Three-storey worship extension at 5 Hatherley Road, Sidcup

The site and surroundings

The site is a two-storey semi-detached place of worship with parking to the rear, near commercial uses, apartments and residential streets.

“The application site is 5 Hatherley Road, a two-storey semi-detached building with additional contained living accommodation within the roof space, located on the west side of Hatherley Road, Sidcup. The property is currently in use as a place of worship with associated education and cultural activities, falling within Use Class F1, as well as living accommodation on upper floors within the original building as approved in 2001.”

“Immediately adjoining the site, No. 7 Hatherley Road to the north is a three-storey apartment building, while No. 3 Hatherley Road lies to the south, with both buildings sharing use of or proximity to the rear access and parking area. To the west, beyond the rear boundary of the site, is the rear elevation of a four-storey apartment building.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions covered accommodation, a steel staircase, extensions to the lounge and hall, toilets, storage, classroom space and car parking.

“01/00170/FUL - Use of part of first floor as committee/classroom and formation of one separate unit of accommodation on first and second floors. Approved 23.03.2001. 85/00891/FUL - Steel staircase. Approved 06.09.1985.”

“73/1066 – Extension to hall and new toilets, store and classroom. Approved 09.08.1973.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers found the proposal acceptable in principle, design, neighbour amenity, highways, parking and sustainability terms, subject to conditions.

“That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject conditions.”

“The proposed development is acceptable in principle and in respect of its design, neighbour amenity impacts, highways and parking arrangements, and sustainability measures. Subject to conditions, the scheme would modernise and enhance an existing community facility without giving rise to significant adverse effects. The proposal therefore complies with the Development Plan when read as a whole.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no objection, while Environmental Health sought mechanical ventilation or air conditioning to control possible noise from open windows.

“The application has been reviewed by the Highway Authority, who have considered the site’s location within the Sidcup Controlled Parking Zone, existing on-street parking controls, and its PTAL rating of 4 (Good). The applicant provided detailed information on current prayer times, attendance levels, and historic operation of the site, together with additional data requested by Highways on how worshippers travel to and from the venue.”

“Environmental Health have advised that, in the absence of air conditioning, the use of the building may require windows to be opened for ventilation, resulting in potential noise breakout that has not been assessed within the submitted Noise Impact Assessment. To mitigate this, Environmental Health recommend that air conditioning be installed to provide mechanical cooling and avoid reliance on openable windows for purge ventilation.”

Officer report

Objections and support

Objections concerned congestion, parking, overshadowing, outlook, overbearing impact, noise and notification, while supporters cited community benefits, appearance and youth learning.

“The application was submitted in July 2024, with the neighbour consultation at that time resulting in 14 objections. Of the objections received, 6 were from nearby residents while the rest were from further away, including out of Borough objections.”

“Concerns relating to neighbour amenity in terms of overshadowing, outlook and overbearing impact.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A representative objected, while the agent and the applicant spoke in support of the application.

Committee discussion

The committee considered the speakers’ observations, points and comments together with the report and Addendum.

“The Committee discussed the application, considered all observations, points and comments made by the speakers and noted the report and the Addendum item for this application.”

Minutes

The vote

The committee voted by five votes to one to approve the application in accordance with the recommendation, as amended by the Addendum.

“Following their discussion, the Committee RESOLVED on a vote of 5/1 to approve the application in accordance with the recommendation as set out in the report before them, and as amended by the Addendum.”

Minutes