469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Inquiry held on 9 August 2021 to 13 August 2021 Site visit made on 17 August 2021 by Mark Philpott BA(Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 8 September 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by DAO Estate Ltd against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. • The application Ref PA/20/02392, dated 9 November 2020, was refused by notice dated 29 January 2021. • The development proposed was originally described as ‘retention and refurbishment of existing building and the erection of a three storey extension to provide office floorspace with retail floorspace at ground floor (Use Class E)’. Decision 1.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the retention, refurbishment, rear extension and change of use of the existing three storey warehouse building (Use Class B8) and the erection of a three storey extension to accommodate retail floorspace at ground floor level (Use Class E) and office floorspace on the upper levels (Use Class E), together with ancillary servicing and cycle parking at 469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref PA/20/02392, dated 9 November 2020, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule. Preliminary Matters 2. The description of the development in the heading is taken from the planning application form. However, the appellant and the Council agreed to a revised description during the planning application process. I have determined the appeal based on the development as set out in the revised description. This is reflected in the formal decision above. 3. The London Plan 2021 (LP) was published on 2 March 2021 and the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) was revised on 20 July 2021. These have replaced the versions of the documents that the Council took into account when it determined the application.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision During the appeal process the appellant, Council and interested parties have been able to consider the implications of the current versions of the documents and identify the policies most relevant to the issues in dispute. 4. The appellant submitted updated proposed elevation drawings of the building during the Inquiry1. The drawings identify the materials that would be used for 1 Identified at the end of this letter https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision During the appeal process the appellant, Council and interested parties have been able to consider the implications of the current versions of the documents and identify the policies most relevant to the issues in dispute. 4. The appellant submitted updated proposed elevation drawings of the building during the Inquiry1. The drawings identify the materials that would be used for 1 Identified at the end of this letter https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 the external surfaces of the building and amend the extent of metal fins that would project from its eastern façade. The materials identified are consistent with those proposed throughout the application and appeal processes and the alterations to the fins are minor. I have taken the updated drawings into account in making a decision as this would not prejudice any party. 5. The Inquiry was adjourned on 13 August 2021 to allow for a bat assessment and survey of the building to be undertaken and a Section 106 legal agreement (S106) to be completed. These were duly submitted. In addition, photographs of a galvanised metal building at Gormley Studios were submitted following the adjournment, as I was unable to gain access to view that building as arranged at the event. 6. The Inquiry was closed in writing on 27 August 2021. Main Issues 7.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The main issues are: • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the appeal building and the surrounding area; • the effect of the proposal on the setting and significance of 465 Bethnal Green Road, which is a non-designated heritage asset; • the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of properties at Nos 465 and 471-473 Bethnal Green Road, with particular regard to daylight; and • whether or not the proposal would prejudice the development of adjacent land, with particular regard to its window arrangement. Reasons Character and appearance 8. The site includes a 3 storey brick and concrete framed building containing warehouse and office accommodation. The building is located on the corner of Bethnal Green Road and Hollybush Gardens, with a much narrower frontage onto the former than the latter. It forms part of a block of development that is near to a railway viaduct. 9. On its Bethnal Green Road side, the appeal building forms part of a terrace that includes an adjacent 3 storey building at Nos 471-473 and single storey shopfronts nearer to the viaduct. 10-14 Hollybush Gardens is a 4 storey building that is also adjacent to the site.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The main parties agree that Hollybush Gardens is predominantly residential, comprising converted industrial buildings and post-war flats, and that Bethnal Green Road consists of a mixture of retail uses at ground floor with office and residential units above, which accords with my observations on site. 10. Bethnal Green Road and the roads spurring from it, including Hollybush Gardens, are characterised by buildings of varying ages, heights, lengths, widths, architectural styles and materials. There is a prevailing fine grain to the buildings fronting Bethnal Green Road, including the terrace that hosts the appeal building. However, larger buildings are also evident on both sides of Bethnal Green Road near the site and individual ones stand out. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 11. A bank with a top floor flat forms a 4 storey building opposite the site at No 465. Beyond that is a 5 to 8 storey formerly industrial and now residential building at Nos 455-463 (City View House) that also extends along Punderson’s Gardens for a considerable distance. Although the Council states that City View House is an anomaly in the area, it is nevertheless prominent and forms part of the area’s character. In addition, 5 storey buildings are evident at Nos 431 and 464. Taller buildings tend to adjoin smaller ones and thus there are significant height differences between buildings along the road. Taller buildings also occasionally occupy corner plots next to the roads connecting to Bethnal Green Road. The townscape benefits from this diversity. 12. Planning permission has been granted at 10-14 Hollybush Gardens for 6 storeys of flexible retail and office development2 and an application seeking to confirm that it has commenced lawfully is pending determination. A builders’ merchants is located beyond that at 5 Hollybush Place. An approved scheme for 5 to 7 storeys of residential and commercial development3 can be implemented there up until October 2022.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Whilst the proposal’s effect on the existing character and appearance of the area must be considered, I must also have regard to its potential future context. 13. The proposal principally involves an upward extension that would accentuate the appeal building’s narrow frontage to Bethnal Green Road and its wide frontage Hollybush Gardens. As a result, the building would be long, slim and distinctly taller than the adjoining properties. However, it would be seen in the context of and in keeping with the varied building sizes in Bethnal Green Road and contribute to the diversity of the townscape. It would also sit comfortably next to the long continuous form that faces the road at 10-14 Hollybush Gardens and be compatible with the larger scale of the consented development there and at 5 Hollybush Place. The proposal would not result in an undue sense of enclosure to Hollybush Gardens. 14. Although the extension would include a short projection to the rear of the existing building, which would be visible behind the terrace fronting Bethnal Green Road on approach from the viaduct, this would appear set back significantly.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Further, the uppermost parts of the consented development at 10-14 Hollybush Gardens would be visible from such a perspective and both additions would be seen together. The width of the appeal building would be largely unchanged and the fine grain of the terrace would remain evident from Bethnal Green Road. 15. Nevertheless, the extension would be a substantial one which would be set back from the appeal building’s existing brick elevations to a very limited extent. It would feature projecting metal fins that may provide shadowing across the elevations and have larger window openings than those at first and second floor level. It would not be a subordinate addition in these respects. 16. However, the extension’s design clearly reflects the structural grid of the existing building and the appellant’s design and architecture and townscape and heritage witnesses both contend that it would create elegant and satisfying proportions to the building overall. Its proposed galvanised metal finish, which the appellant considers would provide it with a refined and lightweight appearance, is an important consideration in this regard.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council accepts 2 Council reference: PA/17/01732/A1 3 Council reference: PA/16/02713/A1 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council accepts 2 Council reference: PA/17/01732/A1 3 Council reference: PA/16/02713/A1 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3 Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 that a contemporary extension and the use of galvanised metal may be appropriate at the site, albeit not for an extension of the proposed scale and design. 17. Examples contained within the evidence indicate that galvanised metal can have several different qualities and that glazed and metal framed extensions to brick buildings can be designed successfully. I acknowledge that the proposal is not directly comparable to the examples identified in terms of its specific context or the extent of the application of galvanised metal. However, I am satisfied that the material would create a sense of lightness to the extension and provide balance to the upper and lower parts of the building and thus its overall appearance. Additionally, galvanised metal surrounds to the fenestration at the building’s base would provide cohesion between its lower and upper elements. 18. Although galvanised metal is not a commonly used surfacing material in the area, there is capacity for it to be used given the townscape’s diversity.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Furthermore, the finish would complement the appearance of the viaduct and the industrial qualities of the appeal building and other buildings in the vicinity, including City View House. It would also complement the existing industrial aesthetic of 10-14 Hollybush Gardens, and the contemporary design and glazed and metal surfaced elements of the development consented there. 19. A condition to require the approval of comprehensive details of all the development’s external materials, including sample panels and the particulars of joining and fixing methods, would ensure that an appropriate finish is achieved. It would also prevent the quality of the development from being materially diminished between permission and completion in accordance with paragraph 134 of the Framework. 20. The appeal building currently lacks an active frontage onto Hollybush Gardens. The proposed insertion of windows to serve the retail floorspace at ground floor level would enliven the streetscape and provide a more attractive environment for those travelling along the road.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Whilst the proposed roller shutters may be closed when the retail space is not in active use, the aforementioned condition would ensure that the shutters and other security measures would be designed appropriately and ensure cohesion between the building’s base and the extension. 21. The Council contends that the proposed junction between the extension and 10-14 Hollybush Gardens is unclear and may appear crude. However, the relationship between the properties is explored in the Design and Access Statement. Whilst the extension would be immediately adjacent to the roof and chimney of the neighbouring building as it currently stands, and its consented additions, there would be a suitable relationship between the buildings. 