33 - 35 Duke Street Chelmsford Essex CM1 1HY

1. 1.Reason 1 Policy DM26 of the Local Plan part A) requires all new dwellings (including flats) to…”i) Achieve suitable privacy and living environment for residential occupiers” …and… “must be in accordance with the standards as set out in Appendix B, unless it can be demonstrated that the particular site circumstances allow for a lower provision.” Table 9, Appendix B of the Local Plan sets out minimum proximity standards for development and includes a minimum back-to-back or back-to-front distance in the city centre for parallel 2/3 storey buildings with habitable facing rooms is 20m increasing to 27.5m for taller buildings. The proposed residential units could only achieve 10.4m remoteness to Station House to the north in conflict with the minimum standards set out in Appendix B of the Local Plan. The resulting outlook for the occupiers from the only habitable room window serving the primary living area would be oppressive, and occupiers would suffer a high level of overlooking resulting in a poor quality of living environment. Station House is a four-storey commercial building. The proposed developed would conflict with criterion (i) of Policy DM26 of the Local Plan and paragraph 135(f) of the National Planning Policy Framework which sets out that planning policies and decision should 'create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users'. Reason 2 The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 sets a duty for special attention to be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. WEB PBCS090 25/01654/FUL REFULZ Part A of Policy DM13 sets out that the impact of any development proposal on the significance of a designated heritage asset or its setting, and the level of any harm, will be considered against any public benefits arising from the proposed development. NPPF paragraph 212 states “When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. The development seeks to reference an earlier development, which itself is poorly related to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposed development would replicate and exacerbate the harm to the character and appearance of the West End Conservation Area due to its deep plan form, disingenuous roof form and uncharacteristically bland design, which would detract from the significance of the Conservation Area by further eroding the integrity of its historic character. The impact arising from the development would amount to less than substantial harm to the significance of the designated heritage asset. Paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework sets out that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use. The proposed development would not secure the optimum viable use of the of the existing site. Whilst the site could reasonably support residential use in principle given its central and sustainable location, the development cannot demonstrate overall that it represents an optimum use as it fails to satisfy a minimum level of amenity for its future residents. The positive weight that could be attached to the proposal is therefore insufficient to outweigh the harm arising to the significance of Conservation Area. This proposal is contrary to Policy DM13 of the Chelmsford Local Plan and paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework as the proposals repre

From the council's decision notice.

Postcode

CM1 1HY

Application type

Full

Scale / size

Small

Validated

11 December 2025

Consultation expiry

13 February 2026

Consultation end

13 February 2026

Target decision date

5 February 2026

Statutory period

56 days

Planning Portal ID

PP-14512426

Documents

12