Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 June 2018 were confirmed as correct.

The Principal Development Management Officer (PDMO) introduced a report concerning the proposed development of the Former Sanofi Aventis site, Rainham Road South, Dagenham, involving the proposal for the erection of two data centre buildings (Use Class B8), with ancillary plant, offices, gatehouse, electrical sub-stations, fuel storage, car parking, site fencing, landscaping and other associated works. 

The application site comprised approximately 7.54 hectares of land that formed the far southern and eastern parts of the former Sanofi Aventis manufacturing plant (formerly known as May & Baker) located on the eastern side of Rainham Road South, Dagenham.  The application site also included land within the May & Baker Sports Club car park which was sited to the north of Fox Lane, a footpath that runs between the wider Sanofi Aventis site and the May & Baker Sports Club car park. 

The datacentre buildings were identified as buildings 1 and 2 and measure 19,714m² and 33,552m² in gross external floor area respectively.  The gatehouse building would measure 255m². 

The development would provide 149 car parking spaces of which 90 spaces would be located off-site in the May & Baker Car Park.  The remaining 59 spaces would be provided on-site within the compound of the datacentre buildings.  16 accessible car parking spaces would be provided equating to 10% of the total provision.  76 spaces would be provided with electric vehicle charging points equating to 51% of the total provision.  120 long-stay cycle parking spaces would be provided in accordance with the London Plan.  All vehicular access to the site would be from Rainham Road South via Yewtree Avenue, the spine road that ran through the wider Sanofi Site. 

The development would be phased with the construction of building 1, the delivery of the 90 spaces in the northern car park, the construction of the electricity substation and other associated works undertaken as part of phase 1.  Phase 2 of the development would comprise the construction of building 2 and associated works. 

The principle of the development was considered to be acceptable and in accordance with Policy 2.7 of the London Plan and Paragraph 18 of the National Planning Policy Framework which sought to support economic growth through the planning system.  The employment opportunities offered by this development would be approximately 110 permanent jobs.  The applicant would also be seeking to collaborate with local educational establishments such as Barking and Dagenham College and Coventry University London to develop and promote new courses which would enable local people to be provided with the necessary skills to be able to obtain future employment in the proposed development.

The provision of digital technology provided by the datacentre buildings fitted in well with the existing and planned uses for the wider former Sanofi site. This included the existing East London University Technical College, the Londoneast UK Business and Technical Park and the proposals for film studios. Combined these have the potential to transform the local economy providing new jobs in growth sectors in line with the Borough Manifesto.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

The Chief Planner introduced a report concerning the proposed development of the land to rear of Barking Enterprise Centre, Linton Road, Barking, involving the proposal for the erection of a 5-storey building to provide ground floor community space and artists workspace and 12 dwellings above dedicated for artists.

The application sought planning permission for the erection of a 5-storey building to provide ground floor community space and artists’ workspace and 12 dwellings above dedicated for artists’ live/work spaces. It is anticipated that the community space would host a range of public events including arts workshops, film screenings and community meetings.

The project was backed by the Mayor of London and would provide long-term affordable housing provision for artists, while facilitating sustainable public access to artistic activity in the local community. The design had been prepared following an invited competition, on behalf of London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, supported by the Greater London Authority and arts charity Create London.

The application site was a currently cleared and fenced off site to the rear of the Barking Enterprise Centre (BEC) and Anne Mews, where the William Street Quarter begins. The proposed development would fill approximately half of the site with a building of a regular, nearly rectangular footprint. The remainder of the site comprising a courtyard to the rear of the BEC and side of the Hapag Lloyd building will be re-landscaped and shared with the BEC. The proposed five storey building would sit between the heights of the William Street development and the BEC.

The design of the building, its workspace, community space and accommodation had been informed through an intensive public engagement programme, as reported in the Design and Access Statement. The engagement included local residents, artists and leaders in the cultural and creative industries whose collective advice had culminated in the submitted scheme.

The building was currently proposed to be constructed of an in situ concrete façade with a relief pattern and the concrete will be sealed with a ‘fluorinated acrylic’ in order to manage any weathering. However, alternative finishes were being explored to find the most effective finish for the building whilst remaining within budget. As such this aspect was conditioned.

The building was described by CABE as having a ‘monumentality’ to its design. A potentially austere frontage to Linton Road had its tone lifted at ground floor level by the use of a glazed frontage set behind a wall perforated with concrete geometric shapes beneath a substantial overhanging canopy. At the sides facing onto Anne Mews and into the courtyard the canopies were smaller. The canopies have dual functions of shielding ground floor activities from unwanted solar gain and signifying the presence of the building in the streetscene.

Landscaping to the courtyard between the proposed building and the BEC had been provided in a sketch form. However, as these details have yet to be finalised between the two parties, the detailed design and provision of car and cycle parking, refuse, boundary treatments and open space  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

The Chief Planner introduced a report concerning the proposed development of former site of garages, Wivenhoe Road, Barking. This application sought planning permission for the erection of 7 two storey houses (5 x 2 bedroom and 2 x 3 bedroom units) with associated landscaping, parking, refuse and cycle storage.

The application site was formerly a garage block which has been demolished and the site lain vacant for some years. The hard-surfaced area was hoarded off.  The site also included a small part of the greensward areas to either side. The layout and external design of the development would be consistent with the character of the local area. The dwellings would be arranged in a short terrace of three, two-bed dwellings in the middle section addressing the houses opposite and a pair of semi-detached dwellings at either end, each comprising a two bed and three bed dwelling. The three bed dwellings would face down Wivenhoe Road, creating a ‘bookend’ to the development. The proportions of dwellings and detailed sizes of windows and doors responded to the character of the surrounding houses. The dwellings would be of traditional brick wall and pitched, tiled roof construction with solar roof panels and window surrounds defined in varying colours.

Internal design would be consistent with Policy 3.5 (quality and design) of the London Plan (March 2016) and each dwelling would meet and exceed the applicable minimum gross internal area standards for their type in the Mayor of London’s Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (March 2016).

The proposed outdoor amenity space for each dwelling would meet the minimum standard under Policy BP5 of the Borough Wide Development Policies DPD.

The Arboricultural Officer was satisfied with the proposed landscaping subject to conditions including a tree protection scheme during construction and a replacement planting regime. Two trees in the west of the site were proposed to be removed and this was acceptable as they are in poor health. Conditions would be imposed to protect the adjoining Mayesbrook designated Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, the important habitat and wildlife corridor, during construction so that its ecological contribution to the Borough’s overall network is maintained.

The site had a low public transport accessibility level (PTAL) rating of 1b which meant that new residents would be more dependent on private motor vehicles and bicycles for transport. As a result the development provided for one car parking space and two cycle spaces for each dwelling. The Highway Officer was satisfied with the proposal and this aspect is considered to be acceptable. The concerns of the one objector were responded to in the report.

The development would incorporate sustainable design in accordance with the Policy 5.2 (minimising carbon dioxide emissions) and Policy 5.15 (water use) of the London Plan.

Members were concerned about the tenure agreements and were pleased that there would be an increase in the availability of two – three bedroomed properties however they noted there were 1800 people on the Council’s waiting lists for temporary accommodation and they felt that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

The Principal Development Management Officer introduced a report concerning the proposed development of 1 Saville Road, Chadwell Heath and proposed demolition of bungalow and erection of part two/part three storey building to provide 4 one bedroom and 2 two-bedroom flats.

The existing site comprised a detached, two-bedroom chalet bungalow. The proposal was to demolish the existing building and construct a two/three storey block of 6 flats.

A new vehicular access was proposed at the centre of the street frontage leading to an undercroft ‘coach-house’ type driveway providing access to 5 car parking spaces within the rear garden area.

