Planning application · Barking And Dagenham
26/00408/FULL.
6 Simmons Drive, Dagenham, Barking And Dagenham, RM8 3LF
Full / Other Planning at 6 Simmons Drive, Dagenham, Barking And Dagenham, RM8 3LF, received 1 Apr 2026 — refused on 8 Jun 2026 (delegated, Bethany Robins).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBarking And Dagenham profile →
Refused
Outcome
8 Jun 2026
10 wks
Decision time
2 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 of the dwelling (Use Class C3) to a 4-bed HMO for up to 7 residents (Sui Generis)
Reference
26/00408/FULL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
RM8 3LF
Ward
Council
Received
1 Apr 2026
Validated
14 Apr 2026
Target date
9 Jun 2026
Decision date
8 Jun 2026
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
26/00408/FULL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
RM8 3LF
Ward
Council
Received
1 Apr 2026
Validated
14 Apr 2026
Target date
9 Jun 2026
Decision date
8 Jun 2026
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 8 Jun 2026, delegated decision by Bethany Robins — 10 weeks from submission (2 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
1 Apr 2026
Application received
14 Apr 2026
Application validated
9 Jun 2026
Statutory target date
8 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Bethany Robins
1 Apr 2026
Application received
14 Apr 2026
Application validated
9 Jun 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
8 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Bethany Robins
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
Principle of Development
The proposed development results in the loss of a decent sized 3-bedroom family-sized
dwellinghouse, the need for which is clearly demonstrated in the development plan and supporting
evidence base. While it would provide a dwelling in the form of an HMO, it fails to demonstrate that
there is an identified need for this type of housing which would weigh against the loss of a family
sized dwelling. Additionally, the development site is not located within an area of high access to
public transport and is therefore not considered an appropriate location for an HMO as policies
require these types of development to be in highly accessible locations. As such, the proposal is
considered to have a detrimental impact on the borough's supply of family housing and is contrary
to the following policies:
National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024);
Policies D6, D14 and T4 of the London Plan (March 2021); and
Policies SP3, SP8, DMD1, DMT1, DMH5 and DMSI3 of the Barking and Dagenham
Local Plan 2037 (September 2024)
2
Internal Space Standards
The proposed development would fail to provide sufficient internal space for both of the double
bedrooms and would not provide any built-in storage. Therefore, it is considered to provide a
substandard quality of accommodation detrimental to the standard of living of future residents.
Therefore, the proposal fails to comply with:
National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024);
Policy D6 and T4 of the London Plan (March 2021); and
Policy DMH5, DMT1, SP3 and SP8 of the Barking and Dagenham Local Plan 2037
(September 2024)
3
Car Parking
The proposed development fails to demonstrate that additional demand for parking from the
development could be adequately accommodated in the surrounding area. Especially as the
application site has a low PTAL score of 2 indicating poor access to public transport, and is within
the BOM Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) . The proposal is therefore likely to exacerbate existing
parking stress within the BOM CPZ thus add unacceptably to parking stress and congestion in the
vicinity of the application site. As such, it fails to comply with the following policies which seek to
ensure proposals show how car parking will be designed and managed and to take into
consideration on-street parking availability and existing and planned public transport provision:
National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024);
Policies T1, T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (March 2021); and
Policies DMT2, DMT1, DMT2 AND sp8 of the Barking and Dagenham Local Plan 2037
(September 2024)
The above policies can be viewed on the Council's website: www.lbbd.gov.uk/planning.
1
Principle of Development
The proposed development results in the loss of a decent sized 3-bedroom family-sized
dwellinghouse, the need for which is clearly demonstrated in the development plan and supporting
evidence base. While it would provide a dwelling in the form of an HMO, it fails to demonstrate that
there is an identified need for this type of housing which would weigh against the loss of a family
sized dwelling. Additionally, the development site is not located within an area of high access to
public transport and is therefore not considered an appropriate location for an HMO as policies
require these types of development to be in highly accessible locations. As such, the proposal is
considered to have a detrimental impact on the borough's supply of family housing and is contrary
to the following policies:
National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024);
Policies D6, D14 and T4 of the London Plan (March 2021); and
Policies SP3, SP8, DMD1, DMT1, DMH5 and DMSI3 of the Barking and Dagenham
Local Plan 2037 (September 2024)
2
Internal Space Standards
The proposed development would fail to provide sufficient internal space for both of the double
bedrooms and would not provide any built-in storage. Therefore, it is considered to provide a
substandard quality of accommodation detrimental to the standard of living of future residents.
Therefore, the proposal fails to comply with:
National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024);
Policy D6 and T4 of the London Plan (March 2021); and
Policy DMH5, DMT1, SP3 and SP8 of the Barking and Dagenham Local Plan 2037
(September 2024)
3
Car Parking
The proposed development fails to demonstrate that additional demand for parking from the
development could be adequately accommodated in the surrounding area. Especially as the
application site has a low PTAL score of 2 indicating poor access to public transport, and is within
the BOM Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) . The proposal is therefore likely to exacerbate existing
parking stress within the BOM CPZ thus add unacceptably to parking stress and congestion in the
vicinity of the application site. As such, it fails to comply with the following policies which seek to
ensure proposals show how car parking will be designed and managed and to take into
consideration on-street parking availability and existing and planned public transport provision:
National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024);
Policies T1, T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (March 2021); and
Policies DMT2, DMT1, DMT2 AND sp8 of the Barking and Dagenham Local Plan 2037
(September 2024)
The above policies can be viewed on the Council's website: www.lbbd.gov.uk/planning.
Policies cited
D6D14T4SP3SP8DMD1DMT1DMH5DMSI3NPPFT1T6T6.1
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.