A FLAWED and disjointed scheme which has already cost the public purse around £25 million is set to be brought back to life by Thurrock's leading councillors tonight (Wednesday, 18 March).

Over recent years the council championed the Purfleet Centre Regeneration Limited (PCRL) was to deliver more around 2,800 new homes around a new town centre, including a new primary school and integrated medical centre. The total cost of the project was estimated to be as high as £1.4 billion.

However, after more than £25m had been spent on the project, with costly plans drawn up for a new town infrastructure and rail station, the plug was pulled on the project in September 2023.

At tonight's meeting councillors will be warned the new scheme could expose the council to significant cost if, like its predecessor, the scheme fails to progress and a future termination is required.

Under the umbrella of PCRL millions were spent on design plans, research, consultation and payments to directors and officers within the development company, which included Sir Timothy Laurence, husband of Anne, Princess Royal.

Sir Timothy Laurence.

In return, Thurrock got 34 houses! PCRL was wound up in March 2024.

The scheme was roundly criticised by then Thurrock MP Dame Jackie-Doyle Price who said: "We have been talking about building thousands of homes in Purfleet since 2008. If they were constructed on the River Thames, 45 minutes from central London, these homes would have sold themselves.

advertisement

"Purfleet Centre Regeneration Limited, a public-private partnership, was developed to deliver these homes. It had £70 million-worth of public land gifted to it.

"It was granted £5 million in 2015 to kickstart the works, and it subsequently received £70 million in housing infrastructure funding. The first house was promised to be constructed by 2018. We are now in 2024, and we have a handful of homes after spending all that public money."

Thurrock Council has perpetually insisted it has not abandoned the regeneration plan. Tonight it's bringing it back into public view and effectively restarting from scratch.

The council says Muse Places, backed by the English Cities Fund, is now the preferred developer for the scheme.

A report to cabinet says the riverside project remains a corporate priority and has the potential to deliver around 2,850 new homes across a range of tenures, including affordable housing, focused around a new town centre.

It says the scheme is also expected to provide employment space and major community infrastructure, including a new bridge over the railway to allow closure of the existing level crossing, a redeveloped station, a primary school and medical facilities.

Ambitious plans were laid out for Purfleet but they came to nothing after years of big spending.

The latest paper updates members on work undertaken with Muse under an agreement to produce a detailed business plan for delivery.

That plan concludes the scheme is still deliverable but faces a significant viability gap in early, infrastructure led phases and will require substantial public sector funding support.

Cabinet will be asked to note that Muse Places are the council's preferred partner, to agree that officers open negotiations on the terms of a full development agreement with the firm, and to undertake further due diligence on funding, planning and legal issues.

Any development agreement would be brought back to a future cabinet meeting for approval once terms are finalised.

The council also proposes to allocate up to £450,000 from its Freeport Counterfactual Reserve to fund its own costs in negotiating the agreement.

This money will be used to commission specialist planning, legal and financial advice to test the business plan assumptions and support negotiations on the heads of terms.

An independent review by KPMG has broadly endorsed the approach of appointing Muse via a direct award, subject to strict compliance and detailed due diligence.

However, it warns that the first phase is highly constrained, relies on low affordable housing levels and large public funding, and could expose the council to significant cost if the scheme fails to progress and a future termination is required.