Planning application · Newham
26/00652/FUL.
343A Barking Road East Ham London E6 1LA
Full / Other Planning at 343A Barking Road East Ham London E6 1LA — refused on 28 May 2026 (delegated, James Jago).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationNewham profile →
Refused
Outcome
28 May 2026
—
Decision time
submission → decision
—
Conditions
not captured
15
Documents
15 linked
0
Objections
1 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Newham 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?
Demolition of existing first floor extension and kitchen exhaust flue and erection of first floor rear extension, rear double dormer, front roof light and kitchen exhaust flue.
Reference
26/00652/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
E6 1LA
Ward
Council
Received
—
Validated
2 Apr 2026
Target date
6 May 2026
Decision date
28 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Council register
Reference
26/00652/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
E6 1LA
Ward
Council
Received
—
Validated
2 Apr 2026
Target date
6 May 2026
Decision date
28 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Newham portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 28 May 2026, delegated decision by James Jago.
Timeline
Date
Event
2 Apr 2026
Application validated
6 May 2026
Statutory target date
28 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · James Jago
2 Apr 2026
Application validated
6 May 2026
Statutory target date
28 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · James Jago
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development would result in poor quality residential accommodation due to the
proximity of the hot food takeaway kitchen exhaust flue to the dormer windows, which would be
likely to give rise to increased exposure to odour, air pollutants, noise and disturbance. The
proposed flue would also reduce the outlook from the dormer windows and neighbouring
properties. These impacts would be detrimental to the health, wellbeing and living conditions of
future occupiers of the dwelling and would limit the ability for the dwelling to achieve adequate
natural ventilation. The proposal is therefore contrary to:
• National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024)
• Policy D3 and SI1 of the London Plan (2021);
• Policies SP2, SP3, SP8 and SC5 of the Newham Local Plan (December 2018).
2
The proposed realigned and extended flue, by reason of its height, design and visual prominence,
would be discordant and visually intrusive and would harm the character and appearance of the
surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to:
• National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024)
• Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021);
• Policies SP1 and SP3 of the Newham Local Plan (December 2018).
1
The proposed development would result in poor quality residential accommodation due to the
proximity of the hot food takeaway kitchen exhaust flue to the dormer windows, which would be
likely to give rise to increased exposure to odour, air pollutants, noise and disturbance. The
proposed flue would also reduce the outlook from the dormer windows and neighbouring
properties. These impacts would be detrimental to the health, wellbeing and living conditions of
future occupiers of the dwelling and would limit the ability for the dwelling to achieve adequate
natural ventilation. The proposal is therefore contrary to:
• National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024)
• Policy D3 and SI1 of the London Plan (2021);
• Policies SP2, SP3, SP8 and SC5 of the Newham Local Plan (December 2018).
2
The proposed realigned and extended flue, by reason of its height, design and visual prominence,
would be discordant and visually intrusive and would harm the character and appearance of the
surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to:
• National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024)
• Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021);
• Policies SP1 and SP3 of the Newham Local Plan (December 2018).
Policies cited
D3SI1SP2SP3SP8SC5NPPFSP1
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
1
Total comments
1
Objections
0
In support
1
Total comments
1
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.