Two rear homes at 9 Warren Road, Sidcup

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Bexley Planning Committee on 16 Apr 2026.

25/01572/FULRefusedAgainst officer advice

The site and surroundings

The site contains a two-storey home, detached garage and large rear garden, within a mainly residential area outside a conservation area.

“The application site is situated to the southwestern side of Warren Road. The site at present is occupied by a two storey dwelling with a large frontage and detached garage to its north west. The rear of the site accommodates a large garden area which is in excess of 600 sqm in association with the main dwelling. The site sits adjacent to nos. 8 and 10 Warren Road and backs onto residential dwellings to the rear in Farwell Road and Wren Road.”

“The area is designated for primary residential use and does not fall within a conservation area or impact any listed buildings. The site is at low risk from flooding and has a PTAL rating of 1a with only one bus route within the specified walking distances.”

Officer report

What officers advised

Officers recommended approval because the design, accommodation, neighbouring amenity and highway effects were considered acceptable, subject to conditions.

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

“For the reasons set out in this report the proposed development is considered acceptable in principle. The design of the building would satisfactorily integrate with the character of the street scene whilst optimising the use of the site. A suitable level of accommodation would be provided to future occupants, whilst not adversely impacting the level of amenity currently enjoyed by the surrounding neighbours, nor adversely impacting highways safety.”

Officer report

Consultees’ views

Environmental Health raised no objection, while highway and flood authorities supported the proposal subject to conditions; biodiversity provision was considered acceptable.

“Given no sensitive ecological assets/green infrastructure network exists within the immediate vicinity of the site and the relatively small size of the development, the applicants chosen approach to BNG provision as set out within their BNG Assessment would be difficult to object to.”

“No objection subject to conditions seeking compliance with submitted flood exceedance plans.”

Officer report

What people said

Most representations objected over privacy, overdevelopment, traffic, parking, construction, trees, wildlife, drainage, noise and other concerns.

“Would set a precedent for other similar developments Each application is assessed on their own individual merits Access in Warren Road is narrow which makes access difficult and prone to car collisions Highways Safety Impacts Disputes that fire appliances and other emergency vehicles could access the site given congestion in the road Highways Safety Impacts Construction will cause significant disruption and large vehicles accessing the site will damage kerbs Impact on…”

“Impact local property prices Not a relevant planning consideration Loss of trees and addition of hardstanding will be harmful to local wildlife Ecology, Biodiversity and Landscaping Noise pollution and disturbance Impact on neighbouring amenity…”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two objectors and a local ward councillor spoke against the application, while the applicant spoke in support.

The committee’s discussion

The committee considered the speakers’ observations, comments and the officer report and addendum before deciding the application.

“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.”

“Following their discussion, the Committee moved and seconded the recommendation as set out in the report, and as amended by the Addendum, but this was not supported on a vote of 7/3. Following further discussion, a motion contrary to the recommendation before the Committee, namely that the application be refused due to its design and impact on the character of the area, citing policies SP5 and DP11, was moved and seconded, and the Committee RESOLVED on a vote of 7/0 to…”

Minutes

The members' reasons

The minutes do not record the members' reasons for departing from the officers' recommendation.

Sources

  • Bexley Planning Committee minutes, 16 April 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Bexley's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Bexley
Date
Thursday 16 April 2026
Recommendation
Officers recommended approval
Committee decided
Refused, against officer advice
Vote
7 for refusal, 0 against
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)
Application
The application (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of the minutes.

This committee's year

48 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 6 against officer advice.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →