Firm claims job blow as lorry storage bid fails

Thurrock Gazette: Howard Tenens Howard Tenens

A BID for a commercial storage park at a company site has been booted out by the council – a move which the firm claims could cost 150 jobs.

Howard Tenens, a large logistics firm, lodged a retrospective planning application after being served with two enforcement notices in 2009 for having an illegal lorry storage park on green belt land, next to its lawful Stifford Road base.

But last week, Thurrock Council’s planning committee voted to reject the application.

Howard Tenens told the committee up to 150 local jobs would be lost if the application failed and countered council officers’ arguments that there are alternative sites within Thurrock, insisting their contracted firms would be forced to look south of the river if they lost the site.

A council report on the issue said CHEP, the site’s predominant users, and Eddie Stobart, whose lorries regularly access the area, are on short term contracts with Howard Tenens and concluded job security could not be guaranteed anyway.

The application sought temporary permission for five years and offered to restore “derelict and damaged” green belt land at the end of that period.

Lauren Dooley, on behalf of Howard Tenens, said: “The purpose of this submission is to try to reach a sensible compromise that would allow existing jobs to be retained in tough economic times. Up to 150 jobs at the site could be lost.

“There are now very few employment opportunities in South Ockendon and to allow these jobs to be lost would be nonsensical.”

Despite the firm’s pledges, the application was opposed by councillors.

Cllr Charlie Curtis, Labour, said: “The owners are trying to exploit the system. The people I represent do not agree with our green belt being exploited, and neither do I.”

Cllr Maureen Pearce, Conservative, said lorries accessing the site had blighted Aveley for many years. She added: “I urge members to restore some peace to Aveley.”

The committee voted unanimously to reject the plans.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:35pm Mon 20 May 13

ebagumtrebor says...

Do councillors at Thurrock engage their brains before they make utterances on things. Take the two arguments these councillors have put forward and consider them against the following.

They have allowed developers to build houses on greenbelt land. They have approved current and future plans for allowing people to build on greenbelt land. They approved plans for the port in Stanford which will see thousands of additional lorries on the roads of Thurrock.

They then use the arguments that they don't want want greenbelt land abused and neither do the people they represent. They also don't want extra lorries on roads in Thurrock.

Is it amnesia or are there imposters out there disguised as councillors and voting on things without the knowledge of the real councillors.

I can't remember the last time councillors took a blind bit of notice of the wishes of the people they claim to represent. How many public consultations have completely ignored the wishes of the residents of Thurrock. All of them as far as I can remember. They appear to be in need of serious professional medical help.
Do councillors at Thurrock engage their brains before they make utterances on things. Take the two arguments these councillors have put forward and consider them against the following. They have allowed developers to build houses on greenbelt land. They have approved current and future plans for allowing people to build on greenbelt land. They approved plans for the port in Stanford which will see thousands of additional lorries on the roads of Thurrock. They then use the arguments that they don't want want greenbelt land abused and neither do the people they represent. They also don't want extra lorries on roads in Thurrock. Is it amnesia or are there imposters out there disguised as councillors and voting on things without the knowledge of the real councillors. I can't remember the last time councillors took a blind bit of notice of the wishes of the people they claim to represent. How many public consultations have completely ignored the wishes of the residents of Thurrock. All of them as far as I can remember. They appear to be in need of serious professional medical help. ebagumtrebor
  • Score: 0

10:00pm Tue 21 May 13

essexsurf says...

Do these councillors do any checks before they make coments.

Lorries accessing the site had blighted Aveley for many years. She added: “I urge members to restore some peace to Aveley.”

They don't go trough Aveley Village, they use the bypass if you looked into it.

Have you looked into how many of 150 + people working at the site live in Aveley and Ockendon.

These are peoples jobs you are playing with. The only thing you councillors are after are peoples votes. you dont care if people loose their jobs as long as you are all ok.
Do these councillors do any checks before they make coments. Lorries accessing the site had blighted Aveley for many years. She added: “I urge members to restore some peace to Aveley.” They don't go trough Aveley Village, they use the bypass if you looked into it. Have you looked into how many of 150 + people working at the site live in Aveley and Ockendon. These are peoples jobs you are playing with. The only thing you councillors are after are peoples votes. you dont care if people loose their jobs as long as you are all ok. essexsurf
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree