Roller shutters and longer hours at 290 Prince Avenue, Westcliff-on-Sea

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Southend Planning Committee on 22 Apr 2026.

26/00269/FULRefused

What was proposed

The application sought to retain two side shutters, remove two front shutters, and extend opening hours to 22:30, with earlier starts Monday to Saturday.

“Planning permission is sought to retain two roller shutters and housings on the building’s eastern flank elevation facing Rochester Drive. Two roller shutters and housings in situ would be removed from the building’s north elevation facing Prince Avenue. The shutters are solid and black in colour protruding a maximum of some 250mm. They are full height, 2.8m high from ground level.”

“Planning permission is also sought for the shop’s opening hours to be changed from those previously approved under planning permission 25/00332/FUL. The approved hours are 08:00 to 22:00 Monday to Sunday (including Bank and Public Holidays). The proposed hours of 07:00 to 22:30 Monday to Saturday and 08:00 to 22:30 Sundays, equate to one hour earlier opening on Mondays to Saturdays inclusive and 30 minutes later closing on Sundays.”

Officer report

The site

The site is an end-terrace corner building in a mainly residential area, occupied by a convenience store with a separate flat above.

“The application relates to an end-terrace, corner building on the south side of Prince Avenue, at the junction with Rochester Drive. The area is predominately residential in nature. The application relates to the ground floor of the building which is occupied as a convenience store (Class E)(a). Above is a separate flat. External solid roller shutters have been fitted to all ground floor openings to the front (north) and side (eastern) elevation.”

“The site is not within a conservation area or subject to any site-specific planning policy designations.”

Officer report

Earlier decisions and enforcement

Earlier applications for the shutters and longer hours were refused, both appeals were dismissed, and enforcement action followed over the shutters and opening hours.

“Planning permission 25/00332/FUL dated 13th June 2025 (the 2025 permission) was for “Change of use from a sui generis motorcycles sales shop to a class E(a) convenience store (part-retrospective).” That permission was subject to several conditions, including Condition 05 limiting opening hours for customers to 08:00 to 22:00 Monday to Sunday (including Bank and Public Holidays).”

“On 20 February 2026, taking account of the planning history and support for the Council’s position reflected in the two PINS appeal decisions, it was found expedient to remedy the identified harm by serving a Breach of Condition Notice in relation to the breaches of opening hours and a planning Enforcement Notice in respect of all four of the shop’s unauthorised roller shutters.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the shutters harmed the area’s appearance and the longer hours could cause harmful noise and disturbance to neighbours.

“Applying significant weight to this Council’s 2025 planning refusal and the findings in the dismissed 2025 appeal, the roller shutters to the flank elevation, proposed for retention, significantly harm the character and appearance of the site, the streetscene and the wider area and are unacceptable.”

“Overall, the proposed varied opening hours would not cause any character related harm but the two roller shutters and projecting housings to the building’s eastern elevation have been found by this Council and PINS to represent incongruous development. It is not considered that removal of the two roller shutters in situ to the building’s north, Prince Avenue elevation, which are unauthorised in any event, materially resolves the identified harm.”

Officer report

The committee’s decision

The committee refused planning permission because the extended hours harmed neighbours’ living conditions and the shutters harmed the site, streetscene and wider area.

“It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that the extended hours of operation would not result in a loss of amenity for neighbouring occupiers through noise and disturbance associated with the type, level and times of activity undertaken in association with the Class E(a) use, nor that such impacts could reasonably be overcome through planning conditions. The development has a materially harmful effect on the living conditions of neighbours in this respect.”

“The proposed retention of the solid black metal roller shutters and their projecting shutter housings in this prominent corner location, results in dead frontage and incongruous, poorly designed development significantly harmful to the character and appearance of the site, the streetscene and the wider area.”

Minutes

The members' reasons

The resolution gives these reasons:

  1. 01 It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that the extended hours of operation would not result in a loss of amenity for neighbouring occupiers through noise and disturbance associated with the type, level and times of activity undertaken in association with the Class E(a) use, nor that such impacts could reasonably be overcome through planning conditions. The development has a materially har
Minutes

Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.

Sources

  • Southend Planning Committee minutes, 22 April 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Southend's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Southend
Date
Wednesday 22 April 2026
Recommendation
Officers recommended refusal
Committee decided
Refused
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

This committee's year

32 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 5 against officer advice.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →