WARD councillors and residents have welcomed news that a bid to extend the hours that HGVs can use Wharf Road in Stanford-le-Hope has been rejected.

However, one councillor from the town argued in favour of the extension – which would allow additional lorries to access and leave Stanhope Industrial estate from 6am in the morning. Cllr Gary Byrne fears that not allowing the vehicles access could bring job losses.

Members of Thurrock Council's planning committee debated the application last night (Thursday, 216 July) and the majority of councillors agreed with officers that the application be rejected. Just two, Cllr Byrne and South Ockendon councillor Mike Fletcher, supported the proposal which was widely opposed by local residents.

A resident's statement to councillors spoke of the disturbance caused by HGS already and said that in recent times the number of vehicle movements had increased. That has been reflected in a recent warning by the council that they may be seeking to take businesses on the estate to court for breaching the existing regulations.

Ward councillors Shane Hebb and Terry Piccolo also opposed the extension and a statement from them explaining their concerns was read to the meeting. Cllr Piccolo said: "We strongly object, Wharf Road is very narrow residential road and the movement of HGS has a massive impact on the lives of residents. The number of HGS has increased dramatically."

Cllr Byrne was more sympathetic to the businesses, saying: "This is a case of pleasing residents or putting local jobs at risk. By the very nature of its name Wharf Road, means it was a service to the Wharf so they have rights that exceed those of residents.

"The development does have a right of access and no particular party has any more right than the other.

"These people will lose business if they can't access earlier and this plays in the hands of the owners of the site who might want to put homes on it.

"I feel for the residents but I fear for the businesses if they can't leave before seven o'clock. As far as I am concerned they have the right to go there when they want. As it is at the moment they are being nice.

"Every resident bought a house knowing the estate was there!"

Cllr Byrne then brought up the issue of Riperian rights, saying he believed that it gave occupiers of businesses at the estate the right to travel freely. However, highways and legal officers discounted his argument.

Cllr Gerard Rice said there was an obvious solution – a different access route – but that opportunity had been squandered by the Thames Gateway Development Corporation.

He said: "We have to go back to Thurrock Thames Gateway, they could have built the link road out, it was possible. They refused to do it and here we have the consequences.

"I think seven to seven is just about OK but long term the only way to resolve this problem is build this site out for residential and move these people out to DP World on a proper designated highway.

"It's atrocious that local residents have to deal with this and the damage to the environment."

Cllr Angela Lawrence supported him, saying: "I would like to agree with what's been said, I agree with the refusal."

Cllr Fletcher said he was minded to support the extension saying: "If we are talking about increasing the amount of traffic that's one thing but it's not."

However, the application was defeated by a large majority – news that prompted the following statement from Cllrs Hebb and Piccolo: "The Planning Committee tonight made - in our view - the right decision to refuse a scaffolding company the permission to send large vehicle movement's down Wharf Road in Stanford-le-Hope, at 6am, six days a week.

"It is our view that had the committee not supported the refusal recommendation, it would have set a bad precedent which could further plague Wharf Road families at 6am, six days a week, from other companies who may look to utilise such a ruling and put forward their own designs for earlier starts.

"As Terry's statement, from both of us, said tonight - the loss of amenity and further new nuisance to local people, and the worry that others may try and follow suit if this was given the "green light", were primary reasons why we called in this planning application for debate.

"We think the committee made the right decision tonight".