The Tower Hamlets Development Committee voted to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of 5-6 The Oval, London, E2 9DT, subject to conditions and planning obligations. The development will include residential accommodation, shared living accommodation, workspace, cycle parking, play space, and landscaping. The decision followed concerns raised by residents of the adjacent Empress Works building regarding the impact on daylight and sunlight.

5-6 The Oval Planning Application

The committee approved planning application PA/24/01896 for the redevelopment of 5-6 The Oval to provide:

• Residential accommodation (Use Class C3¹)
• Shared living accommodation (sui generis²)
• Workspace (Use Class E)
• Associated cycle parking
• Play space
• Landscaping
• Associated works

The development will consist of two blocks:

• Block A: A 5-8 storey building with 24 self-contained residential homes (Use Class C3), all of which will be affordable housing, and a workspace unit.
• Block B: A 5-8 storey building that retains part of the facade of the former brewery building, with 222 shared living units and workspace units.

The committee's decision is subject to the completion of a legal agreement and adherence to planning conditions.

Objections

During the meeting, concerns were raised by residents of the Empress Works building, located adjacent to the development site. Irina Bedubescu, a resident of Empress Works, spoke about the impact on her child's room, stating:

If the development goes ahead in its current form, most of the daylight to that room will be lost. The view out the window, which right now gives us space and air and sky, will be replaced by a blank seven-story wall just a few meters away from his room, just the wall.

Charlie Simpson, speaking on behalf of Empress Works residents, urged the committee to refuse the application, arguing that the scheme would render existing homes unlivable. He quoted an expert assessment stating that the proposed building would render some units within Empress Works in virtual darkness .

Timothy Tan, representing the landowner of the Gossamer City Project at 1 to 65 Gossamer Gardens, raised concerns that the proposed building would sit directly on their shared boundary, potentially prejudicing future development of their site. He requested a setback from the boundary.

Support

The applicant, represented by Matthew Gibbs from Savills, highlighted the benefits of the development, including the provision of social housing, improved public realm, and new open space. Jonathan Lonergan of EB7, a daylight and sunlight specialist, addressed concerns about daylight and sunlight, stating that the applicant had considered alternatives to limit the effects on neighbouring homes. Jermaine Brown, co-founder of Reshape, spoke about the importance of housing for dignity, belonging, and fairness, and the community investment program associated with the development.

Committee Discussion

Councillors questioned officers and the applicant about the daylight and sunlight impacts, the mirror test methodology[^4], and the density of the development. Councillor Marc Francis expressed concern about the impact on residents of Empress Works, stating that the impacts were excessive. Councillor Amin Rahman, however, highlighted the benefits of the plan, including the provision of new social rented family homes.

Paul Buckenham, Head of Development Management, Planning and Building Control, acknowledged the significant impacts in terms of daylight and sunlight but emphasised that any development of the site would have some impacts. He noted that the development had tried to set itself back from its boundary as much as possible to minimise those impacts.

Decision

Following the discussion, the committee voted to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and planning obligations. Four members voted in favour, one against, and one abstained. Councillor Iqbal Hossain, Chair of Development Committee, confirmed that the committee supported the recommendation to grant planning permission subject to conditions and obligations. The committee also agreed to an additional condition regarding obscure glazing to address privacy concerns.