 53 full time and 87 part time (from 48 and 77 respectively). The application also proposes a remodelled car parking area to the front of the site; this would increase from 44 spaces at present to 80 spaces altogether.

The applicant is also proposing to give part of the land to the north eastern corner of the site over to the Council to allow footway improvements to be made to link Manor Road with the Thurrock Park Way / Churchill Road development to the east.

The extensions are suitably distant from the nearby residents on Manor Road not to result in a loss of privacy or amenity once they are in use.

The revisions to the parking layout would result in a substantial increase in the number of spaces on site; the level of parking and the access in and around the site is satisfactory and in accordance with the requirements of the highways department.

All other matters of detail are considered to be acceptable and approval is therefore recommended subject to conditions.

Councillor Kelly commented that the parking and traffic situation will only get worse with the increase of vehicles and was the Officers confident that the proposed plans alleviated these issues. The Officer confirmed that the issues raised were covered in the range of conditions proposed.

The Chair invited the Ward Councillor, Councillor C. Kent, to make her statement to the Committee.

Councillor Rice asked if the Traffic Warren Control scheme proposed by Councillor C. Kent be included in an existing condition. The Officers confirmed that this could be added to the Travel Plan Process.

Page 8 The Chair, Councillor Hipsey, commented that the scrap yard at the end of Manor Road may cause some concerns with the amount of vehicles but this could be reduced when the proposed cycling and footpaths links are in place and educating of parents to use them.

It was proposed by Councillor Hipsey and seconded by Councillor Liddiard that the application be deemed to be granted, subject to conditions.

For: Councillors Terry Hipsey, Tom Kelly, Chris Baker, Steve Liddiard, Tunde Ojetola, Brian Little, Barry Palmer, Gerard Rice and Kevin Wheeler (9)

Against: (0)

Abstain: (0)

RESOLVED:

That the application be deemed to be granted, subject to conditions.

91. 15/00939/TBC - Thameside Primary School Manor Road Grays Thurrock RM17 6EF

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application to the Committee to seek temporary permission for the siting of two temporary classrooms on the site to provide additional teaching facilities for a period of 18 months to cover an increase in pupil numbers until the fully extended building is completed.

The design and appearance of the buildings is not to the high level that the Council would expect. In the short term the temporary buildings would be considered to be acceptable, a condition requiring their removal would ensure that they are not kept on site permanently.

Subject to the above, approval is recommended.

It was proposed by Councillor Hipsey and seconded by Councillor Brian Little that the application be deemed to be granted, subject to conditions.

For: Councillors Terry Hipsey, Tom Kelly, Chris Baker, Steve Liddiard, Tunde Ojetola, Brian Little, Barry Palmer, Gerard Rice and Kevin Wheeler (9)

Against: (0)

Page 9 Abstain: (0)

RESOLVED:

That the application be deemed to be granted, subject to conditions.

The meeting finished at 7.47 pm

Approved as a true and correct record

CHAIR

DATE

Any queries regarding these Minutes, please contact Democratic Services at [email protected]

Page 10 Agenda Item 6

17 December 2015 ITEM: 6 Planning Committee Planning Appeals

Report of: Leigh Nicholson, Development Management Team Leader

Wards and communities affected: Key Decision: All Not Applicable

Accountable Head of Service: Andy Millard, Head of Planning and Growth

Accountable Director: David Bull, Director of Planning and Transportation

This report is Public

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides Members with information with regard to planning appeal performance.

1. Recommendations:

1.1 To note the report.

2. Introduction And Background:

2.1 This report advises the Committee of the number of appeals that have been lodged and the number of decisions that have been received in respect of planning appeals, together with dates of forthcoming inquiries and hearings.

3. Appeals Lodged:

3.1 Application No: 15/00843/HHA Officer: Zoe McAden Location: 13 Cumberland Road, Chafford Hundred RM16 6ER Proposal: Retention of rear ground floor extensions

Page 11 3.2 Enforcement No: 14/00291/CWKS Officer: Marilyn Ager Location: Mills Oak Lower Dunton Road, Laindon RM14 3TD Nature: Two storey building built to front of the property without the benefit of planning permission.

3.3 Enforcement No: 15/00041/CWKS Officer: Marilyn Ager Location: 32 Catalina Avenue Chafford Hundred, Grays RM16 6RE Nature: The ground level has been raised at the rear of the property and the fence has been reduced from 6ft to 3ft.

3.4 Application No: 15/00515/TPO

Officer: Jackie Ford Location: 1A Sycamore Close, Tilbury RM18 7TB Proposal: Removal of T10 - Beech tree from Tree Preservation Order 02/1989

3.5 Application No: 15/00229/FUL Officer: Jonathan Keen Location: 246 Heath Road, Chadwell St Mary RM16 3AP Proposal: Change of use from hostel to residential (Use Class C3) to form 3 no. dwellings, together with associated alterations/extensions.

Page 12 4. Appeal Decisions:

4.1 The following appeal decisions have been received: None.

5.0 Forthcoming Public Inquiry And Hearing Dates:

5.1 The following inquiry and hearing dates have been arranged: None. 6.0 Appeal Performance:

6.1 The following table shows appeal performance in relation to decisions on planning applications and enforcement appeals. The target is 31% (lower is better). This is no longer a National Performance Indicator, but it is considered that it is important to continue to monitor appeal decisions.

APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR Total No of Appeals 0 3 1 0 9 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 16 No Allowed 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 % Allowed 43%

7.0 Consultation (including Overview and Scrutiny, if applicable)

7.1 N/A

8.0 Impact On Corporate Policies, Priorities, Performance And Community Impact

8.1 This report is for information only.

9.0 Implications

9.1 Financial

Implications verified by: Sean Clark Head of Corporate Finance

There are no direct financial implications to this report.

Page 13 9.2 Legal

Implications verified by: Vivien Williams Principal Regeneration Solicitor

The Appeals lodged will either have to be dealt with by written representation procedure or (an informal) hearing or a local inquiry.

Most often, particularly following an inquiry, the parties involved will seek to recover from the other side their costs incurred in pursuing the appeal (known as 'an order as to costs' or 'award of costs').

9.3 Diversity and Equality

Implications verified by: Rebeka Price Community Development Officer

There are no direct diversity implications to this report. 9.4 Other implications (where significant) – i.e. Section 17, Risk Assessment, Health Impact Assessment, Sustainability, IT, Environmental

None 10. Background Papers Used In Preparing This Report (include their location and identify whether any are exempt or protected by copyright):

The planning files relating to any application mentioned in this report are available from Planning, Thurrock Council, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL. The planning enforcement files are not public documents and should not be disclosed to the public.

11. Appendices To This Report:

None

Report Author Contact Details:

Name: Leigh Nicholson E-mail: [email protected]

Page 14 Agenda Item 8 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

Reference: Site: 15/01283/OUT Portland Lodge Brentwood Road Bulphan Essex RM14 3TJ

Ward: Proposal: Orsett Outline application for three dwellings (with all matters reserved)

Plan Number(s): Reference Name Received (No Nos.) Location Plan 26th October 2015 B1 Site Layout 26th October 2015

The application is also accompanied by: - Design and Access Statement - Planning Statement

Applicant: Validated: Mr G Tuckfield 23 October 2015 Date of expiry: 18 December 2015 Recommendation: To Refuse

The application has been called in by Cllrs B Little, S Little, J Halden, R Gledhill and B Johnson for determination to allow the consideration of the proposal against Green Belt policies.

1. Description Of Proposal

1.1 The application seeks outline planning permission, with all matters reserved, for the development of three houses. The properties would be two-storey detached chalet properties with two parking spaces per dwelling.

1.2 The properties would be sited with two dwellings to the eastern half of the site and the third dwelling would be located to the western corner of the site, all access off the access road which would lead directly west from the existing access.

