Planning application · Lambeth
24/00945/FUL.
24 - 28 Brixton Water Lane London SW2 1PE
Full / Other Planning at 24 - 28 Brixton Water Lane London SW2 1PE, received 21 Mar 2024 — refused on 5 Jun 2024 (delegated, Felicia Onabanjo).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationLambeth profile →
Refused
Outcome
5 Jun 2024
11 wks
Decision time
3 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
28
Documents
28 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Lambeth planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Erection of a mansard roof extension to provide 2 self-contained flats, together with the provision of cycle storage at ground floor level.
Reference
24/00945/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SW2 1PE
Council
Received
21 Mar 2024
Validated
11 Apr 2024
Target date
6 Jun 2024
Decision date
5 Jun 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
24/00945/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SW2 1PE
Council
Received
21 Mar 2024
Validated
11 Apr 2024
Target date
6 Jun 2024
Decision date
5 Jun 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Lambeth portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 5 Jun 2024, delegated decision by Felicia Onabanjo — 11 weeks from submission (3 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
21 Mar 2024
Application received
11 Apr 2024
Application validated
6 Jun 2024
Statutory target date
5 Jun 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Felicia Onabanjo
21 Mar 2024
Application received
11 Apr 2024
Application validated
6 Jun 2024
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
5 Jun 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Felicia Onabanjo
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed used of commercial floorspace at ground floor level of the application property to make
provision for cycle storage associated with the proposed residential units would unacceptably reduce the internal
floorspace of the existing commercial units at No. 24 and 28 Brixton Water Lane. The proposal would significantly
reduce the capacity of the existing commercial units to provide cycle storage for staff and to accommodate refuse
Lambeth Planning Telephone 020 7926 1180
PO Box 80771 www.lambeth.gov.uk
London planning@lambeth.gov.uk
SW2 9QQ
REFULZ
and recycling of commercial waste. In these respects, the proposal would compromise the viability of the existing
commercial units and consequently the vitality of the Tulse Hill/Brixton Water Lane Local Centre. As such the
proposal is contrary to Policies ED7 and ED10 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
2
The proposed 1-bedroom residential units would intensify the non-family size dwellings on the site thereby
failing to offer a range of housing types on the site including family sized accommodation to meet the current and
future housing needs of the borough contrary to Policy H4 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
3
The proposed flats by reason of their size, would fail to provide the required minimum internal floorspace
space of 50sqm for 1-bedroom and 2 persons flatted developments. The inadequate standard of accommodation is
demonstrated by the insufficient in-built storage space and the lack of any outdoor private amenity space or
equivalent internal floorspace for each flat. As such, the development would provide substandard quality of
accommodation contrary to Policy H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021).
4
The proposed mansard roof extension by reason of its design, scale and massing would result in an
incongruous and over dominant addition that would fail to appear subordinate the host building and would harm the
uniformity and architectural integrity of the adjoining group of buildings of which it forms a part. Therefore, the
proposal is contrary to Policies Q2, Q5, Q8 and Q11 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021), and design guidance on
mansard roof extensions contained in the Lambeth Design Guide (2023).
5
In the absence of detailed plans for the provision for cycle parking, it has not been demonstrated that the
development has sufficient space for the requisite number of long and short stay cycle spaces for the future
occupants of the flats and visitors. In this respect, the proposal is contrary to Policies Q13 and T3 of the Lambeth
Local Plan (2021) and Policy T5 of the London Plan (2021).
6
In the absence of a Unilateral Undertaking or other legal agreement securing appropriate mitigation by
restricting future occupiers of the development from obtaining parking permits within the Controlled Parking Zone,
providing car club membership and cycle hire scheme, the proposed development would likely exacerbate existing
parking stress and congestion on the surrounding highway network. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies
D4, T1 and T7 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and Policy T6 of the London Plan (2021).
1
The proposed used of commercial floorspace at ground floor level of the application property to make
provision for cycle storage associated with the proposed residential units would unacceptably reduce the internal
floorspace of the existing commercial units at No. 24 and 28 Brixton Water Lane. The proposal would significantly
reduce the capacity of the existing commercial units to provide cycle storage for staff and to accommodate refuse
Lambeth Planning Telephone 020 7926 1180
PO Box 80771 www.lambeth.gov.uk
London planning@lambeth.gov.uk
SW2 9QQ
REFULZ
and recycling of commercial waste. In these respects, the proposal would compromise the viability of the existing
commercial units and consequently the vitality of the Tulse Hill/Brixton Water Lane Local Centre. As such the
proposal is contrary to Policies ED7 and ED10 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
2
The proposed 1-bedroom residential units would intensify the non-family size dwellings on the site thereby
failing to offer a range of housing types on the site including family sized accommodation to meet the current and
future housing needs of the borough contrary to Policy H4 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
3
The proposed flats by reason of their size, would fail to provide the required minimum internal floorspace
space of 50sqm for 1-bedroom and 2 persons flatted developments. The inadequate standard of accommodation is
demonstrated by the insufficient in-built storage space and the lack of any outdoor private amenity space or
equivalent internal floorspace for each flat. As such, the development would provide substandard quality of
accommodation contrary to Policy H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021).
Show all 6 rows
4
The proposed mansard roof extension by reason of its design, scale and massing would result in an
incongruous and over dominant addition that would fail to appear subordinate the host building and would harm the
uniformity and architectural integrity of the adjoining group of buildings of which it forms a part. Therefore, the
proposal is contrary to Policies Q2, Q5, Q8 and Q11 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021), and design guidance on
mansard roof extensions contained in the Lambeth Design Guide (2023).
5
In the absence of detailed plans for the provision for cycle parking, it has not been demonstrated that the
development has sufficient space for the requisite number of long and short stay cycle spaces for the future
occupants of the flats and visitors. In this respect, the proposal is contrary to Policies Q13 and T3 of the Lambeth
Local Plan (2021) and Policy T5 of the London Plan (2021).
6
In the absence of a Unilateral Undertaking or other legal agreement securing appropriate mitigation by
restricting future occupiers of the development from obtaining parking permits within the Controlled Parking Zone,
providing car club membership and cycle hire scheme, the proposed development would likely exacerbate existing
parking stress and congestion on the surrounding highway network. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies
D4, T1 and T7 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and Policy T6 of the London Plan (2021).
Policies cited
ED7ED10H4H5D6Q2Q5Q8Q11Q13T3T5D4T1T7T6
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.