Rear and side extensions at 1 Bull Close, Chafford Hundred, Grays

The site

The site is a two-storey end-of-terrace home in an established residential area, with no specific landscape or heritage designation.

“The application site relates to a two-storey end-of-terrace dwelling located on the northern side of Bull Close, in Chafford Hundred, Grays.”

“The site is not subject to any specific landscape or heritage designations and is located within an established residential area.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the design, neighbour impact, parking and highway effects were considered acceptable subject to conditions.

“The proposal would result in the property becoming a 4 bedroom dwelling. Policy PMD8 does not require the provision of additional car parking provision at the site. The surrounding area is characterised by similar residential properties, a number of which have been extended, and which are served by comparable levels of off-street parking. The existing provision of two spaces is therefore considered acceptable in this context.”

“The principle of the proposed development is considered acceptable and there would be no unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the area or neighbour amenity as a result of the proposed development, subject to relevant conditions. There would also be no detrimental highways impacts arising from the proposed development.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

Highways raised no objection subject to retaining parking, while residents objected over traffic, pollution, noise, amenity, antisocial behaviour and short-term letting.

“No objections subject to condition to retain the existing parking space provision on the site.”

“Additional Traffic • Environmental Pollution • Litter/Smells • Out of Character • Possible excessive noise • Access to Site • Loss of Amenity • Materials Unacceptable • Overlooking Property • Anti-social behaviour concerns • Unneighbourly behaviour by occupiers • Use of property for short term letting…”

Officer report

Speaker’s concerns

A speaker opposed the application, but confirmed there were no objections to the design when questioned by members.

Members’ discussion

Members considered the garage, parking, layout and possible conditions, and were advised that antisocial behaviour was separate from the planning merits.

“The Vice-Chair sought clarification on whether the garage would accommodate a car or just a motorbike. Officers confirmed it is acceptable for the parking of cars and there would be no loss to parking at the site. Motorcycle parking was indicated on the frontage.”

“Members stated while there were difficulties with local concerns from a planning viewpoint there is limited action that Planning Committee could take given the limits to the considerations that could be had and noted the applicant did not choose to attend. The Chair and the Vice- Chair were in support of the application adding that as Planning Committee they are required to assess the application on its own merits.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee authorised permission subject to conditions and added advice that the consent covered a dwellinghouse, with separate permission needed for a house in multiple occupation.

“Recommendation That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT planning permission for the development subject to those conditions set out in section 16 of the report with the following informative;”

“Informative- The applicant is advised that the consent hereby granted relates solely to the extension of the property as shown on the plans approved and on the basis that the property remains within Planning Use Class C3 (Dwelling house) as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended). Separate planning permission will be required in the event of the property being used as a House of Multiple Occupation.”

Minutes