22. Interested parties contend that equipment on the roof, such as the photovoltaic panels, would be unsightly. However, many of the roof’s features would not be visible from public vantage points. Further, the lift overrun and plant area would be enclosed and the condition to require details of all external materials would ensure that the appearance of such features would be appropriate. 23.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council has advanced that the development is not genuinely design led and that its pre-application advice has not been taken into account. It has also been put forward that alternative development at the site may address the https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council has advanced that the development is not genuinely design led and that its pre-application advice has not been taken into account. It has also been put forward that alternative development at the site may address the https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 concerns raised. However, the appellant is not necessarily bound to follow the Council’s recommendations and, fundamentally, I must make a decision based on the proposal and evidence before me. 24. It has not been argued that the retention of the existing building is inappropriate in principle. The appellant has undertaken a detailed assessment of the site’s current and historic local context and clearly explained the design process and approach adopted. The evidence shows that 3 to 5 storey extensions of varying forms were assessed. In addition, while none are evidenced, the appellant’s design and architecture witness stated that 1 and 2 storey options were also considered. Reasons for discounting the alternatives have been provided. 25. Whilst changes have been made to the proposal at appeal, and amended plans have been provided, this does not equate to evidence indicating that a design led approach has not been followed. On the contrary, based on what I have seen and heard, alternative options have been thoroughly appraised and clear justification for the proposed design exists. Overall, I consider that the scheme follows a design led approach and optimises the site’s capacity.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision 26. I consider that the proposal is based on a sound understanding of and responds to the site’s features and context, and its potential future context, and is well designed. It would not cause harm to the character or appearance of the appeal building or the surrounding area. It accords with Policy S.DH1 of the Tower Hamlets Local Plan 2031 (THLP), which includes a requirement that development meets the highest standards of design and respects and positively responds to context. It also accords with LP Policies GG2 and D3 which, amongst other matters, set out that to create successful sustainable mixed-use places and make the best use of land, a design led approach must be applied to determine optimum development capacity. 27. The proposal also accords with the National Design Guide and National Model Design Code. Alongside other points, these set out the importance of understanding the contexts and features of sites, the integration of development with its surroundings and that development should be sympathetic to existing grain and relate to the architectural character and materials of the surrounding area. It also complies with Section 12 of the Framework.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Amongst other things, it sets out that development should reflect local design policies and government guidance on design, be visually attractive as a result of good architecture, be sympathetic to local character, and optimise the potential of sites. Non-designated heritage asset 28. The bank at 465 Bethnal Green Road is an attractive red brick building with a stucco base and a slate clad, mansard style roof. It has primary elevations facing both Bethnal Green Road and Hollybush Gardens. It derives significance from features of architectural interest such as an ornamented arch over a corner entrance, with bay windows with stone pediments and surrounds above. It also benefits from features including arched windows at ground floor level, pedimented first floor windows, similarly ornamented dormers separated by balustrades, and elegant chimney stacks at roof level. It was built around the start of the twentieth century by Thomas Bostock Winney, who was the chief architect of the London City and Midland Bank, and therefore also has historic significance. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 29. The bank was clearly designed to have prominence in the high street, inspire confidence and create a sense of security. It has maintained its high street function and thus Bethnal Green Road forms part of its setting and contributes positively to its significance. Hollybush Gardens and the buildings adjacent to the bank, including the appeal site, also form part of its setting. However, the existing building on the appeal site was built post war and makes no contribution to the bank’s significance. 30. The Council contends that No 465 satisfies criteria for local listing and intends to add the building to the local list in the future. However, there can be no certainty that it will be added to the list, particularly as public consultation would need to be undertaken beforehand. Whilst I have had regard to the Council’s intentions, I must take the current status of the building into account. 31. The bank’s significance is best appreciated in short distance views on approach on Bethnal Green Road from the direction of the railway viaduct, from where the architectural features of its corner entrance, both elevations and roof are visible.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision From these perspectives, the appeal building currently blocks views of much of the bank’s elevation to Hollybush Gardens and part of its roof. The extension would block slightly more of the roof from view. However, the bank’s features, including those at roof level, would still be readily apparent. The extension would not obstruct visibility of the bank in any other short distance views from Bethnal Green Road or Hollybush Gardens. 32. The bank's roof can also be seen from Roman Road on the other side of the viaduct. However, the evidence indicates that the viaduct was constructed before the bank and so the visual relationship between the bank and the area on the other side of the viaduct is an incidental rather than a meaningful one. In any case, the lower parts of the building are largely obscured from view by the viaduct and street furniture. In addition, its roof is set against the backdrop of City View House and views from Roman Road tend to be occupied by buildings in the foreground, such as a 4 storey public house adjacent to the viaduct. The bank’s interest features are largely unnoticeable from there as a result.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision For these reasons, the obscuring of views of the bank by the development would not affect the bank’s significance. 33. The appeal building as proposed would have a greater presence in both Bethnal Green Road and Hollybush Gardens than is currently the case due to its scale, design and materials. However, in comparison with the bank, the development would have a simpler form, far less detailing and a less noticeable entrance. The base of the appeal building would contrast positively with the bank’s detailed entrance and elevations. The bank’s interest features would continue to afford it with prominence and stature, and its presence in the high street would be maintained. Indeed, the bank is currently apparent in short distance views even though it is located next to the much larger City View House. I therefore consider that the setting and significance of the bank will be preserved in respect of this matter. 34. Moreover, I have already identified that the streetscape would be enhanced by the development’s active frontages. These would reinforce Bethnal Green Road’s high street character and imbue the entrance to Hollybush Gardens with similar characteristics.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision In this regard, the contribution that the bank’s high street setting makes to its significance would be enhanced, albeit to a very limited extent. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision In this regard, the contribution that the bank’s high street setting makes to its significance would be enhanced, albeit to a very limited extent. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 35. The proposal would not harm the setting or significance of 465 Bethnal Green Road. It accords with THLP Policy S.DH3 and LP Policy HC1, which require that development preserves the settings and significance of heritage assets. Additionally, I find no conflict with the Framework in respect of this matter, which sets out that the significance of non-designated heritage assets should be taken into account in determining applications at paragraph 202. Living conditions 36. An assessment of the effect of the proposal on daylight and sunlight receipt to residential properties in the vicinity of the site was undertaken by the appellant for the application. The cumulative impacts of the development and the nearby consented schemes have also been considered. It is undisputed that the appellant’s assessment methodology follows Building Research Establishment (BRE) guidance4 on the loss of daylight to buildings, as encouraged at paragraph 8.89 of the THLP. Additionally, the daylight values that the appellant reports are largely uncontested. Whilst the Council suggests that some windows may have been incorrectly modelled, no assessments to counter the appellant’s data have been presented.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision 37. The BRE guidance set out that an impact will be significant if the vertical sky component (VSC) of a window after development is less than 27 percent and less than 0.8 times its former value, or if daylight distribution to the area of the working plane of a room that can receive direct daylight is less than 0.8 times its former value. Average VSC values can be relied upon where more than one window of equal size serves the same room. It also states that living spaces and kitchens need more daylight than bedrooms. In addition, it is common ground between the main parties that kitchens need more light than bedrooms. 38. The BRE guidance sets out that it should be used flexibly and not be interpreted as planning policy. THLP Policy D.DH8 requires that development must not result in an unacceptable material deterioration of the daylight and sunlight conditions of surrounding development or result in unacceptable levels of overshadowing. Consequently, a significant impact in the terms of the BRE guidance does not necessarily equate to an unacceptable impact on the sunlight or daylight conditions of a property in conflict with the policy. 39.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The flat above the bank at 465 Bethnal Green Road has windows that are of the same size. Taking into account the average values for the rooms that benefit from more than one window, there would be no significant impacts in VSC terms. However, daylight distribution to a bedroom and an open plan kitchen and dining room in the flat would be significantly affected. The appellant’s daylight and sunlight assessment categorises the daylight distribution impacts as major adverse ones. 40. The kitchen and dining room benefits from a window that was not considered in the appellant’s original assessment. It was evident from my visit that the window contributes to daylight distribution. Moreover, the window would not be significantly affected by the scheme due to its position. The Council’s daylight expert accepted that this may improve the daylight conditions of the room. It is likely that more than 34 percent of the room, as reported in the original assessment, would continue to receive direct daylight. Around a quarter of the bedroom would receive direct daylight. 4 Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide to good practice, second edition, 2011 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 7

