Community and worship centre at Technology House, Yiewsley

“Planning permission is sought for the change of use from mixed use Class B8 (Storage and Distribution) and Class E (Commercial Business and Services) to mixed use Class B8 (Storage and Distribution), Class E (Commercial Business and Services) and Class F.1 (Learning and Non Residential Institutions).”

“The proposal would also involve the conversion of approximately 238 sqm of existing Class E floorspace and 250 sqm of Class B8 storage and distribution space to provide a total of 488 sqm of Class F.1 floorspace for public worship and religious instruction. This would accommodate a place of worship with a capacity of approximately 150 people.”

“Technology House is a two-storey building housing 1202sq.m floorspace located on a rectangular parcel of land . It is understood that the building was previously occupied by an IT company which used the building for a mix of Class E (office) and Class B8 (storage and distribution) uses.”

“The site is accessed via The High Street through the forecourt of the adjoining Shell petrol station to the east. The site is located between two large retail units. Tesco occupy the unit to the south, whilst the unit to the north is presently under renovation. The Grand Union Canal is located to the west of the site, the public towpath runs immediately to the west of the site and rear of the building.”

“It is recognised that the development plan provides support for community use and F1 floor space in appropriate locations and that the proposal would bring forward some public benefits to the local community. However, in this case the proposed building to be repurposed is in an inappropriate location and therefore the public benefits are not considered to outweigh the harm identified.”

“The development would not be served by adequate pedestrian and vehicular access or car parking provision and would therefore prejudice highway and pedestrian safety. It has also not been demonstrated that flood risk has been satisfactorily addressed. There is also a planning obligation in respect of air quality mitigation that has not been secured by the completion of a s106 legal agreement.”

“The Kingsborough Centre is a Registered Charity which is involved with a range of local community projects and events including the food bank, support for the unemployed and disadvantaged families, vocational training and spiritual support. It makes a valu able contribution to the local community. We support their proposals for new and improved accommodation and urge the Council to approve the planning application.”

“The lead petitioner addressed the Committee and made the following points: • The Committee were urged to approve this change of use application for Kingsborough • The Church had had an extraordinary and lasting impact on individuals, families and the wider community over the past 23 years • The Church had played a significant role in the lives of the petitioners, providing spiritual guidance, community support, friendship and opportunities for personal growth • This…”

“The applicant addressed the Committee and made the following points: • The applicant was speaking on behalf of their late father, who sadly passed away in May 2026 • For almost 25 years, the applicant’s father had dedicated his life to serving the people of Hillingdon and the Kingsborough Centre was borne out of this • Kingsborough was an organisation that had supported thousands of families across the borough through education, employment opportunities, childcare and…”

“Members noted that the application was well supported, but the hazards remained. The submission from Highways was also noted.”

“Members commended the Kingsborough for the important work they do but noted that these cannot be separated from planning policy issues. There were major objections on pedestrian safety grounds.”

“Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.”

“The proposed development would not be served by adequate pedestrian or vehicular access, nor by sufficient on -site car parking, and would therefore result in unacceptable impacts on highway and pedestrian safety. Furthermore, it has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that flood risk issues have been appropriately addressed.”