The contemporary design, and height of the building at three storeys, whilst different to that of the surrounding dwellings, was considered appropriate at this juncture of the street being adjacent to a vehicle sales garage to the north and close to High Road.

The proposed internal layout and external space would provide a good standard of residential amenity for future residents in accordance with the policy standards of the London Plan. The site layout was considered to provide an acceptable relationship with existing neighbouring dwellings that would not cause harm to residential amenity.

The proposed level of parking provision was considered acceptable and in accordance with adopted parking standard of the London Plan.

The proposed vehicular access would result in the loss of an existing street tree positioned on the pavement in front of the bungalow that would need to be removed to facilitate the development. In order to mitigate for this loss the applicant has agreed to a Section 106 contribution that would fund the planting and initial maintenance of three replacement trees to be planted within the vicinity of the site.

Mr Kupa, an objector to the application, was invited by the Chair to address the Committee. He was concerned about parking issues, construction traffic causing nuisance and congestion and loss of privacy and light to neighbouring properties if this application were granted.

Mr Singh, the applicant, was invited by the Chair, to address the Committee. He drew Members attention to the report, which recommended that planning permission be granted for the application, which he said was compliant with Planning policies at local and national level. This application would provide good quality accommodation of five units and he recognised that there had been some objections to the application, however there was no loss of amenity and off-street parking was available. In addition, agreement had been reached with the Aboricultural Officer to remove one tree and replace it with three trees at a cost of £6500.

Members were concerned about the impact of the proposed development in a very busy road which had commercial premises and parking problems. The Principal Development Management Officer responded that the eaves height of the proposed building was similar to that of the neighbouring dwelling, and that the design of the proposed development was considered appropriate given its context and the variety of building typologies already existing in Savile Road.  In relation to vehicular access the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

The Development Management Officer introduced a report concerning the proposed development of 4 Farr Avenue, Barking. The application property was a ground floor commercial property located within the pedestrianised Farr Avenue neighbourhood shopping centre. The application proposed the use of the shop as an interpretation and translation service and for training purposes and is currently already operating.

The proposal would increase the amount of non-retail uses within the Farr Avenue Neighbourhood Centre (NC9) to 38% which is slightly above the 35% maximum set in the Local Plan. The Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS) has been established in the borough since 1994 and was recently relocated from the Gascoigne Estate to Farr Avenue.

The TIS has a charitable status and is the only one of its kind offering this service as a not-for-profit organisation within the UK. It employs approximately 100 interpreters with 60-70 used per month to provide translation services to the community. The interpreters visit places such as schools and hospitals both in the borough and in surrounding boroughs to provide help to those with language needs. They are also currently providing English as a Second Language (ESL) courses which will be run at the application site and further aid the language needs of residents and the community.

There was evidence showing that the unit has been in use for a period of at least 11 years prior to the current occupiers as offices for a charity (The Handicapped Children’s Action Group) although no permission was sought for the use. The unit has not therefore been in retail use for a very long period of time. It is understood that the current use by TIS, in particular its training activities, would be likely to encourage more footfall to the area than the previous use.

It was considered that the use provides a valuable community service and that the breach of policy was relatively minor. It is not considered that the proposal would have any significant adverse effect on the vitality and viability of the shopping area. Moreover, it is was also likely that the previous office use of the premises would have now been lawful due to the time that it was in operation.

The Committee granted planning permission subject to the following condition:

1. The premises shall be used as a translation and interpretation service and for associated training and education purposes and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class D1 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order). The premises shall revert to Class A1 (retail) use upon the cessation of use by the Translation and Interpretation Service.

  Reason: To protect the locality by avoiding the introduction of a use   detrimental to its amenities and in accordance with policy BP8 of the   Borough Wide Development Policies DPD.

The Development Management Officer introduced a report concerning the proposed development of 102 North Street, Barking. The application site was a 2-storey detached building located on the eastern side of North Street, Barking. The application sought permission for the installation of 1 internally illuminated fascia sign and 2 non -illuminated signs.