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 41. The flat above the bank features 2 rooms that can reasonably be called living rooms. These have windows facing Bethnal Green Road that would have relatively high daylight values and the effects of the proposal on these rooms would be modest. Whilst a tree is adjacent to one of those windows, the Council’s daylight expert confirmed that trees are not typically factored into assessments. Furthermore, it would not be in leaf in winter when daylight is at its scarcest. For the reasons given and having regard to the purposes of the most affected rooms, the deterioration in the daylight conditions of the property from the development directly would not be unacceptable. 42. Notwithstanding this, there is a limited separation distance between the proposed extension and the flat and, without mitigation, its fifth and sixth floor windows would facilitate overlooking. This would lead to indirect light loss as blinds or curtains would need to be closed to provide satisfactory levels of privacy for the flat’s occupiers. However, a condition to require that the relevant windows are fixed shut and obscure glazed to a height of 1.8m would prevent overlooking and further losses of light.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The living conditions of the occupiers of the flat would thus be acceptable with the development in place. 43. Flat 1 at 471-473 Bethnal Green Road features an open plan kitchen, dining and living room that has a window with adjacent glass bricks that face the site, a narrow skylight, and full length glazed patio doors from which a private patio is accessed. 44. The VSC for the window facing the site is currently limited at 7.60 percent and this would be reduced substantially. However, the evidence suggests that the patio doors have more than twice that VSC value and the reduction in daylight to the patio doors would be limited. Moreover, kitchen fixtures such as the sink and countertops are positioned such that the area nearer the patio doors is more readily usable as living space than the area adjacent to the window facing the site. The evidence demonstrates that daylight distribution impacts on the room would be insignificant. Flat 1’s other rooms would be largely unaffected. I find that the deterioration in daylight to the property would not be unacceptable. Furthermore, sunlight provision to the patio would accord with the BRE guidance. It would not be significantly affected. 45.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision One bedroom each at Flat 2 and Flat 4 at Nos 471-473 would be significantly affected by the development in both VSC and daylight distribution terms, with major adverse impacts reported for the latter metric. However, they both have another bedroom and a living room facing Bethnal Green Road that would not be significantly adversely impacted. Having regard to this and the purposes of the rooms most affected, the losses of daylight to the properties would not be unacceptable. 46. Flat 3 at Nos 471-473 is located on the second floor. The daylight and sunlight assessment suggests that there would be a minor adverse impact to one room. However, the flat’s floorplans suggest that it is a small galley style kitchen. I note that the supporting text to THLP Policy D.DH8 states that kitchens which provide space for dining will be considered habitable rooms. The kitchen’s usability for purposes beyond food preparation is limited. The flat’s bedroom and living room would be largely unaffected. Consequently, the deterioration of the daylight conditions to this property would not be unacceptable. 47. The occupiers of the flats at Nos 471-473 have access to a communal roof terrace. The extension would be immediately adjacent to it.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 8

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 8

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 accepts that the terrace would continue to receive levels of sunlight in accordance with the BRE guidance. Although the Council does not allege any conflicts with planning policy in respect of this matter, there would nevertheless be an adverse impact on the terrace as sunlight to it in the afternoon would be reduced. However, the adverse impact carries limited weight given that it would not be significant in the terms of the BRE guidance and complies with policy. 48. Due to the proximity of the proposed windows facing the roof terrace and to prevent overlooking, a condition is needed to obscure glaze and fix shut those windows to a height of 1.8m; however, fully obscured or fixed shut windows would be unnecessary. Outlook towards the viaduct and across Benthal Green Road would be unaffected by the development and therefore the scheme would not have an overbearing effect on the terrace. 49. Whilst the proposal would have adverse impacts to some rooms in nearby properties, for the reasons given the development would not result in unacceptable material deteriorations of the daylight conditions of Nos 465 and 471-473 Bethnal Green Road.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision In addition, it would not create unacceptable levels of overshadowing of the roof terrace at Nos 471-473. Accordingly, the proposal would not have an unacceptable effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of the properties. It accords with THLP Policy D.DH8. 50. Although not specified on the decision notice, the Council also argues that the proposal fails to adopt a design-led approach in relation to consideration of living conditions impacts. It is alleged that the proposal conflicts with LP Policy D3 in respect of this matter. However, the policy states that development should deliver appropriate outlook, privacy and amenity. The proposal achieves this and thus I find no conflict with the policy. Development of adjacent land 51. The appellant has provided examples of ways in which development of the land between the site and the railway viaduct could come forward with the appeal scheme in place. The Council’s planning witness confirmed at the Inquiry that it would be physically possible for the adjacent land to be redeveloped following the completion of the appeal scheme.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Although the appeal building would need to be carefully considered when any adjacent development proposal is being designed, there is no evidence indicating that the appeal scheme would prevent the delivery of a policy compliant proposal on the adjacent land. 52. It has been put forward that an adjacent scheme could reduce daylight to the proposed offices, especially if the floorspace is subdivided to create single aspect units facing 471-473 Bethnal Green Road. However, there is nothing before me which suggests that an adjacent scheme must extend up to the site’s boundaries. In addition, no compelling reasons have been presented which indicate that it is likely that single aspect office units would be created. Moreover, I have not been referred to any daylight standards that must be met for offices specifically. For these reasons, even if an adjacent proposal was to reduce daylight to parts of the appeal building, it is highly likely that the accommodation would remain adequate, with the majority of the floorspace continuing to be served by windows facing Bethnal Green Road and Hollybush Gardens that are some distance from neighbouring buildings. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 9

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 53. Similarly, the obscure glazing and fixing shut of part of the windows oriented towards the adjacent roof terrace or 465 Bethnal Green Road does not lead me to conclude that there would be unacceptable levels of daylight to the proposed floorspace. In addition, there is little to indicate that adequate cross ventilation would be unachievable, that high levels of energy consumption from artificial lighting would occur as a result of restrictions to the windows or the construction of an adjacent scheme, or that the appeal building would otherwise fail to function well. 54. The Council’s daylight expert explained that adjacent landowners could serve light obstruction notices to prevent the windows facing 471-473 Bethnal Green Road from acquiring rights to light. Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that adjacent development would not be achievable if those rights existed. The Council has also referred to Regulation 8 of the Workplace Health, Safety and Welfare Regulation 1992, which sets out that every workplace shall have suitable and sufficient lighting and that this should be natural lighting so far as is reasonably practicable.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision However, there is nothing compelling before me which suggests that owners or tenants of the appeal building would be in breach of the regulations if the adjacent land was redeveloped. 55. I conclude that the appeal scheme would not prejudice the development of adjacent land. I find no conflict with LP Policies GG2 or D3, the purposes of which I have already summarised. I also find no conflict with paragraph 130 of the Framework, which explains that development should function well and add to the overall quality of an area over its lifetime. Other Matters 56. The main parties agree that the development would not adversely affect the settings or significance of any designated heritage assets, the nearest of which are located on the other side of the viaduct to the site. Historic England has no objections to the proposal. Given the degree of separation and the presence of the intervening viaduct between the site and the assets, I have no compelling reasons for find otherwise. 57. The bat survey indicates that the appeal building has low potential for roosting bats, that no bats are roosting there currently, and that there are low levels of bat activity in the area. As such, bats are not a constraint to the development. 58.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision The Council has also identified that there would be daylight impacts on 4 Hollybush Place. It does not argue that the deterioration in daylight would be unacceptable or thus conflict with policy, but it considers that this nevertheless indicates against the development. I agree that there would be daylight impacts, but these attract limited weight given that they are not unacceptable material deteriorations for the purposes of THLP Policy D.DH8. Interested parties have also put forward that there would be light loss and outlook to the flats at City View House. However, the separation distance between the buildings would be sufficient to prevent harm in these respects. 59. Interested parties highlight that the patio and roof terrace at 471-473 Bethnal Green Road provide habitats for wildlife and that the use of those outdoor spaces contributes to the health and wellbeing of the building’s occupiers. However, substantive evidence which indicates that biodiversity would be harmed has not been submitted and the condition to restrict the windows https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 10

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 facing the outdoor spaces would ensure that an appropriate level of privacy is afforded to those using them. 60. It has also been put forward that the proposal would result in parking problems. The development would be car free; however, the site is located in a PTAL5 6a area and as such it benefits from high levels of accessibility via sustainable transport modes. Additionally, an accessible parking bay for blue badge holders is proposed near the site and cycle parking facilities would be present within it. For these reasons there would be no significant parking issues. 61. It is put forward that there is already sufficient office space in the area and the retail space may adversely affect businesses in the area. However, the site is in an area designated by the THLP as a district centre and Bethnal Green Road is identified as primary shopping frontage Employment space is supported in such areas by THLP Policy D.EMP2 and S.TC1. Further, THLP Policy D.TC2 encourages retail and other uses that contribute to town centre activity and vitality along primary shopping frontages. As such, there is policy support for additional employment and retail space at the site. 62.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision There is a Transport for London (TFL) vent shaft immediately adjacent and London Underground infrastructure located beneath the site. Amongst other things, TFL recommends that noise and vibration emanating from both the development and the vent shaft should be mitigated. Interested parties also raise concerns regarding the potential for the development to reverberate noise and heat from the vent shaft and affect the release and distribution of fumes from the shaft. 63. However, transport infrastructure has evidently operated near the existing building for a considerable length of time. Substantive evidence indicating that there are, or will be, issues arising from the building’s proximity to the infrastructure have not been provided. No concerns from the Council’s environmental health department have been raised regarding these issues. These matters do not indicate that the proposal is unacceptable and conditions relating to them are not required. Planning Obligations 64. The S106 includes several planning obligations that would come into effect if permission is granted.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision I have considered these having regard to the statutory tests contained in Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations6 in addition to the tests set out at paragraph 57 of the Framework. 65. The S106 secures a financial contribution towards carbon offsetting to ensure that the development produces no net carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with THLP Policy D.ES7 and LP Policy SI2. The methodology for calculating the contribution is set out in the Council’s Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The obligation is directly related to the development, fairly and reasonably related to the development in scale and kind and needed to make the development acceptable. It thus accords with the tests for planning obligations. 5 Public Transport Accessibility Level 6 The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 11

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 66. Obligations relating to employment, skills, enterprise and training contributions and initiatives during the construction and end-user stages of the development are also included. These are underpinned by THLP Policy S.SG2 and the SPD, which identify a need to address Tower Hamlet’s above average unemployment levels and low proportions of residents finding employment within the borough. These obligations meet the tests for planning obligations. 67. The S106 also requires that a highway works agreement is completed and that carriageway and footway works to the parts of Bethnal Green Road and Hollybush Gardens that will be affected by the development are restored. These are needed to ensure that the highway in the vicinity will be safe to use and therefore satisfy the tests for planning obligations. The provision of the accessible parking bay is also secured by the S106. This meets the tests as the space is needed for occupiers of the development. 68. A fee towards the Council’s costs of monitoring the S106 is also included. Regulation 122(2A) of the CIL Regulations enables such fees to be sought. The SPD sets out a methodology for calculating fees.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision I am satisfied that the monitoring fee satisfies the CIL Regulations. 69. In conclusion, the planning obligations specified above comply with the tests set out in the CIL Regulations and the Framework, and I have taken them into account in deciding the appeal. Conditions 70. The appellant and the Council agreed to a schedule of conditions during the Inquiry. Additionally, the appellant has agreed to the wording of conditions with pre-commencement requirements. I have considered whether the proposed conditions meet the tests set out at paragraph 56 of the Framework. In order to satisfy those tests, minor editing of some of the conditions is necessary. 71. Further to the conditions that I have already identified to be necessary, a condition to require that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans is needed in the interests of certainty. A condition to require that cycle parking is provided prior to first occupation of the development is necessary to ensure that the occupiers benefit from timely provision of such facilities and to encourage the use of sustainable travel modes.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision To reduce the risk of flooding, a condition to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the flood risk assessment and sustainable drainage report is required. 72. Although the loss of employment space is constrained by THLP Policy D.EMP3, the Council’s planning witness explained that there have been significant losses in office floorspace in recent years. This reconciles with the Employment Land Review7. A condition to require that the proposed office floorspace is retained for office purposes is clearly justified. The main parties agree that the ground floor should be restricted to uses within sub-paragraphs (a) to (c) of Class E of Schedule 2 of the Use Classes Order (UCO)8, which principally include retail, financial and professional, and food and drink related uses, in order to maintain the building’s active frontages. Whilst THLP paragraph 11.21 indicates that gyms are appropriate on upper floors, there are not clear reasons for restricting uses within Class E(d) of the UCO such as this, which often also 7 London Borough of Tower Hamlets Employment Land Review, September 2017 8 The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 12

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 maintain active frontages. A condition limiting the ground floor to uses within sub-paragraphs (a) to (d) of Class E is therefore necessary. 73. Conditions to control the construction process, including a pre-commencement one to require the approval of a construction environmental management and logistics plan, are needed in the interests of highway safety and to safeguard the amenity of the occupiers of properties near the site. Noise and vibration from any proposed mechanical plant and equipment must also be controlled by condition for the latter reason. Further, TFL recommends that design and method statements are required specifically to ensure that the development does not adversely affect underground service tunnels and the adjacent vent shaft. Another pre-commencement condition is needed for this purpose. 74. Conditions to ensure that any land contamination identified during the construction process is remediated and require the approval of extract ventilation systems are needed in the interests of human health and amenity. 75.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision Based on the findings of the bat survey, a condition is needed to require that a further survey and any subsequently necessary mitigation is undertaken if the development is not commenced by the end of March 2023. This is to ensure that bats continue to remain absent from the building. Another one to require the implementation of biodiversity mitigation and enhancements is necessary to protect and enhance biodiversity of the site in accordance with Policy D.ES3 of the THLP. 76. To make sure that the delivery and servicing arrangements do not have an unacceptable adverse impact on highway safety and traffic flows on Bethnal Green Road and Hollybush Gardens, a condition to require adherence to an approved delivery and servicing management plan is needed. A condition to require the approval of refuse storage details to be submitted is necessary so that adequate provision is made. To ensure that the development achieves the highest levels of sustainable design and construction and maximises energy efficiency in accordance with THLP Policy D.ES7, a condition is needed to ensure that the development has achieved a BREEAM Excellent rating.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision A condition to require the approval of security measures is needed to make sure that the development contributes to community safety effectively. 77. It has been suggested that a condition should require that it be demonstrated that the building could be accessed without entering TFL land. However, I am not convinced that this is a matter related to planning or necessary. TFL also recommends that the windows near the vent shaft are fixed shut to prevent items being dropped into it. However, the aforementioned restrictions to those windows would mitigate this potential issue sufficiently. 78. Having regard to my findings in respect of the capacity for the adjacent land to be redeveloped, a condition to prevent any single aspect units with windows oriented towards 471-473 Bethnal Green Road is unnecessary. Additionally, as I have found that the relationship between the development and 10-14 Hollybush Gardens would be acceptable, a condition to require more details of the junction between the buildings is not required. Conclusion 79.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision I have found that the proposal would not have harmful effects on the character or appearance of the appeal building or the surrounding area, or the setting or https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 13

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Appeal Decision I have found that the proposal would not have harmful effects on the character or appearance of the appeal building or the surrounding area, or the setting or https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 13 Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 significance of 465 Bethnal Green Road. Furthermore, it would not prejudice the development of adjacent land. Although there would be adverse impacts due to loss of daylight to Nos 465 and 471-473 Bethnal Green Road and 4 Hollybush Place, and loss of sunlight to the roof terrace at Nos 471-473, the development would not have unacceptable effects on the living conditions of the occupiers of the properties in the vicinity of the site, and the proposal complies with the development plan in respect of these matters. Moreover, the proposal accords with the development plan when it is taken as a whole. 80. Whilst I have carefully considered the Council’s case and the views of all interested parties, material considerations do not indicate that a decision should be taken other than in accordance with the development plan. 81. For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal is allowed.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 14

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 14 Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 APPEARANCES at the Inquiry FOR THE APPELLANT: Robert Walton QC instructed by DAO Estate Ltd Lukas Barry BA(Hons) MA(Hons) RIBA ARB Carmody Groarke Sarah Jackson BSc BArch MSc ARB Peter Stewart Consultancy Lok Tang MSc Delva Patman Redler LLP Jonathan Marginson MA(Hons) MRTPI DP9 Claire Saffer Memery Crystal FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY: Esther Drabkin-Reiter, of Counsel instructed by the Council Victoria Lambert BA(Hons) DIPTP DIPAA Principal, Place Shaping, the Council MRTPI IHBC Paul J Littlefriar MA PhD CEng MCIBSE FSLL Building Research Establishment MILP Patrick Harmsworth BA(Hons) MA MRTPI Senior Planning Officer, the Council Diane Phillips Planning Lawyer, the Council INTERESTED PARTIES: Oliver Collier Local resident Daren Firminger Local resident Robert Fraser Local resident https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 15

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 DOCUMENTS submitted during the Inquiry 1. Daylight presentation for evidence-in-chief, by Dr Paul Littlefriar 2. Opening statement on behalf of the appellant 3. Opening statement on behalf of the Council 4. Consultation response from Historic England, 9 August 2021 5. Natural England Standing Advice - Bats: surveys and mitigation for development projects 6. Email from appellant confirming qualifications of Mr Lukas Barry, 10 August 2021 7. Consultation response from Transport for London, 11 August 2021 8. Schedule of suggested planning conditions, 11 August 2021 9. Draft Section 106 legal agreement, Ref LBTH Amends 11.8.21_ draft s106 Agreement 469 BGR (V3) (002) 10. Draft Section 106 legal agreement, Ref 11627824_1 11. Summary of Section 106 legal agreement 12. Schedule of suggested planning conditions, 13 August 2021 13. Closing statement on behalf of the Council 14. Closing statement on behalf of the appellant 15. Schedule of suggested planning conditions, 13 August 2021, version 3 16. Bat Roost Assessment Statement of Common Ground and associated appendices 17. Photographs of galvanised metal building at Gormley Studios, received via email 18 August 2021 18.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Draft Section 106 legal agreement, Ref 106_BethnalGnRoad_engrossment 19. Email from appellant confirming agreement to pre-commencement conditions, 25 August 2021 20. Counterpart Section 106 legal agreements, dated 25 August 2021 DRAWINGS submitted during the Inquiry 1. Proposed South Elevation: 303_P_40_01 P2 2. Proposed West Elevation: 303_P_40_02 P2 3. Proposed East Elevation: 303_P_40_04 P2 4. Indicative Proposed Window Section https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 16

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Draft Section 106 legal agreement, Ref 106_BethnalGnRoad_engrossment 19. Email from appellant confirming agreement to pre-commencement conditions, 25 August 2021 20. Counterpart Section 106 legal agreements, dated 25 August 2021 DRAWINGS submitted during the Inquiry 1. Proposed South Elevation: 303_P_40_01 P2 2. Proposed West Elevation: 303_P_40_02 P2 3. Proposed East Elevation: 303_P_40_04 P2 4. Indicative Proposed Window Section https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 16 Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 Schedule of Conditions 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 303_X_10_01_P1; 303_X_10_02_P1; 303_X_20_01_P1; 303_X_20_02_P1; 303_X_20_03_P1; 303_X_20_04_P1; 303_X_30_01_P1; 303_X_30_02_P1; 303_X_40_01_P1; 303_X_40_02_P1; 303_X_40_03_P1; 303_X_40_04_P1; 303_P_20_01_P2; 303_P_20_02_P1; 303_P_20_03_P1; 303_P_20_04_P1; 303_P_20_05_P1; 303_P_20_06_P1; 303_P_20_07_P1; 303_P_30_01_P1; 303_P_30_02_P1; 303_P_40_01_P2; 303_P_40_02_P2; 303_P_40_03_P1; 303_P_40_04_P2.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 Schedule of Conditions 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 303_X_10_01_P1; 303_X_10_02_P1; 303_X_20_01_P1; 303_X_20_02_P1; 303_X_20_03_P1; 303_X_20_04_P1; 303_X_30_01_P1; 303_X_30_02_P1; 303_X_40_01_P1; 303_X_40_02_P1; 303_X_40_03_P1; 303_X_40_04_P1; 303_P_20_01_P2; 303_P_20_02_P1; 303_P_20_03_P1; 303_P_20_04_P1; 303_P_20_05_P1; 303_P_20_06_P1; 303_P_20_07_P1; 303_P_30_01_P1; 303_P_30_02_P1; 303_P_40_01_P2; 303_P_40_02_P2; 303_P_40_03_P1; 303_P_40_04_P2.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 3) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re- enacting that Order with or without modification), a minimum of 2036 square metres of floorspace within the building shall be used for office purposes falling within Class E(g)(i) of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) and for no other purposes. 4) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re- enacting that Order with or without modification), the retail/showroom floorspace identified on Drawing No 303_P_20_01_P2 shall be used for a use or combination of uses falling within sub-paragraphs (a) to (d) of Class E of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or in any provision equivalent to those sub-paragraphs within Class E in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) and for no other purposes.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 5) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details and the ‘Proposed Drainage Arrangements’ set out within the Flood Risk Assessment & SuDS Report (Ref 2218 Rev 2, dated November 2020). 6) The cycle storage facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved plans prior to the first occupation of the development and thereafter be maintained and made available to the occupiers in operational condition for the lifetime of the development. 7) Prior to commencement of the development, including demolition works, a Construction Environmental Management & Logistics Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The plan shall include details of: a) the telephone, email and postal addresses of the site manager and details of complaints procedures for members of the public; b) a Dust Management Strategy to minimise the emission of dust and dirt during construction including but not restricted to spraying of materials with water, wheel washing facilities, street cleaning and monitoring of dust emissions; https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 17

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 c) measures to maintain the site in a tidy condition in terms of disposal/storage of waste and storage of construction plant and materials; d) a scheme for recycling/disposition of waste resulting from demolition and construction works; e) ingress and egress to and from the site for vehicles; f) the numbers and timings of vehicle movements to and from the site and details of the access routes, delivery scheduling, use of holding areas, logistics and consolidation centres; g) parking of vehicles for site operatives and visitors; h) a Travel Plan for construction workers; i) the locations and sizes of site offices and welfare and toilet facilities; j) the erection and maintenance of security hoardings including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing; k) measures to ensure that pedestrian access past the site is safe and not obstructed; and l) measures to minimise risks to pedestrians and cyclists, including but not restricted to accreditation of the Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS) and use of banksmen for supervision of vehicular ingress and egress. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 8) Prior to commencement of the development, including demolition works, design and method statements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority which shall include but are not restricted to: • details on construction methods for the development; • details on the use of tall plant and scaffolding; • Risk Assessment and Method Statements (RAMS); and • details which demonstrate that increased loading from the development on the site will not have a negative effect on existing London Underground infrastructure. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 9) If the development has not commenced by the end of March 2023, an updated bat survey shall be undertaken by a licensed bat worker prior to commencement of the development. Evidence that the survey has been undertaken shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. If evidence of bat roosting is found, mitigation measures shall be implemented in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 10) Unless otherwise specified by a S61 Consent granted under the Control of Pollution Act 1974, demolition, building, engineering or other operations associated with the construction of the development (including the arrival, departure and loading and unloading of construction vehicles): https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 18

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 10) Unless otherwise specified by a S61 Consent granted under the Control of Pollution Act 1974, demolition, building, engineering or other operations associated with the construction of the development (including the arrival, departure and loading and unloading of construction vehicles): https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 18

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 a) shall be carried out in accordance with the Tower Hamlets Code of Construction Practice (or successor documents); b) shall only be carried out within the hours of 08:00 and 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays and no works shall take place on Sundays and Public Holidays; c) shall not generate ground-borne vibration that exceeds 1.0mm/s Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) at residential properties and 3.0mm/s PPV at commercial properties neighbouring the site. d) shall not generate noise levels that exceed 75dB(A) measured 1 metre from the façade of any occupied building neighbouring the site; and e) any Non Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) of net power between 37kW and 560kW used during the course of the demolition, site preparation and construction phases shall not exceed the emission standards set out in the Mayor of London’s ‘Control of Dust and Emissions During Construction and Demolition’ Supplementary Planning Guidance 2014. Unless it complies with those standards, no NRMM shall be on site, whether in use or not, without the prior written consent of the local planning authority.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott The developer shall keep an up to date list of all NRMM used during the demolition, site preparation and construction phases of the development on the online register at https://nrmm.london/. 11) a) If during the construction works any potential land contamination or unusual or odorous ground conditions are encountered, all construction works shall cease immediately and not resume until either: (i) the potential contamination has been assessed and a remediation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority; or (ii) the timescales for submission of a remediation scheme and details of works which may be carried out in the interim have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. b) If land contamination is identified pursuant to part (a) of this condition, the development shall not be occupied until the contaminated land has been fully remediated in accordance with an approved remediation scheme and a post completion report that verifies that the site has been remediated has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 12) Notwithstanding the approved plans, no superstructure works shall take place until samples and full particulars of all external facing materials to be used in the construction of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These shall include but are not restricted to: a) A sample of limewashed brickwork of no less than 1 metre by 1 metre and a sample of a galvanised metal panel. b) Details at a scale of no less than 1:10 of external cladding, including the colour and finish of the galvanised metal, and details of joints, panel sizes and fixing methods, together with details of junctions with the brickwork and windows of the building. If an off-site manufactured cladding system is to be used, details of the system and a mock-up sample panel that includes at least one junction between pre- assembled panels and other adjoining materials including brickwork and windows shall be provided. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 19

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 c) Samples and drawings of fenestration including details of reveals, sills and lintels. Drawings shall be at a scale of no less than 1:20. d) Drawings and details of entrances and shopfronts including doors, glazing, reveals, stallrisers, canopies, signage zones, post boxes, lighting, soffits and security measures. Drawings shall be at a scale of no less than 1:20. e) Details and samples of roofing. f) Details of any external rainwater goods, flues, grilles, louvres and vents. g) Details of any external plant, plant enclosures and safety balustrades. h) Details of the vertical and horizontal fins at a scale of no less than 1:10. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details. 13) No superstructure works shall take place until details of security measures have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall demonstrate that Secured by Design security standards, including counter terrorism advice, have been included in the final build specifications. The approved security measures shall be implemented in full prior to first occupation and retained for the lifetime of the development.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 14) No superstructure works shall take place until details of biodiversity mitigation and enhancements to be provided within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented in full prior to first occupation of the development. 15) The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a Delivery and Servicing Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Deliveries and servicing shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details for the lifetime of the development. 16) The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of refuse storage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 17) Notwithstanding the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the windows installed in the eastern elevation of the extension and the part of the southern elevation of the extension facing the Transport for London vent shaft as identified on Drawing No 303_X_20_01_P1 have been glazed with obscured glazing and fixed shut so as to be incapable of being opened to a height of 1.8 metres above the floors of the rooms in which those windows are installed. Details and samples of the obscured glazing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the windows are installed. The windows shall be installed as approved and retained in that form thereafter. 18) Notwithstanding the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the windows identified as obscure glazed on Drawing No 303_P_40_02_P2 have been glazed with obscured glazing and fixed shut so as to be incapable of being opened to a height of 1.8 metres above the floors of the rooms in which those windows are installed. Details and samples of the obscured glazing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 20

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott Appeal Decision APP/E5900/W/21/3271874 planning authority before the windows are installed. The windows shall be installed as approved and retained in that form thereafter. 19) Any mechanical plant and equipment within the site shall be designed and maintained for the lifetime of the development so that the rating level of noise from the plant and equipment does not exceed the typical measured background noise level (LA90,T) without the plant or equipment in operation as measured one metre from the window of the nearest habitable room of the nearest residential property. The rating level of the plant and the background noise level shall be determined using the methods from the version of BS 4142 current at the time of this decision. Vibration from plant in the centre of any habitable room shall be no higher than the value equivalent to “low probability of adverse comment” when assessed in accordance with the version of BS 6472 current at the time of this decision. No mechanical plant or equipment shall be operated within the site until a post installation verification report that includes acoustic test results has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

469 Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 9QH — London Borough of Tower Hamlets — Mark Philpott 20) Prior to installing an extract ventilation system, details of the system including any extraction hood, internal fan, flexible couplings, three-stage filtration (grease filters, pre-filters and activated carbon filters), the height of the extract duct above eaves level and anti-vibration mountings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The system shall be installed as approved before coming into use and maintained as such thereafter. 21) The development shall achieve a BREEAM Excellent rating accordance with the requirements of the relevant BREEAM scheme. Within 3 months of first occupation of the development a Final BREEAM Certificate shall be issued for it and produced to the local planning authority certifying that a BREEAM Excellent rating has been achieved. ***End of schedule*** https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 21