Replacement five-bedroom dwelling at Namashkar, Meesons Lane, Grays

The site and its setting

The site contains an existing two-storey home and garage in a residential area, with trees and off-street parking.

“The application site is located on the western side of Meesons Lane. It currently hosts a 2-storey, 4-bedroom residential dwelling and detached garage. It also benefits from off-street parking to the front of the site.”

“The site lies within an existing residential area. The site contains several trees, which are not subject to Tree Protection Orders.”

Officer report

Earlier site history

Earlier applications included approved drainage works and residential development, while an application for eleven dwellings was refused in 1971.

“Reference Proposal Decision 87/00906/FUL Surfacing and Drainage works off Meesons Lane. Approved 85/01019/OUT Residential Development Approved 85/01019A/FUL 14 Detached Houses. Approved 71/00662/OUT Erect 11 Dwellings (Site of Freeby, Meesons Lane) Refused 09.12.1971”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways, Environmental Health and Waste Strategy raised no objections subject to conditions where applicable, and the Health and Safety Executive did not advise against permission.

“The applicant provided additional information in response to the request and liaised with Highways Officers. Subsequently, comments were received dated 4 th December 2025 advising that there were no objections subject to conditions in relation to pedestrian sight splays, boundary wall height, provision of the parking area as depicted and a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).”

“No objections subject to conditions requiring the submission and approval of a CEMP.”

Officer report

Objections received

Twenty-eight written objections raised concerns about access, character, construction, parking, privacy, scale, ecology and possible overdevelopment.

“Access to Care Homes nearby • Character • Concerns about future use of gym / wrestling ring • Construction amenity impacts • Construction traffic impacts • Damage to private road infrastructure • Ecology impacts…”

“Excessive scale • Existing parking difficulties • Insufficient parking • Lack of CEMP • Lack of neighbour consultation by applicant • Loss of amenity / light • Loss of privacy • Over intensification / overdevelopment • Precedent • Pressure on local infrastructure • Unsuitability of Meesons Lane for HGVs…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A resident and a ward councillor spoke against the application, while the applicant spoke in support.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed private road damage, the basement, the applicant’s entitlement to apply and the need to assess planning matters on their merits.

“Members queried who would be liable if there is damage to the private road. It was confirmed this has not been adopted by highways therefore it would be a private matter for the owners. Officers added that any degradation will be remediated as part of the proposal.”

“Other members queried other applications that have been put forward for extensions but recommended to refuse. Officers reiterated that each application should be reviewed on its own merits. Adding that they acknowledged there would be some disruptions, however planning merits stack up.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the recommendation to grant permission subject to the listed conditions.

“Recommendations That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT permission for the development subject to those conditions set out in section 16 of the report.”

Minutes