Page 15 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

2. Site Description

2.1 The application site is a roughly-square piece of land, comprising approximately 0.34 Ha in the south eastern corner of the Portland Lodge site which is located to the east of Brentwood Road.

2.2 The land is bordered by open agricultural land to the immediate south and east, with the remainder of the Portland Lodge site to the immediate north and west. The site is in the Green Belt.

3. Relevant History

None directly relevant to this site, however, there is history relating to other parts of Portland Lodge which is set out below:

Reference Description Decision 11/00830/CLEUD Existing use of the site for commercial vehicle Approved repairs, conversion and body works and light industry 12/00742/CLEUD Retention of existing concrete. Approved 12/01043/CLEUD The use of the land for commercial purposes. Approved 12/01130/CLEUD Substantial completion of the steel-framed Approved industrial building on site. 13/01028/FUL Outline application with all matters reserved for Refused demolition of existing commercial buildings and construction of three dwellings. 14/00284/FUL Outline application with all matters reserved for Approved demolition of existing commercial buildings and construction of three dwellings. 15/00487/OUT Outline application (with all matters reserved for a Approved subsequent reserved matters application) for five dwellings with access from Brentwood Road.

4. Consultations And Representations

4.1 Detailed below is a summary of the consultation responses received The full version of each consultation response can be viewed on the Council’s website via public access at the following link:

www.thurrock.gov.uk/planning/15/01283/OUT

PUBLICITY:

4.2 Neighbours were notified directly by letter. A site notice was also displayed. Eight letters have been received, including one letter in support from the applicant. All of the remaining seven letters received have written in

Page 16 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

support of the development. Members will be updated should any additional letters of representation be received.

HIGHWAYS:

4.3 No objections, subject to conditions.

EDUCATION:

4.4 No contributions required.

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:

4.5 No objections, subject to standard conditions.

LANDSCAPE ADVICE:

4.6 Objection, on grounds of loss of open character and landscape impacts.

ANGLIAN WATER

4.7 No comments to make.

5. Policy Context

National Planning Policy Framework

5.1 The NPPF was published on 27th March 2012. Paragraph 13 of the Framework sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Paragraph 196 of the Framework confirms the tests in s.38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and s.70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and that the Framework is a material consideration in planning decisions. Paragraph 197 states that in assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

5.2 The following headings and content of the NPPF are relevant to the consideration of the current proposals.

1. Building a strong, competitive economy 9. Protecting Green Belt land

Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

5.3 In March 2014 the Department for Communities and Local Government

Page 17 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

(DCLG) launched its planning practice guidance web-based resource. This was accompanied by a Written Ministerial Statement which includes a list of the previous planning policy guidance documents cancelled when the NPPF was launched. PPG contains 42 subject areas, with each area containing several sub-topics. Those of particular relevance to the determination of this planning application comprise:

- Design; - Planning obligations and; - The use of planning conditions.

Local Planning Policy

Thurrock Local Development Framework

5.4 The Council adopted the “Core Strategy and Policies for the Management of Development Plan Document” in December 2011.The following Core Strategy policies apply to the proposals:

Thematic Policies:

CSTP1 (Strategic Housing Provision) CSTP22 (Thurrock Design) CSTP23 (Thurrock Character and Distinctiveness)2

Policies for the Management of Development:

PMD1 (Minimising Pollution and Impacts on Amenity)2 PMD2 (Design and Layout)2 PMD6 (Development in the Green Belt) PMD8 (Parking Standards)3 PMD12 (Sustainable Buildings)2 PMD13 (Decentralised, Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation) PMD16 (Developer Contributions)2

The Core Strategy has been subject to a focused review for consistency with the (NPPF). The focused review document was submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination on 1 August 2013, and examination hearings took place on 8 April 2014. The inspector's report was received in October 2014. Minor changes have been made to some policies within the Core Strategy; the policies affected by the changes are indicated above.

1: New Policy inserted by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 2: Wording of LDF-CS Policy and forward amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 3: Wording of forward to LDF-CS Policy amended either in part or in full

Page 18 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy.

Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy

5.5 This Review was commenced in late 2012 with the purpose to ensure that the Core Strategy and the process by which it was arrived at are not fundamentally at odds with the NPPF. There are instances where policies and supporting text are recommended for revision to ensure consistency with the NPPF. The Review was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for independent examination in August 2013. An Examination in Public took place in April 2014 and the Inspectorate found the review sound subject to revisions.

Draft Site Specific Allocations and Policies DPD

5.6 This Consultation Draft “Issues and Options” DPD was subject to consultation commencing during 2012. The Draft Site Specific Allocations DPD ‘Further Issues and Options’ was the subject of a further round of consultation during 2013. The application site has no allocation within either of these draft documents. The Planning Inspectorate is advising local authorities not to continue to progress their Site Allocation Plans towards examination where their previously adopted Core Strategy is no longer in compliance with the NPPF. This is the situation in Thurrock. The report to the 12th February 2014 Cabinet sets out a number of options for taking forward development plan making in Thurrock. Work has commenced on the production on a new integrated Local Plan which is timetabled for adoption in 2018. In light of this, there will be a fresh call for sites and the draft SSADPD will not be advanced. The draft SSADPD can therefore be afforded little weight.

Thurrock Core Strategy Position Statement and Approval for the Preparation of a New Local Plan for Thurrock

5.7 The above report was considered at the February meeting 2014 of the Cabinet. The report highlighted issues arising from growth targets, contextual changes, impacts of recent economic change on the delivery of new housing to meet the Borough’s Housing Needs and ensuring consistency with Government Policy. The report questioned the ability of the Core Strategy Focused Review and the Core Strategy ‘Broad Locations & Strategic Sites’ to ensure that the Core Strategy is up-to-date and consistent with Government Policy and recommended the ‘parking’ of these processes in favour of a more wholesale review. Members resolved that the Council undertake a full review of Core Strategy and prepare a new Local Plan. It is anticipated that a new Local Plan for Thurrock could be adopted by early 2018.

Page 19 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

6. Assessment

6.1 This application seeks outline planning permission for the construction of three detached dwellings including provision for access, parking and landscaping. This is an outline application with all matters reserved for a subsequent reserved matters application. Nonetheless, the Council would need to be satisfied that the proposed development could be suitably accessed and accommodated on site. The application includes an indicative layout of the proposed development and indicative elevation drawing.

6.2 The principal issues to be considered in this case are:

I. Plan designation and principle of development II. Design and appearance III. Highways and access IV. Landscaping V. Residential Amenity VI. Infrastructure improvements (s. 106 contribution) and affordable housing

I. PLAN DESIGNATION AND PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

6.3 The application site is located within the Green Belt as defined within the Thurrock Local Development Framework, Core Strategy (2011). Policy PMD6 applies and states that permission will not be given, except in very special circumstances, for the construction of new buildings, or for the change of use of land or the re-use of buildings unless it meets the requirements and objectives of National Government Guidance. The NPPF (at paragraph 89) sets out the categories of development, which may be acceptable in the Green Belt. The construction of new dwellings is not listed as appropriate in either the NPPF or Policy PMD6. The application proposal therefore represents “inappropriate development” in the Green Belt and is therefore a departure from Development Plan policy.

6.4 Consequently, the proposals represent “inappropriate development” in the Green Belt and are a departure from Development Plan policy.

6.5 Paragraph 87 of the NPPF states that ‘inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances’. Paragraph 88 goes on to state; ‘When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations’.

Page 20 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

6.6 Notwithstanding the NPPF’s presumption in favour of sustainable development (para 14), policies in the NPPF clearly indicate that development in the Green Belt should be restricted and sets out the test by which inappropriate development should be judged. The NPPF does not seek to define further what ‘other considerations’ might outweigh the damage to the Green Belt.

6.7 Having established that the proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt, it is necessary to consider the matter of harm. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt, but it is also necessary to consider whether there is any other harm to the Green Belt and the purposes of including land therein. The proposals would comprise a substantial amount of new buildings in an area which is free from built development. It is considered that the amount and scale of development proposed would significantly reduce the openness of the site.

