Planning application · Lambeth
25/03716/FUL.
10 Handforth Road London SW9 0LP
Full / Other Planning at 10 Handforth Road London SW9 0LP, received 1 Dec 2025 — refused on 30 Jan 2026 (delegated, Michael Berry).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationLambeth profile →
Refused
Outcome
30 Jan 2026
9 wks
Decision time
1 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
Yes
Appeal
Appeal lodged
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 rear dormer to the existing outrigger involving a creation of a rear roof terrace and the installation of two front rooflights to the second floor flat.
Reference
25/03716/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
1 Dec 2025
Validated
5 Dec 2025
Target date
30 Jan 2026
Decision date
30 Jan 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
25/03716/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
1 Dec 2025
Validated
5 Dec 2025
Target date
30 Jan 2026
Decision date
30 Jan 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
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 30 Jan 2026, delegated decision by Michael Berry — 9 weeks from submission (1 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
1 Dec 2025
Application received
5 Dec 2025
Application validated
30 Jan 2026
Statutory target date
30 Jan 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Michael Berry
Appeal
Appeal lodged
1 Dec 2025
Application received
5 Dec 2025
Application validated
30 Jan 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 5 rows
30 Jan 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Michael Berry
Appeal
Appeal lodged
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The erection of the terrace and dormer, by virtue of its design, would be considered as an incongruent
addition to the character and appearance of the rear roofscape of Handforth Road, and would result in the loss of
the rear return pitched roof characteristic of the rear returns with the immediate locality, thus contrary to Policy Q5,
Q8 and Q11 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
Lambeth Planning Telephone 020 7926 1180
PO Box 80771 www.lambeth.gov.uk
London planning@lambeth.gov.uk
SW2 9QQ
REFULZ
2
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate how the proposed terrace would not result in
the unacceptable loss of privacy to the neighbouring No 12 Handforth Road's terrace, the occupiers of the first floor
of No 8 Handforth Road, and the occupiers of the rear gardens to No 8, No 10, and No 12 Handforth Road, and
thus demonstrate it would comply with Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
1
The erection of the terrace and dormer, by virtue of its design, would be considered as an incongruent
addition to the character and appearance of the rear roofscape of Handforth Road, and would result in the loss of
the rear return pitched roof characteristic of the rear returns with the immediate locality, thus contrary to Policy Q5,
Q8 and Q11 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
Lambeth Planning Telephone 020 7926 1180
PO Box 80771 www.lambeth.gov.uk
London planning@lambeth.gov.uk
SW2 9QQ
REFULZ
2
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate how the proposed terrace would not result in
the unacceptable loss of privacy to the neighbouring No 12 Handforth Road's terrace, the occupiers of the first floor
of No 8 Handforth Road, and the occupiers of the rear gardens to No 8, No 10, and No 12 Handforth Road, and
thus demonstrate it would comply with Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
Policies cited
Q5Q8Q11Q2
Appeal
Appeal
Outcome
Appeal lodged
Outcome not yet recorded
Appeal lodged
Outcome not yet recorded
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.