Six flats with parking at 269 Roman Road, Mountnessing

The site

The site is a former butchers shop and offices in a row of mixed-use units within the Mountnessing settlement.

“The application site is located on the southern side of Roman Road, the building forms part of a row of mixed use units with commercial at ground floor and some with converted first floor into residential. The host site occupies no residential use and currently used as butchers shop and offices. The building is two storey with the single storey element which extends fully to the rear of the site to accommodate the refrigeration area.”

“The parade of commercial units are not an allocated shopping parade or within an area which has been allocated for commercial use within the Local Plan, therefore the addition of residential use would be supported and the loss of commercial use supported subject to all other planning criteria being met.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

An earlier rear extension was permitted in 2019, and pre-application advice in 2023 supported this type of development in principle.

“The application site has little recent planning history with an approval for a single storey rear extension in 2019 and a pre application for the redevelopment on the site in 2023. The pre application concluded the principle of this type of development would be supported subject to all other planning criteria being met.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the design fitted the area, parking was adequate and the proposal was acceptable subject to conditions.

“The design approach taken is considered to be appropriate to the site and would appear in keeping with the wider streetscene. The new development would benefit from adequate off road parking, and provide 11 spaces which will be allocated for the flats and their visitors.”

“Overall, it is considered that the proposal would represent sustainable development as defined within the NPPF and in line with the Development Plan should be approved subject to the conditions below.”

Officer report

What consultees said

The revised scheme received highway approval subject to conditions, while landscape and ecology raised no objections subject to landscaping details.

“From a highway and transportation perspective the impact of the proposal is acceptable to the Highway Authority subject to the following conditions:”

“There are no landscape or ecology objections to the proposal subject to the landscape condition.”

Officer report

What residents said

Six objections raised concerns about parking, highway safety, traffic, overlooking, noise, smells, village character and the loss of the shop.

“The development is unsuitable for the village. • The development does not provide adequate parking, and would obstruct visibility for pedestrians and drivers causing harm to highway safety. • There are poor sustainable transport options in this location and future occupiers would rely heavily on the use of private vehicles which would lead to traffic congestion and strain on parking.”

“Terraces overlooking ours and all properties. • Anti-social behaviour. • Noise from use of side access and position of bins. • Not enough parking provided. • Access to gated fields blocked, grass verges used and destroyed, wooden blocks to deter parking removed by general public, curb parking on Roman Close, curb parking illegally on Roman Road, Residents (i.e., 271, 273, 275) unable to park during day, Cars left over night in laybys, Disabled parking space is used…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer presented the application, while a parish representative and the ward councillor spoke against it.

What members debated

Members discussed housing density, the character of the whole site, shop frontages, designated centres, speed limits and parking restrictions.

“Members discussed the housing density issues as outlined in the Supplementary Addendum. Officers advised that a holistic approach to the whole site should determine the decision and not just the density issue. The overall design and character of the area should be taken into account when determining the application.”

“Members considered other matters during the debate including the protecting of shop frontages and designated centres (Policy PC04). They continued to discuss highway matters such as speed limits and parking restrictions as part of this development.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Nine members voted for approval, two voted against and one abstained; one member had left and did not vote.

“Members RESOLVED to APPROVE the application subject to conditions outlined within the report.”

“[Cllr Murphy had left the meeting during the debate and did not vote].”

Minutes