6.8 Paragraph 80 of the NPPF sets out five purposes which the Green Belt serves:

i. to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; ii. to prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another; iii. to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; iv. to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and v. to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

The development is likely to conflict with purposes three and five.

6.9 The PPG was recently updated (06.10.2014) and in relation to the Green Belt and housing, the PPG indicates that: Unmet housing need (including for traveller sites) is unlikely to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other harm to constitute the “very special circumstances” justifying inappropriate development on a site within the Green Belt.

6.10 Case Law (R (Cherkley Campaign Limited) v Mole Valley DC [2013]) states that Local Planning Authorities must ask three separate sequential questions when applying Green Belt policy:

1. Is “inappropriate development” proposed? 2. Do “very special circumstances” exist? 3. Do such circumstances “clearly outweigh” the potential harm caused by the inappropriateness of the development and any other harm?

6.11 Local Planning Authorities are also required to give “substantial weight” to any harm which might be caused to the Green Belt by the “inappropriate

Page 21 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

development”. It is only if a local planning authority has conscientiously considered each of these three questions and answered each “yes” and given substantial weight to any harm caused, can it be said properly to have applied Green Belt policy as laid down in the NPPF.

6.12 The Planning Statement submitted with the application contains the applicant’s case in favour of the proposed development. The applicant sets out the following in support of the proposals:

(i) The recent outline planning approval for 5 dwellings at the Portland Lodge site (planning re. 14/00487/OUT) and the desire to carry out a coherent development; (ii) The application site does not form part of an agricultural field or contribute to the openness of the countryside; (iii) Bulphan is a suitable settlement with a Post Office, Village Store, primary school and village hall; (iv)The proposal would provide high quality homes for the local area; (v) The occupants of the dwellings would help support local facilities and services; the construction of the dwellings would provide jobs and the larger dwellings would attract economically active residents to the Borough; (vi)The proposal should be viewed in the context of other recent housing developments approved on the Green Belt: 20 dwellings at the Baker Street site (planning ref, 12/00952/OUT); 50 houses at Malgraves, Lower Dunton Road (planning ref, 14/00990/FUL) and 19 dwellings at Pieris Place, Brentwood Road (planning ref, 14/01406/OUT).

6.12 The matters are analysed below:

(i) The recent outline planning approval for 5 dwellings at the Portland Lodge site (planning re. 14/00487/OUT) and the desire to carry out a coherent development;

6.13 The applicant indicates that given the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for 5 houses on part of the Portland Lodge site, this current proposal would allow for the creation and development of a more coherent scheme.

6.14 However, the provision of further housing on other parts of the Portland Lodge site does not constitute a very special circumstance to allow inappropriate development. Members are advised that the scheme permitted under 15/00487/OUT related to the re-use of previously developed land, utilising the floorspace of commercial buildings. In contrast, this application proposes built development on open land. This factor does not weigh in favour of the development.

Page 22 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

(ii) The application site does not form part of an agricultural field or contribute to the openness of the countryside

6.15 The applicant states that the site does not form part of the open countryside as it “will be bordered on two sides by the existing house, stables, swimming pool…and the new residential development” and does not contribute to the openness of the countryside.

6.16 The site is an open grassed field adjacent to the residential curtilage for the existing property at Portland Lodge. One of the essential characteristics of the Green Belt is its openness; the proposal would significantly erode the openness of the Green Belt site and the proposed development of the site for 3 houses, on the eastern boundary of the site abutting open farm fields, would be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt. This factor does not weigh in favour of the development.

(iii) Bulphan is a suitable settlement with a Post Office, Village Store, primary school and village hall

6.17 The applicant considers the site is a short walk from Bulphan which has facilities and good public transport links.

6.18 The village shop and post office recently closed, though there is a school, a village hall and a bus service to/from the village. The site relatively close to Church Lane, however the first part of the walk would not be served by public footpath and pedestrians would be required to walk on grass verges alongside the A128 which is a national speed limit road. This could be potentially dangerous and is not considered to contribute towards the very special circumstances. In addition these are easily repeatable matters and could not be considered to constitute very special circumstances to allow inappropriate development.

(iv) The proposal would provide high quality homes for the local area;

6.19 The applicant considers that the development would provide high quality home that ambitious young people growing up locally can live in, and that the development would encourage people to live in the district who will have disposable income.

6.19 These matters are easily repeatable and could be applied to any site; these matters are not very special circumstances to allow inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Furthermore, as set out in paragraph 6.9 the provision of new dwellings, whilst contributing to the Council’s 5 year housing supply deficit, would not amount to very special circumstances sufficient to justify development of this kind in this Green Belt location.

Page 23 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

(v) The occupants of the dwellings would help support local facilities and services; the construction of the dwellings would provide jobs and the larger dwellings would attract economically active residents to the Borough;

6.21 The applicant asserts the proposal would help support local facilities due to increase population, that jobs would be provide during the construction phase and the larger properties would attract people who may choose to live outside the district

6.22 As with (iv) these matters are easily repeatable and could be applied to any site; these matters are not very special circumstances to allow inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

(vi) The proposal should be viewed in the context of other recent housing developments approved on the Green Belt.

6.23 The applicant considers that recent planning decisions for 20 dwellings at the Baker Street site (planning ref, 12/00952/OUT); 50 houses at Malgraves, Lower Dunton Road (planning ref, 14/00990/FUL) and 19 dwellings at Pieris Place, Brentwood Road (planning ref, 14/01406/OUT) demonstrate that permission should be granted for the proposal.

6.24 The above applications were considered on their own merits and unique set of very special circumstances were demonstrated in each case for their approval. The same cannot be said of this application; the matters put forward fall some considerable way short of constituting the very special circumstances required to allow inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

Conclusion on very special circumstances

6.25 In conclusion under this heading, the residential development of the site constitutes inappropriate Green Belt development. The development is therefore harmful by definition and significant weight should be attributed in this regard. The matters put forward by the applicant do not represent very special circumstances. As such, it is considered that the proposal is contrary to PMD6 of the Core Strategy and guidance contained in the NPPF and PPG.

6.26 In addition to the in-principle objection the dwellings and associated hard surfacing would represent urbanising features which would be visually damaging to the countryside and undermining to the openness of this part of the countryside. The proposal is therefore also contrary to Policy PMD6 of the Core Strategy and guidance contained in the NPPF on these grounds.

Page 24 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

2. DESIGN AND APPEARANCE

6.27 The indicative plan suggests that the dwellings would be designed with traditional pitched roofs, traditional window doors and openings and porches and dormer windows. The overall design of the dwellings could be acceptable and on design grounds the proposals would comply with LDF CS Policies PMD2, CSTP22 and CSTP23. However this would not overcome the Green Belt issue identified above.

3. HIGHWAYS AND ACCESS

6.28 LDF CS Policy PMD9 states that the Council will only permit the development of new vehicular accesses or increased use of existing accesses onto the road network where there is no possibility of a safe access being taken from an existing or lover category road, the development minimises the number of accesses required and the development makes a positive contribution to road safety or road safety is not prejudiced.

6.29 LDF CS Policy PMD2 indicates that all development should allow safe and easy access while meeting appropriate standards.

6.30 Whilst the proposals are acceptable in principle, there are some acute concerns relating to access to Brentwood Road that need to be addressed. It is considered that development of this site will intensify vehicle trips and the following points mentioned within the below policies should be implemented.

6.31 The Council’s Highways Officer advises that the A128 Brentwood Road is identified as a Level 1 Strategic Non Trunk Road and any intensification of accesses on to this high category of road would not be supported, unless it can be demonstrated to not have significant impact upon the free flow and safe movement of vehicles. The proposals seek to utilise an existing access, rather than a new access, so complies with policy in this regard.

