Appeal 6006374

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the subdivision of commercial units to form four self-contained commercial units within ground floor rear outbuildings to the rear of 20, 22, 28 & [address], Dagenham [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, reference 25/01428/FULL, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: JW1243 100 PL03, JW1243 101 PL04, JW1243 102 PL01 and JW1243 103 PL.

The use hereby permitted relates to Use Class E of the Town and Country Planning ([name]) Order 1987 (as amended).

The use shall not commence until the bike store and bin store have been installed in accordance with the approved plans and they shall be retained at all times thereafter.

The uses hereby permitted, including deliveries, collections and servicing, shall only take place between the hours of 7am and 9pm.

Prior to the installation of any noise generating mechanical service plant, external lighting or CCTV, full details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Any installation shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

The external areas to the buildings, outside the areas of the bike and bin stores and the bin collection point, shall be used for access, parking and servicing only and shall not be used for storage or other ancillary uses. Appeal Decision: 6006374

The main issues are whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area; the effect on the vitality and viability of the neighbourhood centre; and the effect on highway safety.

The above description was agreed by the parties. The proposal relates to four buildings to the rear of the [address] shopping parade. The council suggest that their lawful use is as ancillary accommodation to the commercial units that front onto [address] which have a lawful Class E use. The appellant states that whilst previously used for commercial purposes, the previous users were not all in connection with the [address] units. The sales information and leases provided support this. However, the lack of a planning tie of these units to the original host properties does not indicate that any separate use of them was lawful or would be lawful if resumed.

There is a specific procedure that would establish whether the separate independent uses of these buildings, including any intensification of use, would be lawful. It is not within the scope of this procedure to make such a determination. As there is no formal determination that demonstrates that a separate use of each building would be lawful; and as there is an application before me, I have assessed the proposal on the basis of the agreed description.

The units have recently been used for residential purposes but were the subject of enforcement notices that required the uses to cease. An appeal (Lead case reference APP/Z5060/C/23/3315882) relating to the four enforcement notices was dismissed in 2024. The notices require the cessation of the use of the outbuildings as self-contained units of accommodation; removal of all alterations and fixtures enabling the creation and use of the self-contained units; and the removal of all consequent waste material from the premises. The notice does not require any external alterations.

This proposal identifies that internal partitions within each unit would be removed. The plans illustrate formalised bin storage within an enclosure and provision for bicycle storage. Otherwise, there would be little physical change.

The shopping parade and its rear service area, including the appeal buildings, lie within the Dagenham Village Conservation Area. This is a small area that forms the historic core of the original village. It is focussed on the mediaeval Church of [name] and [name], the 15th century [name] and the 17th century [name]. The parade of shops along the north side of [address]; and the former bank building opposite, are included within the conservation area and are part of an important vista towards the church. The significance of the conservation area as a heritage asset lies principally in the evidential value of the surviving historic buildings, what is left of the original street pattern and the other retained older buildings.

There is a statutory duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area. A similar duty requires special regard be had to the desirability of preserving listed buildings or Appeal Decision: 6006374 their setting which in this case relates to the grade II* listed church; and the grade II listed vicarage and public house. The Old National School and [address] are locally listed.

The parade was evidently designed for commercial use with residential accommodation above. Given its central location in relation to the church, school and pub, it would have been an important focus for commercial activity and interaction, at the heart of the village. Consequently, the commercial land use of the parade contributes positively to the historic interest and significance of the conservation area. The buildings to the rear have a minor negative impact given their form and detailing. They are however evident in views into the conservation area from [address], and the open space and properties to the north.

It was previously found that introducing a residential character to the rear of the main parade, within these units, would be at odds with the character of the conservation area’s historic street pattern and function; and with that of the surrounding area. This proposal would not alter the physical form or change the appearance of these buildings. The access and yard area would remain as currently exists. A new frontage would not be created as these buildings are not of a design that would facilitate this. The rear of the parade would continue to operate as a service area, albeit with low-key small-scale business activity within the units. Outside storage can be restricted by condition and the open areas limited to use for parking, turning and servicing.

In these circumstances, as the proposal would not alter the appearance of the area, it would have a neutral impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area. Subject to a condition relating to the outside area and the provision of the bins store, it may have benefits with regard to its appearance, upkeep and maintenance. It would therefore preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and maintain its appearance. It would make no material change to the setting of either the nearby listed buildings or those that are locally listed.

As there would be no harm to the conservation area or the setting of heritage assets there would be no conflict with Policy HC1 of the London Plan 2021 (LP). The lack of any material changes would also avoid conflict with policy DMD 1(j) of the Barking and Dagenham Local Plan 2020-2037 (2024) (BDLP).

Although reversion to ancillary commercial uses associated with the frontage units is considered to be the lawful use by the council, there is nothing to suggest that providing this additional floor space and the associated building maintenance requirements, would be welcomed by the existing users or that it would represent a practical or viable use. There is also nothing to suggest that the commercial use now proposed, albeit separate from the frontage users, would not be the optimum viable use. The proposal would not therefore conflict with BDLP Policy DMD 4 with regard to heritage assets.

The council is concerned that the proposal would result in a loss of floorspace to the existing commercial units; and could reduce demand for them, which would harm the vitality and viability of the neighbourhood centre. Only some of the units within the parade are now in retail use, there is a nursery use which extends to the rear, office uses and some of the units were shuttered during my visit. It is evident that the floor space within these rear buildings has not been available to the Appeal Decision: 6006374 commercial users of the parade for some time; and it is not clear that any of the current users previously utilised them. There is nothing to suggest that the existing frontage unit users would benefit from the use of the rear buildings or that they would be more attractive to future occupiers with the additional space available. As the appellant suggests, the space could be made available to those users if required.

The council is concerned that there is no evidence that there is a need in this neighbourhood centre for additional commercial units and that the additional units may harm the attractiveness of the frontage units. Whilst it does appear that the parade may be struggling to attract occupiers and the proposed units may compete with them, the rear units would offer a different environment, without a shop window and with a very limited public presence. Business uses relying on a public presence would be unlikely to be attracted to such a location. Given the nature of these units, footfall to and from them by the public, is likely to be limited. Use Class E allows for a wide range of uses and any increase in commercial activity in this area would be likely to help to maintain the overall vitality of the area and the parade. There is nothing to suggest that the separate use of these buildings would detract from the existing commercial uses or would result in harm to the vitality and viability of the neighbourhood centre.

Overall, I am not persuaded that there would be a significant change to the operation of the parade other than an increase in workers and perhaps some clients/customers entering and leaving the rear yard area. This would be entirely commensurate with the designation of this area as a neighbourhood centre. Given that the proposal seeks to increase activity in this designated centre and would be unlikely to attract users that require a frontage, it would not conflict with BDLP Policy DME 3 or the strategic objectives of the LP with regard to town centre policies SD6 and SD7.

Concern has been raised with regard to the impact on the highway network and parking provision. The area has a historic use as a service yard to the existing commercial units. The proposal would not materially change this although there may be an increase in activity given the increase in units. However, there is nothing to suggest that this, together with the refuse provisions, would not be appropriately managed within this private area or that the proposal would result in any greater impact on highway safety. This is supported by the lack of objection from the Transport Planning Officer.

The site offers limited parking but as with the commercial units to the frontage, users would rely on other modes of travel or would utilise on-street parking in the vicinity. This is appropriate to a neighbourhood centre. Any servicing requirements are likely to be limited and generally accommodated within the site. Refuse provisions would need to be resolved with commercial operators but there is no reason that this cannot be appropriately managed. There is nothing to suggest that the proposal would result in unacceptable harm. It would not therefore conflict with the safety, parking or servicing requirements of [name] T6 and T7; and [name] 2 and DMT 4. Conclusions and conditions Appeal Decision: 6006374

The proposal would not materially change the character or appearance of this rear area. Whilst its function would alter to independent uses, this would be a marginal change. There is no reason to suggest that the vitality and viability of existing uses would be harmed; and the increased activity may bring some benefits in that respect. It would result in a more efficient use of this area and would be likely to result in the improved management and maintenance of it. It would encourage economic activity which would be of a scale and nature commensurate with the neighbourhood centre. I am mindful of the encouragement for economic activity within the National Planning Policy Framework.

The proposal would not result in harm to the character or appearance of the conservation area or the setting of local heritage assets. There is also nothing to suggest that there would be a significant impact on highway safety or parking provisions locally.

[name] have had regard to the concerns raised by the council, I have found no matters that are sufficient to justify resisting the proposal. I therefore allow the appeal.

I have imposed conditions relating to the commencement of development and the details of the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. I have imposed a condition setting out that the use permitted relates to Use Class E to define the permission. I have also required that the bin store and bike store be installed before the use commences to ensure that the site has a satisfactory appearance and provision is made for alternative modes of travel. I have required that the external area be kept clear and would not be used for any purposes other than access, parking and servicing to ensure that the site would have a satisfactory appearance, external activity would not disturb neighbouring users and parking and servicing could take place.

The proposal may result in increased noise and disturbance as a result of the commercial intensification and the additional comings and goings. In order to protect the first floor residents, the Environmental Protection Officer has suggested a condition limiting the hours of operation to between 7am and 11pm and delivery and collections to between 7am and 9pm. Given the close proximity of residential uses, such a condition is necessary, but I consider that 11pm would be too late with regard to activity close to the rear of the residential flats. I have therefore limited the use to 9pm. A condition has also been suggested regarding the requirements of any noise generating mechanical service plant. As no such plant is sought, I have required that details of any such provisions to be submitted to and agreed before installation.

The Metropolitan Police have suggested that a condition be imposed with regard to security standards with reference to a range of matters including alarms, doors and windows, drainpipes, CCTV and external lighting. Physical external changes are not proposed to the building and as this is already a commercial area, security considerations would be better addressed by the management and users of the premises, based on the police advice. However, to accommodate such provisions, I have required that details of any CCTV and external lighting be agreed in the interests of security and to protect the appearance of the area and the amenity of the neighbouring residents. Appeal Decision: 6006374

With regard to biodiversity net gain, as there are no changes to the site other than the proposed bike stores and bin compound, which would be located on already hard surfaced areas, there is no requirement for a condition in this regard.

I have considered the imposition of a condition preventing a change of use from Use Class E to residential. However, as it has already been found that such a use would be detrimental to the conservation area; and the conditions of Class MA of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) require prior approval with regard to the impact on the character or sustainability of the conservation area, such a condition would be unnecessary.