PLANNING councillors were barracked by disgruntled residents - slammed as 'disgraceful' and told 'you should be ashamed of yourselves' after approving the demolition and rebuild of a home in Grays. 

The application sought permission for a replacement three-storey five-bedroom dwelling with a single storey basement and a detached car port following the demolition of the existing two-storey, four-bedroom detached dwelling and a detached garage called Namashkar on Meesons Lane.

A low-level garden wall is also proposed to be erected around the property boundary to the front of the dwelling. 

The new building will be home to a professional scale gym and wrestling ring. Details can be read here.

Residents in the area, backed by ward councillor Val Morris-Cook, opposed the scheme – and there were 29 written objections on the council's planning portal.

Among them was this comment from Meesons Lane resident Mrs Raheela Rasool who said: "We are particularly worried about the fact that road is very narrow with larger vehicles struggling to pass cars let alone HGVs.

"Currently restricted access prevents HGV entry to the private road section.

"There is no off road parking or suitable loading/unloading space for HGVs and frequent HGV movements will cause damage to the block paved roads, footpaths and traffic calming measures. Further there is no area that provides room for HGVs to perform a reverse manoeuvre.

"Any restriction in terms of access to the road will cause risk in terms of emergency service access to residents and in particular the care homes in the area.

"It may also cause delays in residents going to work, attending appointments etc."

Clle Val Morris-Cook (left) and Dr Ann Richards,

Next door neighbour Dr Ann Richards also spoke against the proposal, saying: "The scale of this project is unprecedented. Namashkar is a very large, 30-year-old four bedroomed house in good repair. Only four families have ever lived in this home. It is a mirror home to our own and its design and layout are carefully aligned to the street scheme of 14 homes.

"We object to the destruction of this very modifiable, well-built and aesthetically pleasing house for the purpose of excavating the basement. Demolition is neither environmentally friendly, nor committing to sustainable goals.

"We object to the replacement building being taller and more expensive, disrupting the existing street scene, creating shadow and overlooking neighbourhood homes."

She described it as a radical proposal and contrasted it with other homes that had used 'dormers and extensions' then enlargement was required.

Dr Richards also took exception to plans to provide a professional gym and wrestling ring by excavating a large basement.

She said: "This is extremely close to our own home and we are extremely concerned about damage to our mature trees and roots and possible structural instability to our own property through subsidence or settlement.

"We are also concerned by the potential disturbance caused by sustained use of a professional wrestling ring and gym and what noise or vibration might be caused by this use, as this is untested.

"We cannot just assume this is equivalent to a home gym or that it will remain in private use, rather than commercial use over time."

Dr Richards told the meeting she and many neighbours were concerned about the scale and nature of demolition and the construction phase of the project.

Cllr Morris-Cook said the planning objections go across a few headings including loss of local character and over development. She stressed how much the new building would be out of symmetry and design of adjacent homes that were all built to the same plan. to 'maintain space and views'.

She said the new building would be 'glaringly out of place'.

Additionally Cllr Morris-Cook raised concerns about highways safety and access on a single track road, which is what Meesons Lane is.

And Cllr Morris-Cook said no environmental survey had been presented, stating that the area was used by wildlife including badgers.

Despite all the objections, their views were rejected, with six councillors supporting the scheme - which was recommended for approval by planning officers – who had a completely opposite view to residents and Cllr Morris-Cook, stating in their report "that the principle of the residential development was already established and thus considered acceptable."

Officers said: "The proposals would be considered acceptable in terms of design, character and appearance and there would be no unacceptable impact upon neighbour amenity, highways safety or ecology as a result of the proposed development, subject to relevant conditions."

Only one councillor, Cllr Russell Cherry, voted for refusal. 

As they left the meeting, residents who had attended registered their disappointment with some caustic comments to councillors. 

The presentations by objectors, debate and decision can be viewed via this link to the council's video library.