A CAREFULLY-worded summary by the borough's senior planning officer appears to have thwarted hopes by novice councillors to reject a major planning application.

For the second time under different planning committees, plans by developers to build 121 homes in Stanford-le-Hope were rejected by councillors - but the controversial proposed development on Butts Lane remains alive.

In March this year members initially voted against the scheme mooted by planning agency Iceni Projects on behalf of Estates and Agency Strategic Land - only to change their minds after pressure from Planning Director Ashley Baldwin.

Having initially voted to reject a recommendation by officers to allow the green belt proposal, they found themselves unable to come up with a form of words to summarise their reasons against the proposal in contrast to the planning team's support.. That meeting can be viewed via this link.

Though they rejected all other aspects of the proposal a hiccup centred around an objection to the scheme by Sport England, a statutory consultee.

Consequently, after their initial rejection and advice from Mr Baldwin and a legal officer, they voted to defer the matter and asked for further comment by the agency.

At a second meeting on Tuesday evening (9 June) a new incarnation of the committee following Reform UK's success at the local election were briefed on the application and latest information. Ahead of the meeting Thurrock Nub News published this report.

At the meeting Sport England came back and said they stood by their opposition.

Officers still tried to drive the scheme through, but by margin of 5-3, their recommendation was voted out.

So for a second time, Mr Baldwin asked members of the committee to come up with words that voiced their opposition.

Six of the eight members of the Committee were novice councillors at their first meeting.

The chair, Cllr Russell Cherry, and his deputy chair Cllr Steve Taylor were supportive of the scheme. Despite their experience from being on the previous committee when both have repeatedly opposed schemes in the Greenbelt, neither were minded to speak against the second application, and indeed Cllr Taylor (who was a former non-voting committee member representing the interest of the Campaign for Rural England) proposed supporting the officers and Cllr Cherry seconded the officer recommendation.

However, five of the remaining six (all new to the planning committee) were against it having heard a lengthy presentation and report by planning officer David Stewart and opposition to the scheme voiced by former councillor Neil Speight who is a resident in the ward.

Their lack of knowledge of terminology was to prove pivotal in the outcome.

Cllr Peggy Davies suggested using a form of words submitted to the committee clerk by Mr Speight, which gave material planning reasons to reject the scheme, but Mr Baldwin refused to accept it, saying members had to come up with their own words.

Asked by Mr Baldwin to find those words, they struggled and he offered a summary of their opposition but introduced the words 'minded to refuse' which means rather than actually reject the scheme it gets to come back to committee for a third time.

The novice councillors clearly did not understand what he was saying and voted for his version of their recommendation. Afterwards some of the members admitted they did not realise the opposition to the proposal was not final.

Cllr Peggy Davies has since apologised for her 'lack of knowledge and understanding' on a complex issue.

Now the application could run 'out of time' allowing the applicants to go straight to the planning inspector for a decision, possibly circumventing local opposition.

It wasn't just the new councillors who didn't grasp the reality of the situation, the Local Democracy Reporting Service, which reported on the meeting for Thurrock Nub News, initially produced a report which said the scheme had been rejected.

However, soon after and possibly on the advice of the council, the report was amended.

LDRS reporter Naomi Greenaway (herself a novice on planning matters) produced an amended report that read as follows.

COUNCILLORS have deferred a decision on plans for 121 homes next to a Stanford-le-Hope school, overturning officers' recommendation to approve the scheme.

Thurrock Council's planning committee debated the proposal for land south of St Clere's School and east of Butts Lane on Tuesday, 9 June, with members raising concerns over the loss of playing field and access arrangements.

The scheme, which had been recommended for approval, would have delivered 121 homes of two-and-a-half to three storeys and was brought back to committee after being deferred earlier this year.

That deferral followed an objection from Sport England over plans to use part of the school's playing field as an access road — an issue which remained unresolved.

Councillors argued the proposals failed to adequately protect the existing sports provision.

Ultimately, the committee deferred their decision so they can get more information about the loss of playing fields and possible access issues

Councillor Jack Fuller, who moved a new recommendation alongside Peggy Davies, said the scheme did not go far enough to address those objections and called for it to be rejected until planning policy requirements were satisfied.

He referred to national planning guidance, which states development on playing fields should only be permitted where adequate replacement or alternative provision is secured.

Sport England maintained its objection, warning the proposal failed to properly consider local demand for sports facilities or involve sufficient consultation.

The committee also raised concerns about the layout of the development.

Questions were asked about the removal of temporary buildings on the site from updated plans, while members debated whether a single point of access was sufficient.

Committee chairman Russell Cherry suggested the layout could provide a safer environment, but Cllr Davies disagreed, arguing the lack of a secondary access route posed a potential risk in emergencies.

She said: "There should at least be an emergency exit route for people, for example if there was a fire there should be more than one way in and one way out."

Highways officers had not objected to the junction arrangements, although they noted issues around the internal road and cycle layout which would need further consideration at a later stage.

The proposals had also drawn objection from former ward councillor Neil Speight, who warned the development would add further pressure to local infrastructure without delivering significant improvements.

He said: "There is no significant addition to local infrastructure – however its creation as a housing estate will add to the current degradation of local services.

"The site is currently designated as green belt and its loss would be another step towards what is often described as urban sprawl, though I recognise planning officers have difficulty in recognising that term."

The site is currently designated as green belt and sits alongside the school, which is itself due to undergo a major rebuilding programme linked to concerns over reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC). A briefing meeting for residents about the rebuild will take place tomorrow (Thursday, 11 June) at the school.

That separate project is expected to come forward later this year, raising further questions about the cumulative impact of development in the area.

In the end, councillors voted in favour of deferring the decision and a future meeting could see the plan either approved or refused.

The planning meeting can be viewed via this link.