On Behalf of Group 1 Automotive Thurrock Football C

Planning & Development Ltd

JMS Planning & Development Ltd

Planning Statement (Updated October 2020)

Thurrock Football Club, Ship Lane, Aveley, Thurrock, RM19 1YN

October 2020

Proposal: Thurrock Football Club, Ship Lane, Aveley, Thurrock, RM19 1YN Client: Group 1 Automotive Date: October 2020

JMS Planning & Development Ltd T: 01986 785038 E: [email protected] © The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of JMS Planning & Development Ltd

CONTENTS

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1 SECTION 2: THE APPLICANT 4 SECTION 3: SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA 5 SECTION 4: PLANNING HISTORY 6 SECTION 5: THE PROPOSAL 7 SECTION 6: PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK 9 SECTION 7: PLANNING ISSUES 18 SECTION 8: CONCLUSIONS 33

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 This Planning Statement has been prepared on behalf of Group 1 Automotive in support of a full planning application validated on 22 October 2019 and referenced 19/01418/FUL for:

“Refurbishment of the former Thurrock Football Club Stadium, to include replacement of existing stadium pitch with new all-weather 3G pitch for community football use. Development of a vehicle Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) centre on the site of training/practise pitches to the north of the stadium to comprise 1,224 parking spaces, PDI Building (1,199.6 sqm GEA), new access to include HGV turnaround, 2.4m boundary fence, landscaping, change of use of existing flat (Use Class C3) to Use Class D2 and associated works” at Thurrock Football Club, Ship Lane, Aveley, Thurrock RM19 1YN (“the site”).

1.2 Following ongoing liaison and negotiation with Sport England, it is now proposed to amend the proposals for the Thurrock Football Club stadium site to retain it in football stadium use but not to provide an all-weather 3G pitch. Instead, it is proposed that the stadium be utilised for continued football use by gifting it to another local football club, namely Grays Athletic.

1.3 Rather than the provision of all-weather 3G pitch at the Thurrock Football Club stadium, it has been agreed with Sport England, following discussions with Thurrock Council (Recreation and Leisure Services) and the Football Foundation, that an appropriate mitigation for the development of the existing training pitches is a financial contribution of £500,000 for new or enhanced football pitch provision at Thurrock Council’s Belhus Park playing fields in Aveley along with the gifting of the stadium to a community sports partner. On the above basis, it is requested that the description of development of the application be amended to read as follows:

“Retention of the former Thurrock Football Club Stadium for ongoing football use. Development of a vehicle Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) centre on the site of training/practise pitches to the north of the stadium to comprise 1,224 parking spaces, PDI Building (1,199.6 sqm GEA), new access to include HGV turnaround, 2.4m boundary fence, landscaping, change of use of existing flat (Use Class C3) to Use Class D2 and associated works”.

1.4 It is considered that the proposed application is of considerable benefit to Thurrock Borough Council (“the Council”). Namely, the proposed application provides:

• The gifting of Thurrock Football Club to a third party to ensure its use for community football in perpetuity; • A financial contribution of £500,000 made to Thurrock Council for improvement of existing football pitch provision at Belhus Park, Aveley; • New access to include a HGV turnaround which will provide road traffic benefits to help reduce/prevent HGVs travelling through Aveley village; • The introduction of a new international company to Thurrock Borough Council; • The creation of up to 30 new jobs; and • New landscaping in order improve views across to the Stadium from the Mar Dyke footpath.

1.5 It is recognised that the application site is located within designated Green Belt and that the proposed development of a PDI centre represents “inappropriate development”. This Planning Statement confirms that it is considered that Very Special Circumstances exist to justify a grant of planning permission for the proposed development. Full details of these Very Special Circumstances are set out within this Statement.

1.6 In order to progress this planning application, the applicant has assembled a team of consultants and the following documents are submitted as part of the planning application submission:

• Existing and Proposed Floor Plans and Elevations; • Planning Statement prepared by JMS Planning & Development (updated October 2020); • Design and Access Statement prepared by JMS Planning & Development; • Transport Statement prepared by DW Transportation Limited (updated October 2020); • Statement of Community Involvement prepared by Cratus Communications; • Ecology Report prepared by Iceni Ecology; • Arboricultural Report prepared by Silva Arboriculture Limited; • Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy prepared by Mason Navarro Pledge;

1.7 Accordingly, Section 2 sets out a description of the applicant whilst Section 3 sets out an overview of the site and surrounding area. A review of the site’s planning history is contained in Section 4, whilst details of the application proposal are set out in Section 5. An overview of relevant planning policy is contained at Section 6 with the planning issues considered at length in Section 7. Accordingly, relevant conclusions are detailed at Section 8.

SECTION 2: THE APPLICANT

2.1 Group 1 Automotive is an international automotive retailer group, made up of a number of subsidiary groups and is a trusted seller of vehicles of a range of marques with over 70 sites currently operating in the UK.

2.2 In March 2007, Group 1 Automotive launched its UK operation and founded the Barons Group when the Company acquired its first BMW and MINI dealerships (Chandlers in Brighton, Hailsham and Worthing). This acquisition was Group 1 Automotive’s very first UK representation. Essex Audi then became a part of the Barons Group in 2012 when Group 1 Automotive acquired their first UK Audi dealerships.

2.3 Think Ford was founded in February 2013 when Group 1 Automotive obtained the Farnborough, Guildford, Wokingham and Bracknell Ford centres under the Barons Group, which were formerly part of Inchcape. Later in December 2014, Elms BMW and MINI joined the UK Barons Group network.

2.4 Spire Automotive become part of Group 1 Automotive’s subsidiary the Barons Group in 2016, representing Audi, BMW, MINI, Volkswagen Commercial, SEAT and ŠKODA across Essex, Hertfordshire and London. A year later, Group 1 Automotive acquired the Beadles Group, which joined its Barons Group operation. Founded in 1987, the Beadles group is based in Dartford and represents Jaguar, Land Rover, Kia, ŠKODA, Toyota and Volkswagen across Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent and Surrey. The Company also has a dedicated Volkswagen Van Centre in Dartford.