The proposed advertisements would be used in conjunction with the approved use of the building as a tuition centre (Ref. 17/00176/FUL) and it was considered that they would not adversely impact upon the appearance of the local area or upon local residents due to the positioning and size of the advertisements and will not pose a safety hazard to pedestrians or traffic.

The Committee granted advertisement consent subject to the following conditions:

1)  The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Front elevation photograph; Side elevation photograph

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2)  The maximum luminance of the fascia sign shall not exceed the levels recommended in The Institute of Lighting Professionals technical guidance note PLG05 "The brightness of illuminated advertisements" 2015 or in any document amending or superseding that report.

Reason:  In the interests of the visual amenity of the area, and to ensure that the advertisement does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or conditions of general safety along the adjoining highway and in accordance with policies BP7 and BP11 of the Borough Wide Development Policies Development Plan Document.

The Committee noted details of the following appeals:

Appeals Lodged

The following appeals have been lodged:

a)  Application for a certificate of lawfulness for a proposed development: Erection of part single/part two storey rear extension and loft conversion involving construction of rear dormer window – 34 Bull Lane, Dagenham (Reference: 17/02011/CLU_P – Heath Ward)

Application refused under delegated powers 22 February 2018

b)  Application for a certificate of lawfulness for a proposed development: Loft conversion involving construction of gable end roof, rear dormer window and front rooflights – 45 Bevan Avenue, Barking (Reference: 17/01984/CLU_P – Eastbury Ward)

Application refused under delegated powers 5 March 2018

c)  Erection of 2 bed end terrace house – 105 Church Elm Lane, Dagenham (Reference: 18/00317/FUL – Village Ward)

Application refused under delegated powers 20 April 2018

Appeals Determined

The following appeals have been determined by the Planning Inspectorate:

a)  Erection of two bedroom house (chalet) in garden – 44 Rugby Gardens, Dagenham (Reference: 17/01275/FUL - Mayesbrook Ward)

Application refused under delegated powers 15 November 2017 for the following reasons:

1.  The proposed chalet house would be out of scale and character with the surrounding development, with a cramped and awkward siting, that would be harmful to the character and appearance of the rear garden environment and street scene, and would create a narrow and oppressive approach to the front doors of the adjacent maisonettes and could create a precedent for future similar developments, contrary to policy CP3 of the Core Strategy, and policies BP8 and BP11 of the Borough Wide Development Policies DPD.

2.  The area of the proposed rear garden to serve the proposed dwelling is inadequate to provide a good standard of accommodation in accordance with the requirements of policy BP6 of the Borough Wide Development Policies Development Plan Document.

Planning Inspectorate’s Decision: Appeal dismissed 11 June 2018

b)  Erection of two storey side extension and single storey rear extension in connection with the conversion of dwelling into 2 x two bedroom flats – 264 Rugby Road, Dagenham (Reference: 17/01698/FUL – Mayesbrook Ward)

Application refused under delegated powers 22 December 2017 for the following reasons:

1.  The proposed development does not comply with policy 3.5 of the London Plan (March 2016) and the Technical Housing Standards - nationally described space standards in that the gross floorspace for the proposed new dwellings is inadequate and provides insufficient space for daily living detrimental to the living standards and amenities enjoyed by future occupiers.

2.  The proposed development fails to provide adequate functional and useable external amenity space for the proposed first floor flat to the detriment of the amenity of future occupiers contrary to Policy BP5 of the Borough Wide Development Policies DPD (March 2011).

Planning Inspectorate’s Decision: Appeal dismissed 20 June 2018

c)  Erection of part single/part two storey side and rear extension – 36 Stratton Drive, Barking (Reference: 17/01414/FUL – Longbridge Ward)

Application refused under delegated powers 17 January 2018 for the following reason:

1.  The proposed side extension would partially close  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

The Committee noted details of delegated decisions for the period 5 February- 2 March 2018.