Planning application · Lambeth
26/00843/FUL.
Full / Other Planning at 3 Colmer Road London SW16 5LA, received 16 Mar 2026 — refused on 13 May 2026 (delegated, Favour Ogedengbe).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationLambeth profile →
Refused
Outcome
13 May 2026
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
17
Documents
17 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 single storey ground floor side extension.
Reference
26/00843/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SW16 5LA
Council
Received
16 Mar 2026
Target date
13 May 2026
Decision date
13 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/00843/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SW16 5LA
Council
Received
16 Mar 2026
Target date
13 May 2026
Decision date
13 May 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 13 May 2026, delegated decision by Favour Ogedengbe — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
16 Mar 2026
Application received
13 May 2026
Statutory target date
13 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Favour Ogedengbe
16 Mar 2026
Application received
13 May 2026
Statutory target date
13 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Favour Ogedengbe
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed extension, by reason of its siting, scale, design and projection beyond the established front
building line of the host property and adjoining terrace would disrupt the established uniformity of the streetscape,
resulting in an incongruous addition that fails to respect the streetscape of the surrounding area. Therefore, the
proposal is contrary to Policies Q5, Q8 and Q11 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and the guidance set out in the
Lambeth Design Guide SPD Part 4: Building Alterations, Extensions and Retrofit (2023).
1
The proposed extension, by reason of its siting, scale, design and projection beyond the established front
building line of the host property and adjoining terrace would disrupt the established uniformity of the streetscape,
resulting in an incongruous addition that fails to respect the streetscape of the surrounding area. Therefore, the
proposal is contrary to Policies Q5, Q8 and Q11 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and the guidance set out in the
Lambeth Design Guide SPD Part 4: Building Alterations, Extensions and Retrofit (2023).
Policies cited
Q5Q8Q11
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.