2.5 In March 2018, the Barons Group acquired five Mercedes-Benz and three Smart dealerships, originally part of the Robinsons Motor Group. The Mercedes-Benz dealerships are based in Bury St. Edmunds, Cambridge, Kings Lynn, Norwich and Peterborough, with the Smart dealerships being situated in Cambridge, Norwich and Peterborough.

SECTION 3: SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

3.1 The application site comprises the former stadium and training pitches of Thurrock FC. The site is currently vacant and Thurrock FC are no longer operational as a club having formerly resigned from the Isthmain League on 31 March 2018.

3.2 The application site is located between Aveley to the north and West Thurrock to the south in Essex and is accessed from Ship Lane via Southway. The relevant Ordnance Survey national grid reference is TQ F7342 79151. The application site is bordered to the south/south west by the Thurrock Hotel, to the north by the Mar Dyke Marshes and to the west by Ship Lane beyond which on the opposite side is business premises, marsh and pasture. The A282 runs to the east of the site which continues to the M25 approximately 1km to the north of the site at Junction 30.

3.3 In total the application site area extends to some 7 hectares. However the application site falls into three distinct parcels of land. The Thurrock Football Stadium which comprises the pitch, stands, clubhouse, changing rooms and associated infrastructure, the former Thurrock Football Club training pitches and an area of unused land to the east. The estimated site areas of each of these is broadly as follows:

• Thurrock Football Club - 2.204 hectares; • Training pitch - 3.017 hectares; • Unused land - 1.138 hectares.

3.4 A high voltage electricity cable crosses the site south west to north east which includes two large pylons being located on the site.

3.5 The site is not located within a conservation area. There are no Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) or listed buildings present on the site.

SECTION 4: PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 A review of the relevant planning history records of the site has been undertaken using Thurrock Borough Council’s online records. This has confirmed the following planning history: Application Proposal Decision Date reference 08/00685/FUL Erection of Covered Seating Refused 19 Nov 2008 07/01105/FUL Formation of two sealing end compounds Granted 11 Dec 2007 including overhead line landing gantries, sealing ends and associated equipment and access arrangements 03/00872/FUL Disabled access ramp Granted N/A 03/00948/FUL Operational works to resurface training Granted N/A ground for 5 junior football practice pitches 98/00466/FUL Proposed roof cover to existing terracing, Withdrawn N/A new stand, fencing, hardstanding, snack bar and overflow car park 97/00843/FUL Football club house Granted N/A 97/00173/FUL Proposed extensions and alterations Refused N/A 95/00438/FUL First and second floor extension Granted N/A 87/00461/FUL Grandstand and floodlights Granted N/A 85/00867/FUL Changing rooms Granted N/A 84/00751/FUL Change of use from senior school to sports Granted N/A and leisure centre, alter and extend existing building to form three squash courts, form new access and drive 80/00092/OUT Tesco retail store, car parking and Refused N/A landscaping 79/01064/OUT Superstore and service centre Withdrawn N/A

79/01407/FUL Tesco retail store and motorway service Refused N/A 79/01488/OUT Industrial development Refused N/A 4.2 Having reviewed the above planning history none of the applications are considered to be relevant to the current application and the issue of Very Special Circumstances.

SECTION 5: THE PROPOSAL

5.1 The application proposes the development of a Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) Centre. The PDI Centre will include an outdoor stock handling capacity of 1,224 parking spaces as well as a PDI Centre building in which the specialist PDI Technical Team can prepare cars.

5.2 The PDI Centre will have the latest pre-delivery inspection and car preparation facilities and the latest equipment and a fully trained team to ensure that vehicles are ready for a speedy onward delivery to dealerships and customers nationwide.

5.3 The PDI Centre will receive vehicles direct from importation and will store the vehicles prior to their shipping to individual dealerships. At the PDI Centre a number of inspections are undertaken to ensure that vehicles are road worthy and fit for sale. The PDI Centre will not be open to members of the public and vehicles will not be sold from the site. Trips to the PDI Centre will be limited to vehicle deliveries, which are received on a low loader and vehicle- testing whereby the vehicles are taken out on the public highway for a short period of time to help assess their roadworthiness.

5.4 In respect to the proposed PDI building, this will have a footprint of 1,096.7 sqm with a gross internal area, including the first floor, of some 1,199.6 sqm. The building is to be 52.86 m long by 23.4 m deep and has a proposed ridge height of 8.1 m. The building will be clad in trapezoidal cladding (colour: Silver Grey RAL 9006).

5.5 The PDI site will be surrounded by a metal palisade fence of 2.4 m high. There will be significant landscaping around the outside of the site to obscure it to include a landscaped/wildlife corridor along the Mar Dyke River. However, given the combined value of the vehicles to be stored on site, it is intended the use will be very low key and will be heavily landscaped partly in order to not draw attention to the site.

5.6 The PDI Centre will provide some 1,224 car parking spaces and will take its access from the existing South Way junction albeit redesigned to accommodate car transporters and with an HGV turning facility. A supporting Transport Statement prepared by DW Transportation Limited (updated October 2020), which accompanies the application sets out the supporting highway and transportation justification for the application proposal.

5.7 The proposed PDI Centre will create an estimated 15-30 new jobs and will open normally from

approximately 7.30am to 6.00pm. The use does however become busier in March and September with the number plate change.

5.8 Group 1 Automotive also proposes a change of use to the existing first floor of the clubhouse which is current used as a two-bedroom flat by the owner of the stadium. The proposed first floor is to be converted to sports stadium use (Use Class D2) and is to be utilised for teaching/educational use as required.

5.9 Further details of the design of the scheme are set out within the accompanying Design & Access Statement.

SECTION 6: PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

6.1 This section of the supporting statement sets out the relevant national and local planning policy framework relevant to the proposed planning application.

