Bromley Council says the boarded-up Conquest House on Elmfield Road does not justify an untidy site notice, and its owner turned down a free vinyl wrap. What councillors were told.

Bromley Council says it will not serve an untidy site notice on Conquest House, the empty office block at 25-27 Elmfield Road. Its reason is that the building is boarded up and secured, so its appearance is not causing enough harm.

The answer was given at Full Council on 12 October, when a resident asked why the council had not acted. The council published the written record of the questions and replies at the end of October (Full Council, 12 October 2026, Appendix A).

What the council said

The question came from a resident and went to Councillor Yvonne Bear, the portfolio holder for renewal, recreation and housing. He asked for the building’s current status, what was blocking a redevelopment, and why no Section 215 notice had been served.

The reply made four points:

  • Conquest House is privately owned, and the council “has no influence over its current status in terms of any potential redevelopment”.
  • The most recent planning application, 21/05420/FULL1, was withdrawn. The one before it, 20/04654/FULL1, was refused by the council and then dismissed at appeal.
  • The council’s economic development team has spoken to the developer and the owner. They told it they cannot put forward a viable scheme at present.
  • An untidy site notice “is not considered appropriate at the moment”, because the site is secured and boarded up.

The council also said it had offered, jointly with Bromley’s Business Improvement District, to pay for a vinyl wrap to improve the look of the building. That offer was refused. “We do, that is why we offered to put a vinyl wrap round it, but they declined,” the reply to a follow-up question said. “There is not much more that we can do as it is private property.”

What the refused scheme was

Both applications proposed knocking down 25-27 Elmfield Road and replacing it with a nine-storey building plus a basement, holding flats and commercial space, with car parking, cycle and bin stores (planning register, 20/04654/FULL1). The later application was a revised version. It was withdrawn, so no decision was made on it.

Break-ins and a hoarding promise

Councillors added their own follow-up questions at the meeting.

Councillor Sam Webber told the meeting of seeing young people breaking in over the summer, and said the hoarding was “inadequate”. The councillor asked for more work with the owners and the police. Councillor Julie Ireland said ward councillors had been in “constant contact” with the police and the council over the summer. A promise to replace the hoardings completely by the end of August had not been kept, the councillor said.

“I was not aware that the owners had agreed to replace the hoarding,” Councillor Bear replied, offering to discuss it after the meeting. The advice given to residents was to report a break-in or pulled-down hoarding to the police at the time it happens.

What it means for you

  • If you see someone breaking in, the council’s advice is to call the police while it is happening, on 999 if a crime is in progress or 101 otherwise.
  • For damaged hoarding, fly-tipping or graffiti, report it to the council through FixMyStreet. Councillor Ian Payne, who lives on the street, told the meeting that both had been very helpful.
  • Don’t expect quick change. The owner has told the council there is no viable scheme for now, and the council says it has no power over the redevelopment itself.

Planning decisions across the borough are on our Bromley planning applications page. The questions put to the same meeting are in our Full Council preview.

Sources