To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning, Transport, Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committeemeeting held on 4 March 2015.

The Minutes of the Planning Transport and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held on 10 March 2015, were approved as a correct record.

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.

There was no items of urgent business.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Terms of Reference were noted.

Chris Brookhouseintroduced himself as the CEO of Thames Enterprise Park and Thames Oilport, which were owned by a joint venture of Greenergy, Vopak and Shell, he added that was also a director of Greenergy. Graham Alexandra introduced himself being the Head of Business Development, and Phil Kennedy a Senior Director at FTI Consulting both present to speak on behalf of Thames Enterprise Park.

The Final Interim Masterplan was presented to the Committee by Thames Enterprise Park. The presentation set out the development strategy and planning considerations for the creation of Thames Enterprise Park, a site comprising approximately 405 acres of previously developed land at the former Coryton refinery.

The Final Interim Masterplan informed the committee of the following;

•           It would provide for a range of other uses, such as logistics, storage and distribution and complementary ancillary services.

•           That the scale and location of the site, provided scope to both respond to market demand and to create an attractive environment within which to invest and to work.

•           It was explained to the Committee that once completed the Thames Enterprise Park will form one of the largest developments of its kind in Europe and provide a major boost to future growth and prosperity of the Borough and the wider Thames Gateway South Essex area.

It was explained to the Committee that Thames Enterprise Park held a meeting in March 2015 to inform Head Teachers of the potential job opportunities that would arise from the development of the Thames Enterprise Park. Councillor Kerin felt that the employment and training opportunities were good and questioned what outcomes came from the meeting with Head Teachers. Thames Enterprise Park explained that the meeting was very responsive and that school visits would be arranged by the preferred bidder when the sale is complete which would encourage young people to consider a career in this area of work. The Head of Regeneration explained that they will aspire to a similar training process currently undertaken at the Royal Opera House. It was added that Officers would aspire to populate the workforce at Thames Enterprise Park with Thurrock residents. The Chair of the Committee requested for a follow up report to come back to the Committee regarding the education training for The Thames Enterprise Park.

Councillor Liddiard questioned if public transport was being considered in the development, it was explained by Officers that this was incorporated in the transport plan. The Head of Regeneration confirmed that £9 million had been secured for the redevelopment of Stanford station. Further to that the Committee was informed that the Thames Enterprise Park would create 5,964 transport movements over 24 hours it was explained that there was more work to do in the future to reduce that figure.

The Chair of the Committee questioned if there would be one owner of the Thames Enterprise Park, and if so would the Council have a guarantee if the land management was to fail. Thames Enterprise Park confirmed that there would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Public Transport Manager introduced the report to the committee during which he highlighted the following points;

•           The budget had reduced from £835,000 in 2008/09 to £245,000 in the current financial year, and that this level of funding does not provide a service for all communities or at a frequency that users consider acceptable

•           Without financial support it is unlikely that areas such as Fobbing, East and West Tilbury, Bulphan and Horndon on the Hill would have any bus services.

•           A consultation is currently being undertaken with users of the three supported services which will run until 10 September 2015.

The Chair informed the Committee that three members of the public and Councillor Stewart were present at the meeting to ask a question or make a statement; he also informed the Committee that three written statements had been circulated to the Committee from Amber Coaches, Carol Rintoul a member of the public and Thurrock Coalition.

Mike Tarbard was welcomed to speak to the Committee and in doing so he highlighted the following points to the Committee;

•           That access was denied to Basildon Hospital, libraries, dentists, opticians and shops and students would not be able to get to college or reach recreational places because there would be no weekend service.

•           It was stated how the 11 bus route was covered by other current bus routes and that the 374 bus route was not.

•           That the council should reconsider the decision made on the grounds of total isolation of Horndon-on-the-Hill.

Gary O’Brien was welcomed to speak to the Committee and he raised the following points;

•           The difference between the two bus routes 11 and 374.

•           Results of a Survey of passenger movements on 374 Bus between Corringham Social Club and The Five Bells Roundabout both outgoing and incoming.

•           A Survey of passengers using the 374 through Fobbing.

•           Observations on how bad the Road Safety and Health and Safety for those who are forced to walk from Fobbing to either the Five Bells or The Corringham Club to Board or Alight any bus.

•           Ongoing Report and Survey of Thurrock Bus 374 prior and after 2 May 2015.

Tony Davis was welcomed to speak to the Committee he covered the following points;

•           Many residents have lost their ability to go out and socialise with friends and family, loss of social contact could lead to depression and anxiety. 

•           That the impact of the loss of the bus was in no way confined to the elderly age group and that some younger people also do not have a car and must use a bus to go to work, to school or to college.

•           On May 2 the bus was removed without any consultation, It was felt that if Thurrock Council held a consultation 8 weeks ago it would had prevented the current situation.

•           On behalf of the residents Tony Davis provided Report and Survey findings to the Committee which states why  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Head of Regeneration explained to the Committee that in July 2013 Cabinet approved the introduction of a broad (8m wide) underpass beneath the railway line to replace the existing level crossing.  The proposals included:

•           access via high quality,

•           landscaped public squares at either end of the underpass

•           The potential for a redeveloped rail station to provide a significantly enhanced arrival point into the town centre.

At December 2014 Cabinet it was envisaged that Network Rail would lead the design and construction of the underpass and the Council would lead the necessary land assembly. The Committee was informed that both organisations had commissioned consultants to develop the design proposals and consider the land and property implications respectively and a preferred underpass option had been identified and valued and a Land Acquisition and Partnership Strategy developed.

The Head of Regeneration explained that the cost estimates provided by Network Rail showed a design and construction cost that was similar to the budget price identified in the studies by Ramboll of £8,851,565. However additional costs appeared excessive, which took the cost estimate to £15,163,396 for the underpass with additional sums for relocating Crown Road and for inclusion of lifts. The Regeneration Team explained they were working with Network Rail to understand these estimates and to consider how they could be reduced.

Members were informed that further reports would be submitted to Cabinet for consideration of the next stages of the project including detailed design, funding and, if necessary, the drafting of a Compulsory Purchase Notice.

Councillor Kerin praised the project and questioned how many people from Thurrock would get the opportunity to work on the construction, Councillor Liddiard also questioned if the work would cause an impact to the train line. The Head of Regeneration explained that companies within Thurrock would be considered and that the construction of the underpass would not affect the train line as it would be a single weekend closure over Christmas. Councillor Liddiard also felt that more communication needed to take place to inform Thurrock residents of the underpass and the benefits.

Councillor Liddiard raised a concern regarding flooding and the underpass; the Head of Regeneration assured the Committee that a pumped solution was in place to resolve that issue.

Councillor Liddiard questioned where funding was being sourced from, The Head of Regeneration explained that they had a variety of funds at their disposal including an allocation within the Council’s capital programme, some S106 monies and both Network Rail and C2C had identified funds that could be used to support the scheme. It was referenced that the Local Growth Fund could be an opportunity to secure the funds still needed.

RESOLVED:

To note that the Planning Transport and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee provided their views on the design options and cost estimates and the approach to land assembly set out in this report.

The Democratic Services Officer explained that there was some new agenda items that had arose from the meeting and that she will circulate the amended work programme electronically.