6.32 The Council’s Highways Officer raises concern regarding the intensification of use of three houses on this existing access. Whilst there is a recently permitted development for five units, which raised no highways objections in principle; this was in relation to the change of use from a commercial operation to residential units, thereby reducing the impact onto the strategic network. This proposal seeks to provide new dwellings on open field, which has no traffic impact. Assessment of the site access has identified that the existing access onto Brentwood Road will require upgrading, to ensure that this development proposal complies with policy.

6.33 If this application were being recommended favourably, the applicant would

Page 25 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

be advised to upgrade the junction to contemporary design standards and provide a suitable access road for the development.

4. LANDSCAPING

6.34 The site contributes towards the Bulphan Fenland which is characterised by wide open space. The Landscape Officer has commented that the site does not contain any landscape or ecology features of significance; however, it is currently an open undeveloped field. The proposed development would extend the built form further from the road and result in a significant group of houses in this location. This would be out of character with this rural Green Belt location. The landscape officer has raised concern that if permission were granted it could result in further applications to continue to expand and intensify the development further.

The development of the land would be harmful to the open character of this Green Belt site. The loss of the open character has been considered earlier in this report.

5. RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

6.35 The proposed dwellings would be set suitably distant from existing properties and one another not to cause impacts in relation to neighbour amenity. The gardens would be well in excess of the Council’s minimum standards and would provide suitable living condition for potential future occupiers.

6. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS (S. 106 CONTRIBUTIONS) AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING

6.36 Policy PMD16 of the Core Strategy indicates that where needs would arise as a result of development the Council will seek to secure planning obligations under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any other relevant guidance. The Policy states that the Council will seem to ensure that development proposals contribute to the delivery of strategic infrastructure to enable the cumulative impact of development to be managed and to meet the reasonable cost of new infrastructure made necessary by the proposal.

6.38 Policy PMD16 of the Core Strategy indicates that where needs would arise as a result of development; the Council will seek to secure planning obligations under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any other relevant guidance. The Policy states that the Council will seek to ensure that development proposals contribute to the delivery of strategic infrastructure to enable the cumulative impact of development to be managed and to meet the reasonable cost of new infrastructure made

Page 26 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

necessary by the proposal.

6.39 Changes to Government policy in April 2015 mean that the Council can no longer use a tariff based approach to s106 (as was the case with the former Planning Obligation Strategy). Consequently, the Council has developed an Infrastructure Requirement List (IRL) that identifies specific infrastructure needs on an area basis. The IRL does not identify any specific requirement for small scale major applications in the Orsett Ward to which this development could contribute. In this instance no education contribution can be justified and it is not considered that there is a justification for a highways contribution.

7. Conclusions And Reason(S) For Refusal

7.1 The proposed development represents an inappropriate form of development within the Green Belt. The applicant has not advanced anything that amounts to very special circumstances that could overcome the strong presumption against this type of proposal. The development is therefore contrary to Policy PMD6 of the Core Strategy and guidance contained in the NPPF and is therefore harmful by definition. In addition the development represents an urbanising feature in the countryside contrary to Policy PMD6 of the Core Strategy and guidance in the NPPF.

7.2 Refusal is therefore recommended.

8. Recommendation

To Refuse for the following reasons:

Reason(s):

1 The application site is located within the Green Belt as defined within the Thurrock Local Development Framework, Core Strategy (2011). Policy PMD6 applies and states that permission will not be given, except in very special circumstances, for the construction of new buildings, or for the change of use of land or the re-use of buildings unless it meets the requirements and objectives of National Government Guidance.

The NPPF (at paragraph 89) sets out the forms of development, which may be acceptable in the Green Belt. The proposed development of the site for residential purposes does not fall within any of the appropriate uses for new buildings set out by the NPPF and Policy PMD6. Consequently, the proposals represent “inappropriate development” in the Green Belt and are a departure from development plan policy. Paragraph 87 of the NPPF sets out a general presumption against inappropriate development within the

Page 27 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

Green Belt and states that such development should not be approved, except in very special circumstances. Paragraph 87 also states that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm, by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

i) The information put forward by the applicant has been considered. However, these matters, neither individually nor taken together, are considered to constitute the very special circumstances necessary to allow a departure from policy being made in this instance. The proposals are therefore contrary to Policy PMD6 of the Core Strategy and guidance in the NPPF in principle.

ii) Notwithstanding the in-principle harm identified above, by reason of the mass, bulk and serious incursion into the open land, the proposals are also harmful to the landscape, character and openness of the Green Belt at this point, contrary to Policy PMD6 of the Core Strategy and criteria within the NPPF.

Documents: All background documents including application forms, drawings and other supporting documentation relating to this application can be viewed online: www.thurrock.gov.uk/planning/15/01283/OUT

Alternatively, hard copies are also available to view at Planning, Thurrock Council, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL.

Page 28 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01283/OUT

Page 29 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 9 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Reference: Site: 15/01155/FUL Land To Rear Of Fairview Avenue Stanford Le Hope Essex

Ward: Proposal: Stanford Le Hope Erection of six 2 bedroom apartments and 3 one bedroom West apartment, with associated access, parking and landscaping

Plan Number(s): Reference Name Received 13 579 1 Other 28th September 2015 L.001 Site Layout 28th September 2015 P 001 Site Layout 28th September 2015 P 002 Other 28th September 2015 P 003 Site Layout 28th September 2015 P 004 Site Layout 28th September 2015 P 005 Floor Layout 28th September 2015 P 006 Floor Layout 28th September 2015 P 007 Roof Plans 28th September 2015 P 008 Elevations 28th September 2015 P 009 Elevations 28th September 2015 P 010 Elevations 28th September 2015 P 011 Other 28th September 2015

The application is also accompanied by: - Design and Access Statement - Ecology Letter Report - Energy Statement - Tree Report - Highway Statement - Planning Statement - Japanese Knotweed Eradication Proposal - Japanese Knotweed Signed Warranty

Applicant: Validated:

Page 31 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Westlake Properties 28 September 2015 Date of expiry: 23 November 2015 Recommendation: Approve, subject to conditions.

This application has been called-in for determination by Councillors P Tolson, J Halden, A Roast, D Stewart and C Key to consider specifically concerns about amenity impacts.

1. Description Of Proposal

1.1 This application seeks planning permission for the redevelopment of the site to provide six two-bedroom flats, and three, one-bedroom flats in one split-level block. Four of the flats would be located on the ground floor and five flats on the first floor, resulting in a 9m high, two-storey building.

1.2 Members are advised that planning permission was granted in December 2014 for the redevelopment of the site for 8 flats (7 two-bedroom and one studio flat). Planning permission also exists for the redevelopment of the site for 7 two-bedroom flats, approved under planning ref. 14/00360/FUL. Neither planning approvals have yet been implemented but are extant.

1.3 The differences between this application and the most recently approved application (ref. 14/01360/FUL) are as follows:

- An increase from 8 to 9 flats; - No change in overall height of the building; - A modest increase in the footprint of the building, most notably a 2.4m deep increase in the footprint at two storeys at the most northern end of the site; - Minimal changes to the appearance and design; - An increase in parking provision from 9 to 11 spaces; - Minimal changes to amenity space and layout.

1.4 Car parking for a total of eleven cars would be provided on site. Eight spaces, including one disabled space, would be provided to the south of the building with the creation of a new access off Fairview Chase; a further three parking spaces would be provided to the North of the building, utilising an existing access off Fairview Chase.

2. Site Description

2.1 The site comprises an area of overgrown vacant space bounded by Fairview Chase to the East, Fairview Avenue to the North and St. Margaret’s Avenue to the West in Stanford le Hope. The site area is 0.1ha.

2.2 To the North, the site borders St Margaret’s Avenue, a pedestrian footpath, and the rear gardens of properties fronting on to Fairview Avenue. To the South, on the opposite side of Fairview Chase, there are two storey

Page 32 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

terraced properties and a 2 storey block of flats. To the immediate West there are two storey properties on Ryde Drive, and the immediate East the site backs onto the gardens and garages of nos. 34-38 Fairview Avenue.

