Share Article 4 consultation on FacebookShare Article 4 consultation on TwitterShare Article 4 consultation on LinkedinEmail Article 4 consultation link
Thank you to everyone who contributed to this consultation. Our consultation is now closed.
Barking and Dagenham Council has agreed to seek new powers to prevent additional storeys being built on existing buildings which result in poor quality and unsightly development in the borough.
The new powers, known as an Article 4 direction under the General Permitted Development Order, will also enable the Council to insist that developers make a contribution towards social infrastructure, such as schools or affordable housing.
The new powers will remove what are known as ‘permitted development rights’ in residential areas when applicants seek to add additional storeys to buildings.
It means applicants in these locations will have to use the standard planning application route, allowing planning staff and other stakeholders, including local residents, to consider the quality of any proposal in terms of design, infrastructure provision and affordable housing contributions.
The Council now has to consult the local community and post formal notices before the new rules can come into force within a year.
Let us have your views
Take a look at the map showing the areas where the article 4 direction will apply
This consultation is being carried out by Be First on behalf of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham.
Barking and Dagenham Council has agreed to seek new powers to prevent additional storeys being built on existing buildings which result in poor quality and unsightly development in the borough.
The new powers, known as an Article 4 direction under the General Permitted Development Order, will also enable the Council to insist that developers make a contribution towards social infrastructure, such as schools or affordable housing.
The new powers will remove what are known as ‘permitted development rights’ in residential areas when applicants seek to add additional storeys to buildings.
It means applicants in these locations will have to use the standard planning application route, allowing planning staff and other stakeholders, including local residents, to consider the quality of any proposal in terms of design, infrastructure provision and affordable housing contributions.
The Council now has to consult the local community and post formal notices before the new rules can come into force within a year.
Let us have your views
Take a look at the map showing the areas where the article 4 direction will apply
Once you had a chance to look through the information, please feel free to tell us what you think below.
Thank you to everyone who contributed to this consultation. Our consultation is now closed.
You need to be signed in to comment in this Guest Book. Click here to Sign In or Register to get involved
This article is essential and the Council should have the power to request applications to be submitted and looked at by the planning department. I think it should be applied to all part of the Borough too. Therefore I support to council in its action to prevent additional storeys being build without planning permiaaion.
yahmartha
over 3 years ago
Think this Article 4 direction is essential, would prefer to see it rolled out all across the borough to prevent poor quality extensions and so that the LA has oversight of the approach across a wider area, and can prioritise quality and demand the appropriate section 106 application which can be used to the overall benefit of everyone who lives or works in the area.
Emily
over 3 years ago
Great idea - design needs to be managed with any extensions particularly those which could affect the context or street scene of a local area. PD rights should not be automatic without consultation with design/ planning officers on such extensions as its possible that such extensions could be a severe detriment to the local area
colb
over 3 years ago
The insidious use of prior approval procedures over many years in order to side-step full planning consideration of proposals has seriously compromised the ability of LPAs to control many types of development. They also speak volumes of the Government's lack of commitment to producing quality developments that contribute to wider community aspirations such as affordable housing and funding associated social/physical infrastructure.
I wholeheartedly support the Article 4 Direction for the above reasons although would question why this measure has not been extended to other prior approval types such as office to residential conversions which have also avoided S106 contributions and often resulted in poor quality developments. The introduction of the new Class E in the Use Classes Order makes the desirability of exercising such controls even more expedient.
Dave
over 3 years ago
I along with many other residents believe that this Article 4 direction should be applied to all relevant parts of the borough to reduce the amount of storeys that applicants of any type are allowed to add to buildings especially those that are of good quality and have a certain amount of heritage value. In the borough of Barking and Dagenham we currently have enough unsightly developments which overshadow buildings of historic as well as social and cultural merit. A great deal more attention ought to be paid in to preserving our structures and their surrounding areas for various historical and environmental reasons. Fundamentally the quality of local developments matter more than the quantity of them for the overall benefit of those people who either live or work within them or in nearby areas for that matter as well.
This article is essential and the Council should have the power to request applications to be submitted and looked at by the planning department. I think it should be applied to all part of the Borough too. Therefore I support to council in its action to prevent additional storeys being build without planning permiaaion.
Think this Article 4 direction is essential, would prefer to see it rolled out all across the borough to prevent poor quality extensions and so that the LA has oversight of the approach across a wider area, and can prioritise quality and demand the appropriate section 106 application which can be used to the overall benefit of everyone who lives or works in the area.
Great idea - design needs to be managed with any extensions particularly those which could affect the context or street scene of a local area. PD rights should not be automatic without consultation with design/ planning officers on such extensions as its possible that such extensions could be a severe detriment to the local area
The insidious use of prior approval procedures over many years in order to side-step full planning consideration of proposals has seriously compromised the ability of LPAs to control many types of development. They also speak volumes of the Government's lack of commitment to producing quality developments that contribute to wider community aspirations such as affordable housing and funding associated social/physical infrastructure.
I wholeheartedly support the Article 4 Direction for the above reasons although would question why this measure has not been extended to other prior approval types such as office to residential conversions which have also avoided S106 contributions and often resulted in poor quality developments. The introduction of the new Class E in the Use Classes Order makes the desirability of exercising such controls even more expedient.
I along with many other residents believe that this Article 4 direction should be applied to all relevant parts of the borough to reduce the amount of storeys that applicants of any type are allowed to add to buildings especially those that are of good quality and have a certain amount of heritage value. In the borough of Barking and Dagenham we currently have enough unsightly developments which overshadow buildings of historic as well as social and cultural merit. A great deal more attention ought to be paid in to preserving our structures and their surrounding areas for various historical and environmental reasons. Fundamentally the quality of local developments matter more than the quantity of them for the overall benefit of those people who either live or work within them or in nearby areas for that matter as well.