FRESH WHARF ESTATE Fresh Wharf Road, Barking, Barking And Dagenham Data via plota.co.uk

Approved 25/01170/NONMAT - Non-Material Amendment following Grant of Planning Permission
Admin / procedural
Council
Barking and Dagenham 6.4/10
Date received
week of 11 Aug 2025
Decision date
week of 6 Oct 2025
Type
Non-Material Amendment following Grant of Planning Permission

Description

Non material amendment to planning permission dated 05/02/2020 comprising of amendments to blocks D, E and F to meet fire safety and minimum accessibility requirements Data via plota.co.uk

Get alerts nearby Council site ↗

Last checked

Associated applications 4

Site constraints 10

Article 4 direction
HMO Article 4. Named permitted development rights are withdrawn here.
An Article 4 direction withdraws particular permitted development rights, so work that would normally need no application needs one here. Not every council has published its directions.
In flood zones plus climate change
Inside the extent flood zones 2 and 3 could reach with climate change: the Central allowance for the 2080s on rivers, the Upper End allowance for sea level rise to 2125. From the sea. Defences are not counted.
The Environment Agency flood map for planning. Councils use it to decide when a flood risk assessment and the sequential test are needed. It is indicative and does not show whether a particular property will flood.
Flood map ↗
Agricultural land, grade 3a
Best and most versatile land (grades 1, 2 and 3a). Source: the Predictive Agricultural Land Classification Map (Defra and Natural England, 2025; the Welsh Government's Predictive ALC Map 2 in Wales), a model rather than a site survey. A site survey can differ.
Where development of farmland is needed, policy prefers poorer land over the best and most versatile (grades 1, 2 and 3a). Three sources: Natural England's post-1988 field surveys, which are definitive where they exist; the Defra predictive map for England (2025) and the Welsh Government predictive map, modelled from the soil map with 3a and 3b split; and the 1970s provisional map, which planners and other services still show, coarser and with grade 3 undivided. Where the provisional and predicted grades disagree, treat the predicted grade as the current estimate and expect an application to carry its own survey.
Archaeological priority area
An assessment or field evaluation may be asked for before ground works.
The council or Historic England considers archaeology likely here. A desk-based assessment, and sometimes trial trenching, can be asked for with the application.
Air quality management area: Barking and Dagenham AQMA
The council has declared the area as failing an air quality objective.
Schemes that add traffic, parking or combustion plant are assessed against the area's action plan and may need an air quality assessment.
Council record ↗
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 2
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Opportunity area
Where the London Plan expects significant growth.
Boundaries are indicative and the borough holds the detailed plan.
Also on the record
National infrastructure project about 1258 m away: Thames Tideway Tunnel; Scheduled monument about 237 m away: Barking Abbey; Public transport access: PTAL 0 (very poor), TfL 2023, for the 100 m square.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt

Checked on 6 October 2026. The pin for this application is the centre of its postcode rather than the building, so distances to nearby designations are measured from the postcode and can be out by the width of the postcode area. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England, the Planning Inspectorate, Transport for London (public transport access levels, Powered by TfL Open Data, OGL v3.0, contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2025) and council datasets, Open Government Licence. A boundary can run through a site and the council holds the definitive record: confirm with the council before relying on this.

Work with planning data?

Every application in Barking and Dagenham - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Nearby new applications

29 Sept 2026Pending

Town Quay, Abbey Road, Barking, Barking And Dagenham

Details pursuant to Condition 3 (Contaminated Land) Part C attached to planning ...

26/01338/AOD
10 Sept 2026Pending

FRESH WHARF ESTATE Fresh Wharf Road, Barking, Barking And Dagenham

Details pursuant to Condition 10 (Landscape Management Plan) attached to plannin...

26/01255/AOD
19 Aug 2026Pending

208, TEAL POINT, 8 Drydock Square, Barking, Barking And Dagenham, IG11 7ZE

Change of use of the C3 dwelling to a C4 3-person HMO

26/01165/FULL
14 Aug 2026Pending

FRESH WHARF ESTATE Fresh Wharf Road, Barking, Barking And Dagenham

Details pursuant to Condition 3 (Landscaping) attached to planning consent 19/01...

26/01146/AOD
14 Aug 2026Pending

Abbey Sports Centre, ABBEY SPORTS CENTRE Axe Street, Barking, Barking And Dagenham, IG11 7LX

Details pursuant to Condition 16 (Refuse Strategy) attached to planning consent ...

26/01147/AOD
12 Aug 2026Pending

Abbey Sports Centre, ABBEY SPORTS CENTRE Axe Street, Barking, Barking And Dagenham, IG11 7LX

Non- material amendment to planning permission 18/00331/FUL dated 13/01/2020 com...

26/01128/NONMAT
Barking and Dagenham
Planning Authority Score
6.4/10
Average
#81 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

Barking and Dagenham is one of the fastest councils in England for householder decisions, ranking #9 out of 296. Only 16% of applications have the time limit extended, well below the 41% national average - the council usually decides on time. Barking and Dagenham is also one of the strictest councils - it refuses more householder applications than almost any other, with only 68% approved vs 90% nationally.

Among the fastest councils in England
for householder decisions
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Barking and Dagenham decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
64%
Overall approval rate
Below avg (87%) #296 of 296
68%
Householder approved
Below avg (90%) #296 of 296
93%
Decided in 8 weeks
Above avg (63%) #9 of 296
16%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #13 of 296
43%
Minor dwellings approved
86 decided (1-9 homes)
100%
Major dwellings approved
7 decided (10+ homes)
28%
Change of use approved
80 decided
725
Total decisions
260 refused in the year to March 2026
Source: MHCLG planning statistics · See full council rankings