2.3 The site slopes heavily from East to West by approximately 6m.

3.0 Relevant History

Reference Description Decision 14/01036/FUL Erection of seven 2 bedroom Approved (Not yet apartments, and one studio implemented) apartment, with associated access, parking and landscaping. 14/00360/FUL Erection of seven 2 bedroom Approved (Not yet apartments, with associated access, implemented) parking and landscaping. 72/01273/FUL 1 Double & 1 Single Garage to the Approved rear of 38 Fairview Avenue 57/00444/FUL 2 Garages to the rear of No. 36 Approved

4.0 Consultations And Representations

4.1 Detailed below is a summary of the consultation responses received. The full version of each consultation response can be viewed on the Council’s website via public access at the following link:

www.thurrock.gov.uk/planning/15/01155/FUL

PUBLICITY:

4.2 The application has been advertised by way of neighbour letters and a site notice has been placed nearby. No written responses have been received.

A Ward Councillor has raised concern about the amenity impact caused by the development, and made particular reference to loss of light falling on to St Margaret’s Path.

4.3 Members will be updated at the meeting should any further letters of representation be received.

HIGHWAYS:

4.4 No objections, subject to conditions.

EDUCATION:

4.5 No contribution required.

Page 33 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY:

4.6 No objections, subject to the footpath remaining open.

LANDSCAPING AND TREE ADVICE:

4.7 No objections, subject to conditions.

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:

4.8 No objections, subject to conditions.

5.0 Policy Context

National Planning Policy Framework

5.2 The following headings and content of the NPPF are relevant to the consideration of the current proposals.

1. Building a strong, competitive economy 6. Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes 7. Requiring good design

Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

5.3 In March 2014 the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) launched its planning practice guidance web-based resource. This was accompanied by a Written Ministerial Statement which includes a list of the previous planning policy guidance documents cancelled when the NPPF was launched. PPG contains 42 subject areas, with each area containing several sub-topics. Those of particular relevance to the determination of this planning application comprise:

- Design; - Planning obligations and; - The use of planning conditions.

Page 34 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Local Planning Policy Thurrock Local Development Framework

5.4 The Council adopted the “Core Strategy and Policies for the Management of Development Plan Document” in December 2011.The following Core Strategy policies apply to the proposals:

Thematic Policies:

- CSSP1 - Sustainable Housing and Locations - CSTP1 - Strategic Housing Provision - CSTP22 Thurrock Design - CSTP23: Thurrock Character and Distinctiveness2 - CSTP25 - Addressing Climate Change - CSTP26 - Renewable or Low-Carbon Energy Generation

Policies for the Management of Development:

- PMD1: Minimising Pollution and Impacts on Amenity2 - PMD2: Design and Layout2 - PMD8: Parking Standards3 - PMD12 - Sustainable Buildings - PMD13 - Decentralised Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation - PMD14 - Carbon Neutral Development - PMD16 – Infrastructure Contributions

[Footnote: 1New Policy inserted by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 2 Wording of LDF-CS Policy and forward amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 3 Wording of forward to LDF-CS Policy amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy].

Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy

5.5 This Review was commenced in late 2012 with the purpose to ensure that the Core Strategy and the process by which it was arrived at are not fundamentally at odds with the NPPF. There are instances where policies and supporting text are recommended for revision to ensure consistency with the NPPF. The Review was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for independent examination in August 2013. An Examination in Public took place in April 2014. The Inspector concluded that the amendments were sound subject to recommended changes. Thurrock Council adopted the Core Strategy and Policies for Management of Development Focussed Review: Consistency with National Planning Policy Framework on 28 January 2015.

Draft Site Specific Allocations and Policies DPD

Page 35 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

of these draft documents. The Planning Inspectorate is advising local authorities not to continue to progress their Site Allocation Plans towards examination where their previously adopted Core Strategy is no longer in compliance with the NPPF. This is the situation for the Borough.

Thurrock Core Strategy Position Statement and Approval for the Preparation of a New Local Plan for Thurrock

6.0 Assessment

6.1 The principal issues to be considered in this case are:

I. Plan designation and principle of development II. Design, Layout and Relationship with Surroundings III. Neighbour Amenity issue IV. Amenity Standards V. Landscape and Trees VI. Highways Parking and Refuse VII. Infrastructure Contributions

I. PLAN DESIGNATION AND PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

6.2 The application site forms part of a wider residential area as designated by the Council's LDF Proposals Map and as such, as a matter of principle, residential development on the site is considered acceptable, subject to ensuring that it would comply with all other Development Management policies.

6.3 Current government guidance sets out that housing applications should be considered ‘…in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development’ (NPPF, para 49). The development proposed would contribute towards housing provision in the Borough, within an existing urban settlement in accordance with the broad aims of the NPPF.

6.4 In conclusion under this heading, given the allocation of the site within the LDF-CS, previous planning approval and the thrust of government guidance, no objection is raised to the principle of the development.

Page 36 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

II. DESIGN, LAYOUT AND REALTIONSHIP WITH SURROUNDINGS

6.5 The proposal seeks to erect a 9m high roughly rectangular-shaped, stepped building providing 2 storeys. The proposal would have a hipped roof with a flat crown, minimising the bulk and overall impact of the resulting building. The building would be sited roughly centrally within the site, fronting Fairview Chase, with the main parking area to the South West and the main amenity areas to the East and North of the site.

6.6 Due to the sloping nature of the site, the building has been designed to step down the slope with the larger part of the building being at a slightly higher level. The building varies in height with ridge levels of 9m and eaves levels of approximately 5.6m. The building would be 23.4m wide and between 11.7m and 15.3m deep.

6.7 Ordinarily the Council would resist the use of ‘crown’ roofs on developments; however, in this instance the use of a crown roof design is the best and most practicable solution to designing a build that would not appear overly obtrusive in the street scene and not appear out of character with the locality.

6.8 The proposal would be taller than the neighbouring terrace properties on Fairview Chase; however, due to the orientation of the proposed building, and the distances between the proposal and the neighbouring properties this minor increase in height would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The building would be of a similar height to the Victorian/Edwardian properties to the North.

6.9 The layout, design, scale, appearance and mass of the proposal would be considered acceptable and complies with LDF CS Policies PMD1, PMD2 and CSTP22.

III. NEIGHBOUR AMENITY

6.10 The development would be separated from properties to the North by approximately 34m. The building would be approximately 18m away from properties on the opposite side of Fairview Chase and 30m from the properties to the South West on Ryde Drive. It is considered that, given the separation distance and the difference in ground levels, the proposal would be unlikely to lead to any detrimental overlooking or loss of privacy for the existing neighbouring properties or the occupants of the new flats.

6.11 The siting and location of the proposed bin stores and cycle stores is considered to be the most practicable for the site and would not lead to any detriment to neighbour amenity.

6.12 The proposal would comply with LDF CS Policies PMD1 and PMD2 with regards the impact upon neighbours.

Page 37 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

IV. AMENITY STANDARDS

6.13 Annexe A1 of the Local Plan (1997) has been formally retained by the Council for use in determining planning applications. The Annexe seeks the provision of a minimum of 50 sqm of amenity space per 2 bedroom flat (of which 25 sqm per flat should be private amenity space). In this instance, the proposal should provide a minimum of 375 sqm, of which 150 sqm should be usable private amenity area.

6.14 The development proposal would provide 366 sqm of amenity space throughout the site, making a very minor shortfall of 9 sqm overall. Of the space provided, 109 sqm would be private amenity space in the form of a communal garden area to the North of the site. The shortfall in private amenity space is not considered to be as significant as to detrimental to the future users of the site.

V. LANDSCAPE AND TREES

6.15 Turning to the matter of landscaping and trees, the site is largely overgrown with bramble and shrubs, although there is a small grouping of trees close to the boundary near Fairview Chase. These trees would require protecting during the construction period. There is scope to achieve a positive gain for the area if good quality planting is included to soften the appearance of the development. This could be secured and managed via an appropriate landscaping condition.

6.16 There are no landscape or arboricultural objections to this scheme. Members are advised that the previously identified Japanese Knotweed has been removed from site.

VI. HIGHWAYS MATTERS

6.17 This proposal is similar to the proposals under application 14/01360/FUL; albeit, with the increase in units to 9 flats.

6.18 The site is located within an area with good links to public transport, as Stanford-Le-Hope Rail Station is within 1km walking distance. The site also benefits from being close to a town centre location with local amenities. The proposals comply with the Council’s Highway requirements in relation to parking and access arrangements and subject to the use of planning conditions to control technical detail, no objections are raised in this regard.

6.20 The Council’s Public Rights of Way Team has no objection to this proposal but stipulates that the footpath (known as Bridleway 212), must be kept clear of any parked vehicles. Adequate parking provision has been allocated for the site. There are no objections raised in relation to this footpath.

Page 38 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

6.21 Notwithstanding the above, concern had been raised by a Ward Councillor in relation to the impact of the proposal upon the light falling on to the public footpath known as St Margaret’s Path, immediately North of the application site. These concerns have been relayed to the applicant who, at the time of writing this report, was investigating options available to provide lighting for the footpath along the boundary of the application site. Members will be updated in relation to this issue at the meeting.

6.22 The proposal would be able to comply with Council Waste and recycling standards, and the plans show that space is available within the site to accommodate refuse storage. Accordingly, on highway grounds the proposal is considered to be acceptable.

VII. INFRASTRUTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

6.27 Policy PMD16 of the Core Strategy indicates that where needs would arise as a result of development; the Council will seek to secure planning obligations under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any other relevant guidance. The Policy states that the Council will seek to ensure that development contribute to proposals to deliver strategic infrastructure to enable the cumulative impact of development to be managed and to meet the reasonable cost of new infrastructure made necessary by the proposal.

6.28 Changes to Government policy in April 2015 mean that the Council can no longer use a tariff based approach to s106 (as was the case with the former Planning Obligation Strategy). Consequently, the Council has developed an Infrastructure Requirement List (IRL) that identifies specific infrastructure needs on an area basis. The IRL does not identify any specific requirement for small scale major applications in the Stanford le Hope West Ward to which this development could contribute. In this instance no education contribution can be justified and it is not considered that there is a justification for a highways contribution.

7. Conclusions And Reason(S) For Approval

7.1 The proposed development of the site for residential purposes complies with all relevant Development Plan policies and is considered acceptable. Neighbour objections have been considered and weighed in the balance however the matters raised are not sufficient in this instance to overcome the considerations that lead to the following recommendation.

8. Recommendation

8.1 APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:

Condition(s):

Page 39 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Time

1 The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission.

REASON: In order to comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Accordance with Plans

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

Samples of materials

3 Samples of all materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building(s) hereby permitted, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, before any part of the development is commenced.

REASON: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the appearance of the locality.

Highways Details

Page 40 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

4 Prior to the commencement of any works, details shall be submitted showing the layout, dimensions and construction specification of the proposed accesses to the highway, such details shall be approved and implemented on site to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority before occupation of the development hereby permitted.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and efficiency.

Sight Splays

5 Before the access is first used, clear to ground level sight splays of 1.5 metres x 1.5 metres from the back of the footway shall be laid out either side of the proposed access within the site and maintained at all times.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

Visibility Sight Splays

6 Sight splays of 2.4; metres x 43 metres shall be provided at the proposed access and thereafter maintained at all times so that no obstruction is present within such area above the level of the adjoining highway carriageway.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and efficiency.

Tree Protection

7 Prior to commencement of the development, the trees located adjacent to the South Eastern boundary shall be protected in accordance with the details contained within the Tree Survey Report. All works shall be in accordance with the report unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that the works do not harm existing trees of the site in accordance with Policy PMD2 of the Thurrock LDF Core Strategy and Policies for Management of Development.

Parking Layout and Street Furniture

8 Before any development is commenced on site details shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the LPA showing the layout and dimensions of the following:

- The proposed access to the highway including the proposed re- positioning of any street furniture affected, in particular the telegraph pole, lamp column and nearby guard railing; - The proposed parking layout for the development, indicating two visitor parking spaces.

The agreed details shall be implemented before occupation of any

Page 41 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

buildings.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and efficiency.

Means of Enclosure

9 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1995 and before any development hereby permitted is first commenced, a scheme showing full details of fences, walls, gates or other means of enclosure, including the carports, in and around the site and including the timing of their provision, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and thereafter these works shall only be undertaken in accordance therewith.

REASON: To safeguard the character of the locality.

Landscaping

10 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development, and a programme of maintenance. All planting, seeding or tuning comprised in the approved scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following commencement of the development (or such other period as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

REASON: In accordance with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and in the interests of visual amenity.

Temporary Hardstanding

11 Before any other work associated with the development hereby approved commences, a temporary hardstanding shall be constructed on the site, clear of the public highway, of materials to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and the hardstanding as agreed shall be used at all times for the delivery of materials to the site and their storage pending construction works No such activities shalt take place on the highway.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity, to prevent mud and spoil being deposited on the public highway and to ensure no storage of materials on the public highway.

Page 42 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Page 43 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Hours of Work

12 No demolition, building work or deliveries shall be carried out before 8am or after 6pm on Mondays to Fridays or before 9am or after 1 pm on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays. REASON: In the interests of amenity generally.

Construction and Environment Management Plan (CEMP)

13 A Construction and Environment Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, details to include:

i. Hours of operation ii. Construction vehicle routing iii. Construction access iv. Temporary hard standing v. Storage of materials vi. Heavy plant storage vii. Abnormal Load Vehicle movements and routing viii. Crane storage and its use ix. Contractor parking x. Wheel Washing Facilities xi. Control of dust and noise during demolition xii. Details of any security lighting during the construction process xiii. A contingency plan to deal with any unforeseen contamination which may be encountered during construction.

Once agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority the works shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the agreed details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and efficiency and the amenity of surrounding occupiers.

Site Levels

14 Prior to the commencement of any development, details shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing the final ground level of the site and the finished floor level of the building hereby permitted.

REASON: To determine the scope of this permission and safeguard the character of the immediate area and amenity of neighbouring properties.

Lighting

15 Notwithstanding the details on the approved plans, prior to the first

Page 44 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

residential occupation of any of the dwelling[s] hereby permitted a detailed lighting plan for the development to include the car parking areas, footways and the boundary fence abutting Bridleway 212 known as St Margaret’s Path, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The submitted lighting plan shall include the siting and design of lighting together with details of the spread and intensity of the light sources. The lighting shall be installed in accordance with the agreed details prior to first residential occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted and thereafter retained and maintained in the agreed form unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and residential amenity and to ensure that the development can be integrated within its immediate surroundings in accordance with Policies PMD1 and PMD2 of the adopted Thurrock LDF Core Strategy and Policies for the Management of Development DPD [2011].

Informative(s):

1. Any works, which are required within the limits of the highway reserve, require the permission of the Highway Authority and must be carried out under the supervision of that Authority's staff. The Applicant is therefore advised to contact the Authority at the address shown below before undertaking such works. Chief Highways Engineer, Highways Department, Thurrock Council, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Thurrock, Essex. RM17 6SL

Alternatively, hard copies are also available to view at Planning, Thurrock Council, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL.

Page 45 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Page 46 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01155/FUL

Page 47 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

Reference: Site: 15/01393/TBC Car Park Thames Road Grays Essex Ward: Proposal: Grays Riverside Extension to existing car park (including surfacing, lighting and pay and display machines)

Plan Number(s): Reference Name Received 5519 01 Site Layout 23rd November 2015 5519 02A Site Layout 23rd November 2015

The application is also accompanied by:

 Design and Access Statement

Applicant: Validated: Thurrock Council 24 November 2015 Date of expiry: 19 January 2016 Recommendation: Deemed to be granted, subject to conditions.

The application is scheduled as a Committee item because the Council is the applicant and land owner (in accordance with Part 3 (b) Section 2 2.1 (b) of the Council’s constitution).

1. Description Of Proposal

1.1 This application seeks an extension to the existing car park on Thames Road. The extended car park would provide 132 pay and display spaces, (an increase of 66 from existing). Lighting would be provided at points within the extended car park and on the boundaries. Pay and display machines would be provided in the north-west, centre and south-eastern corners of the site.

2. Site Description

2.1 The application site is an irregular shaped 0.5ha area of land located within Grays in close proximity to the riverfront and the new South Essex College building.

Page 49 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

2.2 The site has a direct frontage onto Thames Road and backs onto open space to the south with the River Thames beyond. 2.3 The extension area is to the direct south of the existing car park. This land is being used for parking at present but is not formally surfaced.

3. Relevant History

Reference Description Decision 97/00754/FUL Change of use to form temporary Approved private car park

4. Consultations And Representations

PUBLICITY:

4.1 The application has been advertised via a site notice, and direct neighbour letters. At the time of drafting this report the consultation period had yet to expire. No responses have been received at this time.

Members will be updated should any letters of representation be received before the meeting.

4.2 Detailed below is a summary of the consultation responses received. The full version of each consultation response can be viewed on the Council’s website via public access at the following link:

www.thurrock.gov.uk/planning/14/01394/TBC

HIGHWAYS:

4.3 No objection, support the proposal.

ENVIRONMENAL HEALTH:

4.4 No objections (standard conditions recommended).

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY:

4.5 No objections (Advice offered).

5. Policy Context

National Planning Policy Framework

5.1 The NPPF was published on 27th March 2012. Paragraph 13 of the Framework sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Page 50 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

Paragraph 196 of the Framework confirms the tests in s.38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and s.70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and that the Framework is a material consideration in planning decisions. Paragraph 197 states that in assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

5.2 The following headings and content of the NPPF are relevant to the consideration of the current proposals.

1. Building a strong, competitive economy

Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

- Design; - Planning obligations and; - The use of planning conditions.

Local Planning Policy

Thurrock Local Development Framework

5.4 The Council adopted the “Core Strategy and Policies for the Management of Development Plan Document” in December 2011.The following Core Strategy policies apply to the proposals

Management of Development Policies:

PMD1 - Minimising Pollution and Impacts on Amenity2 PMD2 - Design and Layout2 PMD5 – Open spaces, outdoor sports and recreational facilities PMD8 - Parking Standards3

Thematic Policies:

CSTP22 - Thurrock Design CSTP23 - Thurrock Character and Distinctiveness2

Page 51 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

[1: New Policy inserted by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 2: Wording of LDF-CS Policy and forward amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 3: Wording of forward to LDF-CS Policy amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy]

5.5 The Core Strategy has been subject to a focused review for consistency with the (NPPF). The focused review document was submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination on 1 August 2013, and examination hearings took place on 8 April 2014. The Inspector's report was received in October 2014 and was approved by Council on 28th January 2015. Minor changes have been made to some policies within the Core Strategy; the policies affected by the changes are indicated above.

6. Assessment

6.1 There are essentially four main issues in the determination of this application:

I. Development Plan allocation and the principle of development II. Townscape, visual impacts and amenity III. Traffic impact, access, car parking and other transport issues IV. Flood risk

I. DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOCATION AND THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

6.2 The whole of the existing car park and the area to be occupied by the proposed extension is on land which is shown on the Core Strategy, Interim Proposals Map 2011 as ‘Existing Open Space’.

6.3 LDF CS Policy PMD5 seeks to safeguard all Existing Open Space and therefore the application conflicts with the aims of this policy. However, the application site has been used historically for parking of vehicles and this use has only very recently ceased due to inclement weather. The use of the land for parking is considered lawful and this application seeks planning permission to surface the site to facilitate a safer environment for pay and display parking.

II. TOWNSCAPE, VISUAL IMPACTS AND AMENITY

6.4 The car park extension would not be visually intrusive; while the site is found adjacent to an open recreation area to the west, the site is flanked by residential properties and commercial units to the north. The development would not appear incongruous, especially when considering the presence of the existing car park. The lack of any built form (save for lighting) would ensure minimal impact on views of the site.

III. TRAFFIC IMPACT ACCESS, CAR PARKING AND TRANSPORT

Page 52 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

6.5 The Council’s Highways Officer is in support of the proposals and indicates that the development would reduce the pressure of on street parking on nearby residential roads, which has become a cause for concern to local residents. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal complies with the relevant transport criteria of the Core Strategy.

IV. FLOOD RISK

6.6 The site lies within Flood Zone 3a (High Probability), comprising land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding, in this instance from the River Thames. The Environment Agency has been consulted but has raised no objections to the provision of additional parking on the site.

7. Conclusions And Reason(S) For Approval

7.1 In light of the above it is considered that the extension to the car park would be an acceptable use given the open nature of the use, the proximity to the town centre and the identified issues of oversubscribed on street parking on nearby residential roads.

8. Recommendation

It is recommended expressly for the purpose of Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992, permission be deemed to be granted for the above development, subject to compliance with the following:

1 Standard time

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission.

REASON: In order to comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 Accordance with plans

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Plan Number(s): Reference Name Received 5519 03 Site Layout 23rd November 2015 5519 04A Site Layout 23rd November 2015

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

Page 53 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

3 Use of land

The site shall be used solely as a public car park and for no other purposes, including overnight or long-term lorry parking, without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residents and to define the scope of this permission.

4 Landscaping

No construction works in association with the development hereby permitted shall commence on site until a scheme of hard and soft landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the details of which shall include:

(a) All species, planting sizes and planting densities, spread of all trees and hedgerows within or overhanging the site, in relation to the proposed hardsurfacing and other works; (b) Any means of enclosure; (c) Minor artefacts and structures (e.g. signs and lighting); (d) External surface material for parking spaces, pedestrian accesses. (e) Tree protection measures and details of the proposed management of the retained trees and hedges

All soft landscaping comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development whichever is the sooner. All shrubs, trees and hedge planting shall be maintained free from weeds and shall be protected from damage by vermin and stock. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscaping shall also be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that the proposed development is satisfactorily integrated with its immediate surroundings and provides for landscaping as required by policies CSTP18 and PMD2 of the adopted Thurrock LDF Core Strategy and Policies for the Management of Development DPD [2011].

5 Lighting

Any lighting installed on site shall be strictly in accordance with BS5489 – Part 2003, as detailed in the information accompanying this application. In addition other than that shown on the approved plans, there shall be no

Page 54 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

additional lighting unless previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interest of the amenities of nearby residential occupiers

6 Hours of work

No work in construction of the extended car park hereby permitted shall be carried on outside of the following hours (except in an emergency):

 08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday  08:00 to 13:00 Saturday  No working on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

REASON: In the interest of the amenities of nearby residential occupiers

Alternatively, hard copies are also available to view at Planning, Thurrock Council, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL.

Page 55 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

Page 56 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01393/TBC

Page 57 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 11 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

Reference: Site: 15/01394/TBC Cornwall House London Road Purfleet Essex RM19 1PS

Ward: Proposal: West Thurrock And Proposed car park (change of use of land from storage and South Stifford distribution use to car park) with associated surfacing, lighting and pay and display machines

Plan Number(s): Reference Name Received 5519 03 Site Layout 23rd November 2015 5519 04A Site Layout 23rd November 2015

The application is also accompanied by:

- Design and Access Statement

Applicant: Validated: Thurrock Council 24 November 2015 Date of expiry: 19 January 2016 Recommendation: Deemed to be granted, subject to conditions.

The application is scheduled as a Committee item because the Council is the applicant and land owner (in accordance with Part 3 (b) Section 2 2.1 (b) of the Council’s constitution).

1. Description Of Proposal

1.1 This application seeks planning permission to change the use of the land from Class B8 (storage) to a public car park (Sui Generis).

1.2 The car park would provide 100 pay and display spaces. Lighting would be provided on the north, east, south and western boundaries and pay and display machines would be provided in north, west and south eastern corners of the site.

2. Site Description

Page 59 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

2.1 This application relates to an irregular shaped 1.1ha area of land located within Purfleet, approximately 120m west of the Purfleet train station. The site is located to the north of, and fronts onto, London Road. The site’s London Road frontage contains mature hedging and trees.

2.2 The C2C railway line runs to the east of the site. Between the site and the railway station is a wooded chalk outcrop and a belt of trees. On the southern side of London Road are two rows of terraced houses. To the south and south east of the site is an industrial area which includes the vacant British Paper Board Mills, Cory’s Wharf and a storage site containing industrial buildings and tanks.

2.3 Botany Terrace, a row of terraced houses forming part of the Purfleet Conservation Area is located to the west of the site. The western part of the site is 10m from the end terraced property. The site adjoins, but is not within, the Conservation Area. There is a considerable levels change (+/- 5m) between the houses at Botany Terrace and the south-western part of the site, the site levels being below that of London Road and Botany Terrace.

3. Relevant History

3.1 The site forms part of the Purfleet Centre development.

Reference Description Decision 11/50401/TTGOUT Demolition of existing buildings; site Approved preparation; redevelopment of the application site for a mix of uses including; Residential (up to 3,000 units); Retail Floorspace - Use Class A1, Financial & Professional Services Floorspace - Use Class A2, Food & Drink Facilities - Use Classes A3, A4 & A5 (6,900sqm); Employment & Business Uses - Use Classes B1, B2 & B8 (31,000sqm); Hotel - Use Class C1 (3,300sqm); Community, School & Civic Facilities - Use Class D1 and Leisure Uses - Use Class D2 (6,500sqm); Car Parking Spaces; Relocation of Existing Station Ticket Hall; Public & Private Open Space and Landscaping, Highways, Access, Engineering and Associated Works 13/00241/FUL Retrospective application for the use Approved of land for the storage of plant, lorries and motor vehicles, scaffolding, materials, 2 mobile caravans and 4 containers.

Page 60 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

14/01388/FUL Continued use of land for the storage Approved of plant, lorries and motor vehicles, scaffolding and materials.

4. Consultations And Representations

PUBLICITY:

Members will be updated should any letters of representation be received before the meeting.

www.thurrock.gov.uk/planning/14/01394/TBC

HIGHWAYS:

4.3 No objection, support the proposal.

ENVIRONMENAL HEALTH:

4.4 No objections (standard conditions recommended).

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY:

4.5 No objections (advice offered).

5. Policy Context

National Planning Policy Framework

Page 61 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

5.2 The following headings and content of the NPPF are relevant to the consideration of the current proposals.

1. Building a strong, competitive economy

Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

- Design; - Planning obligations and; - The use of planning conditions.

Local Planning Policy

Thurrock Local Development Framework

5.4 The Council adopted the “Core Strategy and Policies for the Management of Development Plan Document” in December 2011.The following Core Strategy policies apply to the proposals

Management of Development Policies:

PMD1 - Minimising Pollution and Impacts on Amenity2 PMD2 - Design and Layout2 PMD8 - Parking Standards3

Strategic Spatial Policies:

CSSP2 - Sustainable Employment Growth CSTP6 - Strategic Employment Provision

Thematic Policies:

CSTP22 - Thurrock Design CSTP23 - Thurrock Character and Distinctiveness2

[1: New Policy inserted by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 2: Wording of

Page 62 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

LDF-CS Policy and forward amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy. 3: Wording of forward to LDF-CS Policy amended either in part or in full by the Focused Review of the LDF Core Strategy]

6. Assessment

6.1 There are essentially five main issues in the determination of this application:

I. Development Plan allocation and the principle of development II. Townscape, visual impacts and amenity III. Heritage IV. Traffic impact, access, car parking and other transport issues V. Flood risk

I. DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOCATION AND THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

6.2 The site is located on land that forms part of the Purfleet Centre development which was granted outline planning permission in May 2013. The 2011 Core Strategy Interim proposals map details the site as ‘Primary Industrial and Commercial Areas’. This Interim proposals map reflects the site designation in the former Local Plan (1997) pending the consideration of land uses in the Site Specific Allocations DPD (SSADPD). In light of this, the land uses detailed on the Interim proposals map do not align with either the LDF-CS spatial vision for Purfleet which seeks a mix of housing, employment and community facilities focused around a new centre or the proposed designations in the further issues and options (Jan 2013) of the LDF-SSADPD.

6.3 The site is owned by Thurrock Council, being an asset transferred from Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corporation. The most recent application was granted on a time limited basis )until 2nd April 2017) as this was considered to be an appropriate time at which the Purfleet Centre development works could commence on this site (this area was shown as being part of an early phase of the scheme).

6.4 Members will be aware that works on the Purfleet Scheme have not yet advanced. Given the circumstances, the use of the land as a pay and display car park would be appropriate as it would provide additional parking capacity in this location until such time as the Purfleet centre re-

Page 63 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

development takes place. No objection is raised to the loss of the employment generating B8 use in this instance.

II. TOWNSCAPE, VISUAL IMPACTS AND AMENITY

6.5 The use of the land as a pay and display car park would be less intrusive than the existing storage and commercial uses on the site and is considered to be acceptable in townscape terms.

III. HERITAGE

6.6 The development is outside of the Purfleet Conservation Area and the use would have a considerably lesser impact than the existing commercial operation. Accordingly it is not considered there would be a detrimental impact on the views from or to the Conservation Area.

IV. TRAFFIC IMPACT ACCESS, CAR PARKING AND TRANSPORT

6.7 The proposal would provide 100 new car parking spaces and would help to reduce inconsiderate parking in the area. In addition, private motor vehicle movements to and from the site would have less of an impact on the local highways network and neighbour amenity than the current use which attracts commercial vehicles. Accordingly it is therefore considered that the proposal complies with the relevant transport criteria of the Core Strategy. The Council’s Highways Officer is in support of the proposals.

V. FLOOD RISK

6.8 The site lies within Flood Zone 3a (High Probability), comprising land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding, in this instance from the River Thames. The Environment Agency has been consulted and has raised no objection.

7. Conclusions And Reason(S) For Approval

7.1 In light of the above it is considered that the development of the site for a car park would be an acceptable use pending the comprehensive redevelopment planned as part of the Purfleet Centre development.

8. Recommendation

1 Standard time

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission.

Page 64 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

REASON: In order to comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 Accordance with plans

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Plan Number(s): Reference Name Received 5519 03 Site Layout 23rd November 2015 5519 04A Site Layout 23rd November 2015

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3 Use of land

The site shall be used solely as a public car park and for no other purposes, including overnight or long-term lorry parking, without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residents and to define the scope of this permission.

4 Retention of hedges and trees

All existing trees and hedges on site shall be retained unless dead, diseased, dying or dangerous.

REASON: To retain important screening elements, in the interests of the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Thurrock LDF Core Strategy Policy PMD1

5 Lighting

REASON: In the interest of the amenities of nearby residential occupiers

6 Hours of work

No work in construction of the extended car park hereby permitted shall be carried on outside of the following hours (except in an emergency):

Page 65 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

 08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday  08:00 to 13:00 Saturday  No working on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

REASON: In the interest of the amenities of nearby residential occupiers

Alternatively, hard copies are also available to view at Planning, Thurrock Council, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL.

Page 66 Planning Committee 17 December 2015 Application Reference: 15/01394/TBC

Page 67 This page is intentionally left blank