Planning application · Barking And Dagenham
23/01253/FULL.
9 Standfield Gardens, Dagenham, Barking And Dagenham, RM10 8JS
Full / Other Planning at 9 Standfield Gardens, Dagenham, Barking And Dagenham, RM10 8JS, received 10 Aug 2023 — refused on 24 Oct 2023 (delegated, Anna Jennings).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBarking And Dagenham profile →
Refused
Outcome
24 Oct 2023
11 wks
Decision time
3 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
7
Documents
7 linked
—
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Barking And Dagenham planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Change of use from C3 Residential to C2 residential institutions
Reference
23/01253/FULL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
RM10 8JS
Ward
Council
Received
10 Aug 2023
Validated
6 Sep 2023
Target date
1 Nov 2023
Decision date
24 Oct 2023
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
23/01253/FULL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
RM10 8JS
Ward
Council
Received
10 Aug 2023
Validated
6 Sep 2023
Target date
1 Nov 2023
Decision date
24 Oct 2023
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Barking And Dagenham portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 24 Oct 2023, delegated decision by Anna Jennings — 11 weeks from submission (3 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
10 Aug 2023
Application received
6 Sep 2023
Application validated
1 Nov 2023
Statutory target date
24 Oct 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Anna Jennings
10 Aug 2023
Application received
6 Sep 2023
Application validated
1 Nov 2023
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
24 Oct 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Anna Jennings
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposal has provided very limited detail of the proposed development, including the
number of intended occupants, the care needs of the anticipated user(s) of the accommodation, or
the staffing arrangement. The applicant has failed to demonstrate an identified need for the care
facility proposed in the Borough and at this location, as required by the local plan. The proposal is
therefore contrary to the following development policies:
Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (DLUHC, September
2023);
Policies S2 and H12 of the London Plan (March 2021);
Policy CC2 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy (July 2010);
Policies BC2 and BC4 of the LDF Borough Wide Development Plan Policies DPD
(March 2011);
Policies DMH3 and SP3 of the Draft Local Plan (Regulation 19 Submission Version,
December 2021)
2
In the absence of information regarding the proposed number of occupants, their care needs, or
the proposed staffing arrangement, the proposed quality of accommodation cannot be assessed. It
has not been demonstrated that the site would sufficiently accommodate the needs of the
future occupants in need of care. The proposal is therefore at odds with the following policies
which seek to ensure that developments provide high quality living space for current and future
occupiers:
Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DLUHC,
September 2023);
Policies D4, D5, D6, D7 and S2 of the London Plan (March 2021);
Policy CP3 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy (July 2010);
Policies BP8 and BP6 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Borough Wide
Development Plan Document (DPD) (March 2011);
Policies SP3 and DMD1 of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham’s Draft
Local Plan 2037 (Regulation 19 Submission Version, December 2021).
3
The proposal fails to provide sufficient information to facilitate an adequate assessment of the
impact to neighbouring amenity. In particular, no information has been provided on the number of
occupants, their specific care needs, anticipated comings and goings of staff, residents or visitors,
or the specific type of accommodation proposed. As such, the proposal may prejudice third parties
who may otherwise have wished to comment on the application, the proposal cannot be accurately
assessed and it cannot be demonstrated that the proposal would be supported by the
development plan. As such, the proposal is at odds with the following policies, which seek to
ensure that development proposals protect residential amenity:
Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DLUHC,
September 2023);
Policy D6 of the London Plan (March 2021);
Policy BP8 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Borough Wide Development
Plan Document (DPD) (March 2011);
Policies SP3 and DMSI3 of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham’s Draft
Local Plan 2037 (Regulation 19 Submission Version, December 2021).
The above policies can be viewed on the Council's website: www.lbbd.gov.uk/planning.
1
The proposal has provided very limited detail of the proposed development, including the
number of intended occupants, the care needs of the anticipated user(s) of the accommodation, or
the staffing arrangement. The applicant has failed to demonstrate an identified need for the care
facility proposed in the Borough and at this location, as required by the local plan. The proposal is
therefore contrary to the following development policies:
Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (DLUHC, September
2023);
Policies S2 and H12 of the London Plan (March 2021);
Policy CC2 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy (July 2010);
Policies BC2 and BC4 of the LDF Borough Wide Development Plan Policies DPD
(March 2011);
Policies DMH3 and SP3 of the Draft Local Plan (Regulation 19 Submission Version,
December 2021)
2
In the absence of information regarding the proposed number of occupants, their care needs, or
the proposed staffing arrangement, the proposed quality of accommodation cannot be assessed. It
has not been demonstrated that the site would sufficiently accommodate the needs of the
future occupants in need of care. The proposal is therefore at odds with the following policies
which seek to ensure that developments provide high quality living space for current and future
occupiers:
Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DLUHC,
September 2023);
Policies D4, D5, D6, D7 and S2 of the London Plan (March 2021);
Policy CP3 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy (July 2010);
Policies BP8 and BP6 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Borough Wide
Development Plan Document (DPD) (March 2011);
Policies SP3 and DMD1 of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham’s Draft
Local Plan 2037 (Regulation 19 Submission Version, December 2021).
3
The proposal fails to provide sufficient information to facilitate an adequate assessment of the
impact to neighbouring amenity. In particular, no information has been provided on the number of
occupants, their specific care needs, anticipated comings and goings of staff, residents or visitors,
or the specific type of accommodation proposed. As such, the proposal may prejudice third parties
who may otherwise have wished to comment on the application, the proposal cannot be accurately
assessed and it cannot be demonstrated that the proposal would be supported by the
development plan. As such, the proposal is at odds with the following policies, which seek to
ensure that development proposals protect residential amenity:
Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DLUHC,
September 2023);
Policy D6 of the London Plan (March 2021);
Policy BP8 of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Borough Wide Development
Plan Document (DPD) (March 2011);
Policies SP3 and DMSI3 of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham’s Draft
Local Plan 2037 (Regulation 19 Submission Version, December 2021).
The above policies can be viewed on the Council's website: www.lbbd.gov.uk/planning.
Policies cited
National Planning Policy Framework 130S2H12CC2BC2BC4DMH3SP3NPPFD4D5D6D7CP3BP8BP6
Public response
Comment counts were not captured for this application.
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.