National Planning Policy

6.2 The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in February 2019 constitutes guidance for local planning authorities and decision-takers and is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications (paragraph 2).

6.3 The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development (paragraph 7).

6.4 Paragraph 8 confirms that there are three overarching objectives to sustainable development: economic, social, and environmental, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways:

• An economic objective – to help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth, innovation and improved productivity; and by identifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure;

• A social objective – to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities by ensuring that a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by fostering a well-designed and safe built environment, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural wellbeing;

• An environmental objective – to contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; including making efficient use of land, helping to improve biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy.

6.5 These objectives should be delivered through the preparation and implementation of plans

and application of policies in the framework; they are not criteria against which every decision can or should be judged. It is confirmed that the planning system should play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions, but in doing so should take local circumstances into account, to reflect the character, needs and opportunities of each area (paragraph 9).

6.6 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development (paragraph 10). For decision taking, this means:

• Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay, and

• Where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date, granting permission unless;

o The application of policies in the framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or o Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this framework taken as a whole (paragraph 11).

6.7 The presumption in favour of sustainable development does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making (paragraph 12).

6.8 Local Planning Authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way. They should use the full range of planning tools available and work proactively with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Decision makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible (paragraph 38).

6.9 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Decisions on

applications should be made as quickly as possible, and within statutory timescales unless a

longer period has been agreed by the applicant in writing (paragraph 47). Local Authorities may give weight to relevant policies and emerging plans according to the stage at which they are at and the extent of unresolved objections (paragraph 48).

6.10 Planning policies and decisions should help create the conditions, which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account both local business needs and where there are opportunities for development. The approach taken should allow each area to build on its strengths, counter any weaknesses and address the challenges of the future (paragraph 80).

6.11 Planning policies should set out a clear economic vision and strategy which positively and practically encourages sustainable economic growth having regard to local industrial strategies and other local policies for economic development and regeneration; set criteria to identify strategic sites for local inward investment to match the strategy and meet anticipated needs over the plan period; seek to address potential barriers to investment; and be flexible enough to accommodate the needs not anticipated in the plan, allow for new and flexible working practices and to enable a rapid response to changes in economic circumstances (paragraph 81).

6.12 Planning policies and decisions should recognise and address the specific locational requirements of different sectors (paragraph 82).

6.13 The Government attaches great importance to Green Belts and the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence (paragraph 133).

6.14 Green Belt serves five purposes, namely:

(a) To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas;

(b) To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;

(d) To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and

(e) To assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

6.15 Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in Very Special Circumstances (paragraph 143). 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 potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal, is clearly outweighed by other considerations (paragraph 144).

6.16 Paragraph 145 advises that Local Planning Authorities should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in the Green Belt but lists a number of exceptions, which include; extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building; and the replacement of a building, providing the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces.

6.17 Section 15 within the Planning Policy Framework provides guidance on conservation and enhancing the natural environment. Paragraph 170 confirms that valued landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and soils, should be protected and enhanced. New development and existing development should not contribute to, being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability. Development should, wherever possible, help to improve local environmental conditions such as air and water quality, taking into account relevant information such as river basin management plans.

6.18 Paragraph 97 confirms that existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:

a) an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or

b) the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced

by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a

suitable location; or

c) the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the benefits of which clearly outweigh the loss of the current or former use.

Development Plan

6.19 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that all applications must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The relevant development plan for the application site comprises The Thurrock Core Strategy and Policies for Management of Development (as amended) (Adopted January 2015) (as amended) the Saved Policies of Thurrock Local Plan 1997 and supporting SPDs including the Thurrock Design Guide.

6.20 The Adopted Thurrock Council Proposals Map identifies the site within the Urban Fringe Landscape, outside the settlement boundary of Aveley. In addition, the site is located within the Green Belt and the Thames Chase, along a green corridor of open spaces and Floodplain Zone 1 and 3 benefitting from flood protection.

Thurrock Core Strategy

6.21 Policy OSDP1 sets out Thurrock's overarching sustainable development policy, which emphasises the Council’s commitment to promoting sustainable growth and regeneration. The policy states that when considering development proposals, the Council will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained within the NPPF. As such, planning applications that accord with the policies in this Core Strategy, (and, where relevant, with polices in neighbourhood plans) will be approved without delay, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

6.22 Policy CSSP4 (Sustainable Green Belt) seeks to seeks to maintain the purpose, function and open character of the Green Belt in Thurrock, and it states that the council will maximise opportunities for leisure and sports in the Green Belt and actively encourage the pursuit of leisure and sports activities appropriate to Green Belt.

6.23 Policy CSSP5 (Sustainable Greengrid) states that “Development within Local Green Spaces will not be permitted unless there are very special circumstances. The Council envisages these circumstances will include where such development would support the functional value of such spaces without detracting from the visual qualities which the community may value.”

6.24 Policy CSTP9 (Well-being: Leisure and Sports) seeks to safeguard and promote the provision of high-quality sports and leisure facilities.

6.25 Policy CSTP10 confirms that the Council will safeguard existing community facilities and will only allow their redevelopment in circumstances where appropriate facilities of equal or better quality will be provided. The policy also states that the Council will support the provision of high quality, accessible community facilities to serve new and existing communities, regenerate areas and raise the profile of Thurrock as a destination for culture and the arts. The Council will encourage the development of multi-functional community facilities as an integral part of all major development in the Borough.

6.26 Policy CSTP14 states that the Council will work with partners to deliver at least a 10% reduction in car traffic from forecast 2026 levels. In order to do this, the Council will ensure that new developments promote high levels of accessibility by sustainable transport modes.

6.27 Policy CSTP17 (Strategic Freight Movement and Access to Ports) confirms the Council will support the logistics and port sectors and the positive impacts of freight activity in Thurrock and beyond through, inter alia, supporting improvements to facilitate sustainable freight movements.

6.28 Policy CSTP18 (Green Infrastructure) seeks to restore, protect, enhance and where appropriate create green assets. - Policy PMD16 (Developer Contributions) will be sought to mitigate or compensate for the loss of any significant amenity or resource.

6.29 Policy CSTP19 (Biodiversity) seeks development contribute positively to the overall biodiversity in the Borough.

6.30 Policy CSTP23 (Thurrock Character and Distinctiveness) states that the Council will protect,

manage and enhance the character of Thurrock to ensure improved quality and a strengthened sense of place. A key area where character is an issue is the Green Belt. Policy CSTP23 states that the Council will protect, manage and enhance the character of Thurrock to ensure improved quality and strengthened sense of place.

6.31 Policy CSTP27 (Management and Reduction of Flood Risk) states that the Council will ensure that, where necessary, new development throughout the Borough contains space for water including naturalisation and environmental enhancement. Developers will be required to incorporate sustainable drainage systems as a priority and to contribute towards flood risk management infrastructure where appropriate.

Thurrock Policies for Management of Development

6.32 PMD1 (Minimising Pollution and Impacts on Amenity, Health, Safety and the wider Environment) explains that development will not be permitted where it would cause unacceptable effects on: • the amenities of the area; • the amenity, health or safety of others; • the amenity, health or safety of future occupiers of the site; or • the natural area. It is noted that particular consideration will be given to the location of sensitive land uses, especially housing, schools and health facilities, and nationally, regionally and locally designated biodiversity sites, and areas of recreational and amenity value which are relatively undisturbed by noise and valued for this reason.

6.33 Policy PMD5 (Open Spaces, Outdoor Sports and Recreational Facilities) states that the Council will safeguard all existing open spaces, outdoor sports and recreational facilities. Development proposals that would result in their complete or partial loss or cause or worsen a deficiency in the area served by the space or facility will not be permitted unless:

i. conveniently located and accessible alternative facilities of an equivalent or improved standard will be provided to serve current and potential new users; or improvements to remaining spaces or facilities can be provided to a level

sufficient to outweigh the loss;

ii. proposals would not negatively affect the character of the area and/or the Greengrid. Any alternative and improved facilities should be available for use before an existing open space or facility is lost.

The Council may also allow: iii. a partial loss of an open space or outdoor sports pitch site, where that partial loss would be due to the development of facilities ancillary to the use of that space or site (e g. changing rooms) and would not result in a loss in the quality or number of pitches provided and their use; or

iv. the redevelopment of an existing open space, outdoor sports or recreational facility where redevelopment would incorporate a type of open space, outdoor sports, or recreational facility for which there is greater need.

Proposed development must ensure that: v. New open spaces, outdoor sports and recreational facilities are provided in accordance with adopted standards to meet the needs of the development and to address deficiencies.

vi. New facilities are fully integrated into the design of development schemes as an element of place making.

vii. Facilities are safe and easily accessible to all.

6.34 All sports and recreational facilities are required to incorporate appropriate ancillary facilities, such as changing rooms and parking to ensure access for the whole community.

6.35 Policy PMD6 (Development in the Green Belt) states that the Council will maintain, protect and enhance the open character of the Green Belt in Thurrock in accordance with the NPPF and relevant DPD policies.

6.36 Policy PMD7 (Biodiversity, Geological Conservation and Development) states that development proposals will be required to demonstrate that any significant biodiversity habitat or geological interest of recognised local value is retained and enhanced on-site.

6.37 Policy PMD10 (Transport Assessments and Travel Plans) states that Transport Assessments, Transport Statements, and Travel Plans must accompany planning applications in accordance with the Department for Transport guidance in Guidance on Transport Assessments (March 2007). Where schools add capacity through development or new schools are proposed, they will be required to develop a School Travel Plan or revise their existing Travel Plan. Development will only be permitted where the Travel Plans, Transport Assessments or Transport Statements are agreed by the Council and there is adequate provision for existing or planned transport infrastructure and other proposed measures.

6.38 Policy PMD8 (Parking Standards) states that new developments will be required to comply with relevant parking standards set out in the Layout and Standards SPD.

6.39 Policy PMD15 (Flood Risk Assessment) states that applications relating to sites not covered by the Thurrock Sequential Test will be required to be supported by a site-specific Sequential Test to demonstrate compliance with the NPPF, and associated Planning Practice Guidance. Developments will also be expected to incorporate Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) to reduce the risk of surface water flooding, both to the site in question and to the surrounding area. Where the potential for surface water flooding has been identified, site specific Flood Risk Assessments should ensure that suitable SUDS techniques are incorporated as part of the redevelopment.

SECTION 7: PLANNING ISSUES

7.1 This section of the Planning Statement details the material considerations relevant to the application proposal. It should be noted that design and access issues are considered within the accompanying Design and Access Statement. Furthermore, as indicated throughout this section all key issues are generally the subject of individual specialist reports. Accordingly, the following general planning matters are considered below:-

• Impact on the Green Belt – Very Special Circumstances; • Enhanced Sports Provision; • Highways and Transportation Matters; • HGV Turnaround; • Job Creation Benefits; • Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Strategy; • Trees and Landscaping; • Public Consultation; • Ecology; • Amenity Issues; • Loss of Residential Use; • Ground Contamination and Archaeology.

Impact on the Green Belt – Very Special Circumstances

7.2 The applicant acknowledges that the development of the site within the Green Belt as a PDI Centre represents inappropriate development. As such, it is necessary for the Council to arrive at a judgment as to whether Very Special Circumstances have been demonstrated which justify a grant of planning permission. In this respect, there are several constituent parts of the application which it is considered form part of the applicant’s Very Special Circumstances argument.

1. The gifting of Thurrock Stadium to a community sports partner for community football use;

2. A financial contribution of £500,000 made to Thurrock Council towards mitigating the

loss of the training pitches, to be secured through a Section 106 Agreement and used towards the delivery of potential football projects at Belhurs Park, Aveley. 3. The provision of a HGV turnaround facility to assist with HGV management on Ship Lane and to avoid the use of HGVs travelling through Aveley village centre; and 4. The introduction of an international automotive retailer to Thurrock with associated job creation.

7.3 A relevant court case in respect to how Very Special Circumstances are to be assessed is Wychavon DC v SoS & Butler 23/06/2008, when the Court of Appeal considered whether an Inspector had taken the correct approach to Very Special Circumstances when granting temporary planning permission to retain an unauthorised gypsy caravan site for one family on land within a Green Belt. The Inspector had concluded that while none of the individual factors amounted to Very Special Circumstances, when added together they were sufficient to meet the test set out at paragraph 3.2 of PPG2. The High Court ruled on 20/12/2007 that the Inspector’s reasoning had been erroneous and that he had not applied the Very Special Circumstances test properly, so quashed the decision. In the Court’s view the aggregation of three commonplace factors could not amount to Very Special Circumstances. However, in reinstating the Inspector’s decision, the Court of Appeal ruled that although the Inspector’s conclusion that Very Special Circumstances existed to justify development in Green Belt was generous, it was nonetheless lawful. The High Court had been wrong to treat the words ‘very special’ in paragraph 3.2 as simply the converse of ‘commonplace’. “Rarity may of course contribute to the ‘special’ quality of a particular factor, but it is not essential, as a matter of ordinary language or policy. The word ‘special’ in the guidance connotes not a quantitative test, but a qualitative judgment as to the weight to be given to the particular factor for planning purposes”. There is no reason, in terms of policy or common sense, why the factors that make a case ‘very special’ should not be the same as, or at least overlap with, those that justify holding that green belt considerations are ‘clearly outweighed’.

7.4 In Herba Foods Ltd v SoS South Cambridgeshire it was held that in dismissing an appeal related to the extension of a rice mill to provide additional storage an Inspector had applied the wrong approach to the ‘Very Special Circumstances’ test. The Inspector had considered that, although small, the extension encroached on Green Belt land and the company’s need for the development did not constitute Very Special Circumstances. The Court ruled that it was clear

that the Inspector gave less weight to the need for additional storage because he regarded it

as a commonplace consideration. He was wrong to do so and the approach of looking for an unusual or rare factor was erroneous. The words ‘very special’ were not to be treated as the converse of ‘commonplace’. This decision echoes the approach taken in Brentwood BC v SoS 22/4/2008. Here, an inspector’s decision to grant temporary permission for five gypsy mobile homes and day rooms on agricultural land within a Green Belt area was challenged. The Court held that a ‘Very Special Circumstance’ could be something that was a commonplace factor that would normally arise as a consequence from refusal of planning permission - in this case homelessness and disruption to family life.

7.5 Also of note in respect to how the Very Special Circumstance test should be assessed is R (Basildon DC) v SoS & Temple 8/11/2004A. In this case, the Council challenged an Inspector’s decision to grant permission for the retention of two gypsy caravans. In upholding the Inspector’s decision, the High Court held that a number of factors, none of them "very special" when considered in isolation may, when combined together, amount to Very Special Circumstances. Whether any particular combination amounts to Very Special Circumstances will be a matter of planning judgment for the decision-taker. The Inspector had decided that Very Special Circumstances existed, which included the lack of alternative gypsy accommodation and the site’s access to shops and schools. There was no basis for criticising the Inspector’s conclusions.

7.6 The applicant appreciates that it is a judgment call for officers as to whether the Very Special Circumstances test has been overcome. A number of different facets can cumulatively together represent Very Special Circumstances. It is the applicant's proposition therefore that together the above elements constitute the case that Very Special Circumstances exist to justify a grant of planning permission.

7.7 The Thurrock Strategic Green Belt Assessment prepared by Peter Brett Associates (PBA) is dated January 2019. Within this document the application site falls within Parcel 39. It should be noted that Parcel 39 referenced within the PBA assessment is a large parcel, of which the application site only forms a small part. It should also be noted that much of the application site is already developed by the existing Stadium, surrounding buildings and car parking. In addition, the existing sport pitches contain a large pylon with another electricity pylon to the rear.

7.8 As set out in the Planning Policy Section, the National Planning Policy Framework confirms that there are five purposes to the Green Belt, these are to check on restricted large built up areas; to prevent neighbouring towns merging in to one another; to assist in the safeguarding of the countryside from encroachment; to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns and to assist urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land (paragraph 134).

7.9 In respect to the Green Belt purposes, it is considered that the importance of the Green Belt for the purpose of checking for unrestricted sprawls of large built up areas does not apply in the context of this site as the site is not immediately adjacent to a large built up area, rather it is adjacent to the A13/M25. As stated above, the majority of the site is already developed and the development of the former training pitches for open storage does not extend as far as the Mar Dyke and it is considered to be only a marginal increase in development over and above the existing stadium.

7.10 Similarly, the site is not directly adjacent to any neighbouring towns and as such this small element of Parcel 39 does not have any purpose in preventing neighbouring towns from merging into one another. In respect to the purpose to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, the site has an extant use on it for sports use. Not only is the site significantly developed but also the remainder of the site is in use as sport pitches rather than in any form of countryside use. The application proposal provides a wildlife corridor along the Mar Dyke in order to respect the setting of the Mar Dyke and avoid any ecological impact.

7.11 The site does not seek to preserve the setting and special character of a historic town. However, it is the case that the application brings the existing vacant, derelict site back into beneficial use.

7.12 In respect to the site’s perception of openness, it should be noted that the site is dominated

by the existing stadium and the sports pitches by the existing pylon and more relevantly the elevated section of the M25. With regard to the nature of views, the site is visible from the Mar Dyke footpath, albeit the view of the site is currently the stadium and beyond this the M25 motorway. The site is to be heavily landscaped along the Mar Dyke frontage, which will ensure that the fencing of the site is to be obscured. In this respect it is considered that green landscaping of the site along the Mar Dyke frontage will soften the existing views towards the stadium, as it will ensure much of the stadium is obscured from view from the Mar Dyke footpath to be replaced with landscaping.

7.13 On the above basis, it is considered that the site’s contribution (as opposed to the wider Parcel 39) to the existing Green Belt is limited. As stated above, it is considered that on balance a justification for the application proposal exists by way of Very Special Circumstances.

Enhanced Sports Provision

7.14 In respect to the adopted Development Plan, Policy CSTP9 (Well-being: Leisure and Sports) seeks to safeguard and promote the provision of high-quality sports and leisure facilities. Policy CSTP10 confirms that the Council will safeguard existing community facilities and will only allow their redevelopment in circumstances where appropriate facilities of equal or better quality will be provided. The policy also states that the Council will support the provision of high quality, accessible community facilities to serve new and existing communities, regenerate areas and raise the profile of Thurrock as a destination for culture and the arts. The Council will encourage the development of multi-functional community facilities as an integral part of all major development in the Borough.

7.15 The existing football stadium is no longer in use, Thurrock FC having withdrawn from the Isthmain league on 31 March 2018. Since this time the site has been vacant. During the marketing of the site no other sports teams or any other party has come forward to retain the stadium in football use. The uniqueness of the application proposal is that the applicant is willing to ‘gift’ the football stadium to a third party community sports partner in order for it to be used for a continued football use. The relevant community sports partner is Grays Athletic, a local football team to Grays and a home team for Thurrock Borough. The decision to partner with Grays Athletic follows significant discussions with Sport England and Essex FA

and the Council’s Leisure Services Team. The previous intention was for the site to be used as

a community football hub with a 3G pitch to be operated by the Essex FA. However, as a result of Covid-19 (and other factors) Essex FA has withdrawn from its desire to pursue a community football hub at this location.

7.16 As a consequence, further ongoing discussions with Sport England have occurred, which have also involved discussions between Sport England and Thurrock Council (Recreation and Leisure Services) and the Football Foundation. Accordingly, it is now proposed that mitigation for the loss of the natural turf training pitches on the application site would principally be made off-site in the form of a financial contribution of £500,000 to Thurrock Council towards the provision of replacement playing fields in the local area instead of investment being made in the refurbishment of the Thurrock FC Stadium. Following the discussions which have occurred between Sport England, Thurrock Council and the Football Foundation, it has been agreed that the most suitable projects for investing the financial contribution would be in new or enhanced football pitch provision at Thurrock Council’s Belhus Park playing fields in Aveley, which is the principal community playing field for football in the western part of Thurrock Borough. Potential projects that a contribution could be used towards have been suggested as potential a new full size, artificial grass pitch, enhancements to the quality of the existing natural turf pitches to increase their capacity and quality and new natural turf pitches on land adjoining Belhus Park. Sport England consider that these projects would be consistent with the priorities in the Thurrock Council’s emerging playing pitch strategy and the Football Foundation’s Thurrock Local Football Facilities Plan.

7.17 The contribution of £500,000 is proposed to be secured through a Section 106 Agreement. It is proposed that the financial contribution be paid to the Council prior to the commencement of development of the PDI centre. At the same time, it is proposed that the freehold of the stadium be transferred to an appropriate community sports partner which, at the current time, is proposed to be Grays Athletic.

7.18 It is considered that the use of the site for community sports facilities will help the Council with its emerging Outdoor Sports Strategy and will provide significant sporting facilities for local residents.

7.19 Accordingly, it is considered that the application accords with Paragraph 97 of the NPPF and

relevant Development Plan policy and provides officers with an opportunity for significantly enhanced sporting provision for the local community at this location.

7.20 The above benefits in respect to sport provision to Thurrock Council and the local residents is considered to represent an important element of Very Special Circumstances which justify the proposal. In respect to the issue of Very Special Circumstances, the ability to bring the stadium back into beneficial use is unique to this application in that it can generally be considered only to apply for any application on the application site. in other words an application not at this location is not going to be able to provide the benefits for sports provision use arising from the ‘gifting’ of the Stadium.

Highways and Transportation Matters

7.21 The planning application is submitted with a Transport Statement prepared by DW Transportation Limited which examines the highway impact associated with the application proposal and which is informed by pre-application discussions with Highways England.

7.22 The site would be accessed by utilising the existing Southway junction with Ship Lane but would be upgraded and incorporate a turning facility for HGVs. The site access and the HGV turning facilities on site have been checked using vehicle tracking software. Space would be provided on the site for HGV turning and waiting for two additional car transporters. Car and bicycle parking for staff and visitors would also be provided.

7.23 The full highway justification for the application proposal is contained within the accompanying Transport Statement from DW Transportation Ltd. This Transport Statement has recently been updated in October 2020 following significant ongoing discussions between Thurrock Highways and Highways England.

HGV Turnaround

7.24 During the public consultation event held at the end of July 2019, a common theme that arose from members of the public was the issue of transport in the local area, particularly in relation to HGVs accessing Aveley village via Ship Lane. Many residents gave anecdotal evidence relating to this and raised concerns about the effect that the new scheme could have on exacerbating this. As will be confirmed within the Delivery Management Plan no vehicles associated with the application use will pass through Aveley village. All vehicles will be instructed (via a DMP which can be legally enforced by legal agreement or condition) will require HGV vehicles to exit left from the site and will only enter the site from the A282/M25 junction. A traffic island is proposed on Ship Lane which physically prevents any HGV lorries from the application site turning right towards Aveley village.

7.25 Following this consultation feedback, a further highways design of the ingress/egress arrangements was prepared which aimed to combine the entrance to the site and also a gift of land to allow for a turning place for HGVs on Ship Lane.

7.26 It is understood that Thurrock Council has previously held a local consultation in the area on how to resolve the area on how to resolve the issue of HGVs on Ship Lane. The results of the consultation were a desire to restrict HGV movements on Ship Lane and potentially for a roundabout to be installed along Ship Lane near to the application site in order to allow HGVs to turn around when faced with no access to Aveley. The cost of this roundabout to the Council and for it to be delivered without the use of third party land is unclear, although it is estimated to be significant. During the second day of the exhibition, the design was discussed further and it was agreed that further consideration could be given to this option which would allow a revised application incorporating a HGV turnaround to form part of the planning application to assist local residents in resolving a long standing problem. Subsequently, discussions have been held with the Aveley and Kennington’s Committee to discuss these proposals and how they can form an integral part of an overall comprehensive package of measures to prevent HGVs travelling through the centre of Aveley village. As such, this application will help to deliver this important local highway facility at no cost to the Council.

7.27 It is therefore considered that the proposed HGV turnaround could be used as part of a

comprehensive strategy to reduce/prevent HGVs travelling through Aveley village centre. This is considered to be a significant benefit of the application scheme which contributes to the balancing exercise of the application proposals in respect to Very Special Circumstances.

Job Creation Benefits

7.28 The application proposal will facilitate the introduction of an international automotive retailer group (Group 1 Automotive) to set up within Thurrock Borough.

7.29 The application proposal will provide a valuable source of jobs and create further job opportunities within the Borough. The application proposal is expected to create between 15 and 30 new jobs which will vary between specialist technicians, management staff and couriers and staff to park and move vehicles around the car storage area. Group 1 Automotive prides itself in its training programmes and its ability to take staff and assist them in securing qualifications in respect to vehicle and engine technology.

7.30 In addition to the actual jobs created by the development, further jobs will be created during the construction phase of the development. There will be other spin offs and linkages to the benefit of the local area during the construction period itself, as for example on site construction staff utilise shops and services in the local area during the period of construction.

Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy

7.31 The application is supported by a Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy prepared by Mason Navarro Pledge. This deals in detail with the issues of flooding and drainage strategy.

7.32 The Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy Report confirms that the

developable site is at a low risk of flooding from rivers and seas given that it is in an area benefiting from flood defence. Equally, maps provided by the Environment Agency indicate that the developable site is predominantly at low risk of flooding from surface water. Full details of the surface and foul water drainage design are provided within the accompanying Mason Navarro Pledge document as well as details of the proposed SUDS maintenance and management plan.

7.33 In summary, the Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy prepared Mason Navarro Pledge confirms that the issue of flooding and surface water drainage are not matters which should prevent a grant of planning permission for the proposed application.

Trees and Landscaping

7.34 In respect to the issue of trees and arboricultural, Silva Arboriculture Ltd has been commissioned by the applicant to provide arboricultural services to support the planning application. Some 70 arboricultural items were recorded during the tree survey within the site boundary including three individual trees and one group of trees of moderate quality and 54 individual trees and six groups of trees of low quality, and five individual trees and one group of trees of poor quality. Generally, the tree report confirms that the majority of the existing tree stock within the site is of low quality and should not therefore provide a constraint to the proposed redevelopment. Three Category B trees were recorded within the site boundary during the survey. The Arboricultural Report notes that the retention of these trees would be desirable, albeit this removal could be mitigated through replacement tree planting. One group of Category B trees were recorded outside the site boundary on the eastern side of the site adjacent to the A282; these trees it is noted should be protected and retained. These trees are outside of the site and are unaffected by the development.

7.35 The report confirms that none of the trees are subject to Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) and the site does not fall within a conservation area.

7.36 The three Category B individual trees which are shown to be desirable to be retained, all fall within the current landscaping areas or the potential area for future PDI expansion. As such the removal of these trees is not proposed in the first instance.

7.37 The existing tree stock on site will be complimented by significant new planting along the landscaping strip fronting the Mar Dyke and around the edges of the site, both to provide appropriate wildlife habitat and to visually obscure the proposed palisade fence around the site.

7.38 Full details on the issue of landscaping is contained within the accompanying Design and Access Statement to be submitted with the planning application.

Public Consultation

7.39 The applicant has commissioned Cratus Communications, a firm specialising in public consultation engagement, to assist with the public consultation and engagement associated with this application. Accordingly, submitted with the application is a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) which outlines the public consultation process undertaken by Cratus Communications and the wider project team in a partnership with Group 1 Automotive as informed by the guides and principles contained with the various documents, notably the Thurrock Local Plan and Statement of Community of Involvement (2015), the Localism Act 2011 (specifically Section 2.11) and the relevant guidance issued to local authorities within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019). In addition, due regard has been paid to Gunning principles. The public consultation process has been extremely beneficial and has directly resulted in the introduction as part of the application proposals of a HGV turnaround facility that it is considered will be of significant benefit to local residents of Aveley village. In addition, following discussions and engagement with officers of the Council, an area of land behind the stadium is now offered to be available for additional sports facilities, for example a potential gymnasium.

7.40 In addition the applicant has engaged with Essex FA regarding the details of supporting information that it required in respect to the state of the existing facilities and to understand how the site could be best utilised to be of benefit to community football.

7.41 Full details of the public consultation engagement are set out in the accompanying Statement of Community Involvement.

Ecology

7.42 The applicant has commissioned Iceni Ecology Limited to undertake a Preliminary Ecology Assessment (PEA) to support the planning application in order to identify any features of ecological significance on the site as well as assessing the potential for the presence or likely absence of protective species and to assess the likely impact of the proposed development on key receptors and to provide an indication of any potential likely mitigation or compensation requirements. Additional surveys in respect to bats and reptiles have been commissioned.

7.43 The PEA identifies a single crack willow on the site as having bat roost potential. This crack willow falls within the current landscaped area and is not proposed to be removed as part of the application proposal.

7.44 It is proposed for significant natural landscaping around the site to be undertaken which can act as a wildlife corridor and to enhance the ecology of the Mar Dyke. The applicant is happy to provide significant landscaping comprising native trees and hedgerow plants and as such it is considered that appropriate compensatory landscaping/ecological habitat can be provided to offset the development of what is principally the sports pitches consisting of mowed grassland.

Amenity Issues

7.45 In respect to the impact on residential amenity of nearby residents and occupiers of the Thurrock Hotel, it is not considered the application proposal will give rise to any adverse impacts.

7.46 In terms of immediate occupiers, the site benefits from no residential properties abutting the site. adjacent to the site is the Thurrock Hotel whilst on the other side of Ship Lane is a commercial use. The nearest residential properties are some distance away along Ship Lane.

7.47 The site is not a 24 hour operation, generally the site will operate from approximately 7.30am

through to approximately 5.30pm-6.00pm. The site will operate slightly longer hours during September and March which are the busier months due to the number plate change. As such, the activities on site will occur entirely during daytime hours. In addition, the level of activity on the site, as set out in detail in the accompanying Transport Statement prepared by DW Transportation Ltd, is low with the number of trips to an from the site being limited. Due to the limited hours of trading with the operation it is not considered that there will be any adverse impacts arising on occupiers of the nearby hotel. All vehicles to the site will enter the site during day time hours. Whilst it is possible that on an infrequent occasion a HGV could arrive at a time when the site is closed, it is anticipated that the HGV would visit the nearby services which contains HGV parking. There is space on the site to accommodate a lorry up to two lorries should any arrive when the site is closed. However, it is not considered that this will be common occurrence and, for the reason stated above and given the proximity of the nearby services, it will not be likely that any HGVs would be waiting on site.

7.48 In terms of the routing of vehicles to and from the site, as previously confirmed this will not involve any routing through Aveley village. As such it is not considered the application is likely to have any undue effect on the amenity of nearby residents.

7.49 Equally, whilst noise will arise from the sports use of the site, this is the existing use of the site at present and whilst the site is flood lit allowing community football use in the mornings and evenings, it is not considered that this is going to be to a level which would have any adverse effect on the nearby hotel. A Noise Report has been submitted in support of the planning application which has been upheld by the Council’s Environmental Health Department who have confirmed that they do not consider that the application proposal gives rise to any adverse noise impacts.

7.50 On this basis it is considered that the application is acceptable in respect to issues of amenity.

Loss of Residential Use

7.51 There is an existing two bedroom flat on the first floor of the clubhouse building. This is used solely by the existing owner of the football club and has been for many years. It is proposed that the first floor of the clubhouse be converted from a flat so as to provide upper floors which could be used for meeting rooms for sports tutoring, meetings or otherwise. This has been a preference of Essex FA in the pre-application discussions which have occurred. It is not considered that the loss of a residential unit at this location is an issue which should raise any planning concerns or frustrate the proposals for the site.

Ground Contamination and Archaeology

7.52 In support of the application a Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Desk Study Report (Preliminary Risk Assessment) produced by Subadra has been submitted. The Council’s Environmental Health Department has confirmed that it agrees with the recommendations of the report with regard to potential contamination on site. As such, it is not considered that there is any ground contamination reason why planning permission cannot be granted subject to appropriate conditions.

7.53 An Archaeological Desk Based Assessment has been submitted by PCA Heritage which confirms that the site has a moderate to high potential to contain heritage assets of Palaeolithic date in the geological gravels which are likely to lie at depths beneath the bulk of the site. These are unlikely to be impacted on by the development except where piled foundations are installed. It is considered that the potential for heritage assets of medieval and post-medieval date to be present on the site is low and the same considerations of the depth of undisturbed soil arises which applies to the potential of pre-historic and Roman evidence to be impacted on applied to any medieval or post-medieval activity which might be present. The report confirms that archaeological work undertaken during the construction of the A13 Wennington to Mar Dyke road in the 1990’s demonstrated that the study area was settled during the Iron Age and early Roman periods, and that scattered finds evidence also hints at a Neolithic presence. For this reason, it is assumed that there is a low to moderate potential for heritage assets of Neolithic date to be present on the site, and a moderate potential for heritage assets of Iron Age and Roman date to be present. These may sit above, be contained within, or be masked by the alluvium which is present beneath the northern part

of the site, although the ground-raising exercise which took place in the 1980’s on this part of the site means that evidence for any such activity may be buried at depth and might not be impacted on by the development. In summary, the Archaeological Desk based Assessment confirms that there is no archaeological reason to withhold a grant of planning permission.

SECTION 8: CONCLUSIONS

8.1 This Planning Statement has been prepared on behalf of Group 1 Automotive in support of a full planning application validated on 22 October 2019 and referenced 19/01418/FUL for:

8.2 Following ongoing liaison and negotiation with Sport England, it is now proposed to amend the proposals for the Thurrock Football Club stadium site to retain it in football stadium use but not to provide an all-weather 3G pitch. Instead, it is proposed that the stadium be utilised for continued football use by gifting it to another local football club, namely Grays Athletic.

8.3 Rather than the provision of all-weather 3G pitch at the Thurrock Football Club stadium, it has been agreed with Sport England, following discussions with Thurrock Council (Recreation and Leisure Services) and the Football Foundation, that an appropriate mitigation for the development of the existing training pitches is a financial contribution of £500,000 for new or enhanced football pitch provision at Thurrock Council’s Belhus Park playing fields in Aveley along with the gifting of the stadium to a community sports partner. On the above basis, it is requested that the description of development of the application be amended to read as follows:

8.4 It is considered that the proposed application is of considerable benefit to the Council. Namely, the proposed application provides:

8.5 It is recognised that the application site is located within designated Green Belt and that the proposed development of a PDI centre represents “inappropriate development”. This Planning Statement confirms that it is considered that Very Special Circumstances exist to justify a grant of planning permission for the proposed development. Full details of these Very Special Circumstances have been set out within this Statement.

8.6 On the basis of the benefits accruing which it is considered represent Very Special Circumstances, it is requested that planning permission be forthcoming.