Nine residential flats at Land To Rear Of 44 And 46 Bankfoot Adjacent Hogg Lane, Grays

What was proposed

Permission in Principle was sought for a three-storey building containing nine flats, with amenity space, cycle storage and refuse storage.

“This application seeks Permission in Principle (PiP) for the erection of nine flats together with associated development, including private amenity space, cycle storage and refuse storage. Drawings submitted with the application are only indicative and a PiP application considers only whether a site is suitable in principle for the proposed land‑use.”

“The application is submitted as a Permission in Principle for the erection of a three‑storey building comprising nine residential flats. The indicative mix consists of six two‑bedroom units and three one‑bedroom units. The flats would be served by a central foyer, with four of the flats having access to front‑facing balconies at first and second‑floor level.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because residential development was acceptable in principle within Grays, subject to conditions and later technical approval.

“The site is designated as falling within an area without notation on the Council’s adopted Core Strategy Development Plan map and within the settlement boundary of Grays, where new development is generally directed. As a consequence, the principle of residential development is considered likely to be acceptable.”

“That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT permission for the development subject to those items set out in section 16 of this report -”

Officer report

Important matters for later

Character, ecology, access, parking, levels, noise and neighbour effects were identified as significant challenges for any later detailed application.

“However, all of these matters would all fall to be fully examined at the Technical Details stage. As outlined above, only the principle of development may be considered at this stage. Issues relating to character and appearance, neighbour impact, living conditions for future occupiers, ecological effects, and detailed access arrangements fall outside the scope of the Permission in Principle assessment and must be addressed through a subsequent Technical Details Consent…”

“Importantly, the site is largely undeveloped and wooded, and the proposal would introduce a substantial degree of urbanisation into this setting which may well appear out of character with the immediate context. When considered alongside the potential issues relating to ecological impact, access, parking and site levels, these matters are likely to present significant barriers to securing Technical Details Consent.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways sought more information and advised refusal, while environmental health, drainage and water consultees requested investigations or further technical details.

“Require more information on topographical survey and surface water drainage strategy…”

“There are no owned Anglian Water assets within the development site boundary or affected by the proposals. Recommend that the applicant carries out a thorough investigation to establish whether any unmapped public or private sewers, lateral drains, or other water infrastructure assets are in existence. They suggested the applicant liaise with Anglian Water before submitting the technical matters.”

Officer report

What residents said

Five objections raised concerns including privacy, wildlife, flooding, green space, traffic, character, damage, parking and overdevelopment.

“Individual notification letters were sent to nearby properties and a site notice was erected in front of the application site on 27/02/2026. The five written comments of objection were received and are summarised below:”

“Overlooking concern • Loss of privacy • Overshadowing • Impact on wildlife/habitat • Increased flood risk • Loss of green space • Impact on character and appearance of the locality • Location is at the top of the bank that formed the original chalk pit that Badgers Dene • Site is SSSI so should be protected from development • Damage to their property • Site is steep from dwelling at the rear • Increase traffic and vehicular use • Open characteristic contributes to the…”

Officer report

Who spoke

An agent spoke in support, and the intended car-free approach was confirmed when members asked about parking.

What members discussed

Members discussed parking, ground levels, railway distance, buses, highway effects, servicing and a nearby sinkhole.

“Members sought clarification regarding the relationship between the proposed ground levels of the development and those of the neighbouring Bankfoot site as well as further clarification on the highway implications of the proposal. It was confirmed that the site was located just beyond the accepted 500-metre walking distance from the railway station.”

“Members raised concerns regarding the location of a recently identified sinkhole in the vicinity of the site. Members were reminded that detailed highway, servicing and ground condition matters, including any issues relating to the sinkhole, were not material considerations at the Permission in Principle stage and would instead be subject to assessment as part of any subsequent Technical Details Consent application.”

Minutes

The decision

Permission was granted subject to conditions, including applying for and obtaining technical details within three years.

“Technical detail consent shall be applied for and approved within the three-year time limit of this permission in principle consent.”

“Reason: As directed by The Town and Country Planning (Permission in Principle) Order 2017 (as amended).”

Officer report