Planning application · Lambeth
26/00918/FUL.
8 Aldebert Terrace London SW8 1BJ
Full / Other Planning at 8 Aldebert Terrace London SW8 1BJ, received 23 Mar 2026 — refused on 18 May 2026 (delegated, Nadia Harper).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationLambeth profile →
Refused
Outcome
18 May 2026
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
9
Documents
9 linked
10
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 create 1 self-contained dwelling flat, and provision of secure refuse and cycle storage with associated alterations to the existing boundary treatment.
Reference
26/00918/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SW8 1BJ
Ward
Council
Received
23 Mar 2026
Target date
18 May 2026
Decision date
18 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/00918/FUL
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SW8 1BJ
Ward
Council
Received
23 Mar 2026
Target date
18 May 2026
Decision date
18 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 9 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 18 May 2026, delegated decision by Nadia Harper — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
23 Mar 2026
Application received
18 May 2026
Statutory target date
18 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Nadia Harper
23 Mar 2026
Application received
18 May 2026
Statutory target date
18 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Nadia Harper
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed removal of the historic roof and its replacement with a mansard roof would be
uncharacteristic and incongruous, undermining the uniformity of the terrace and causing harm to the significance of
the Albert Square Conservation Area. Furthermore, the proposed mansard extension would fail to meet the
requirements set out in the Lambeth Design Guide (2023). The proposal is therefore contrary to policies Q5, Q11
Lambeth Planning Telephone 020 7926 1180
PO Box 80771 www.lambeth.gov.uk
London planning@lambeth.gov.uk
SW2 9QQ
REFULZ
and Q22 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and the Lambeth Design Guide (2023). The identified harm would not
be outweighed by public benefits, contrary to paragraph 215 of the NPPF (2024).
2
The proposed unit by reason of its insufficient floor to ceiling heights and lack of private amenity space
would result in substandard living conditions and poor-quality residential accommodation. The proposal is therefore
contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
3
In the absence of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the development as car-permit free, provision of a
car club membership and cycle hire membership, the transport impacts of the development would not be fully
addressed, and it would fail to promote less private car ownership and sustainable travel. The application is
therefore contrary to Policies T1, T3 and T6 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021)
1
The proposed removal of the historic roof and its replacement with a mansard roof would be
uncharacteristic and incongruous, undermining the uniformity of the terrace and causing harm to the significance of
the Albert Square Conservation Area. Furthermore, the proposed mansard extension would fail to meet the
requirements set out in the Lambeth Design Guide (2023). The proposal is therefore contrary to policies Q5, Q11
Lambeth Planning Telephone 020 7926 1180
PO Box 80771 www.lambeth.gov.uk
London planning@lambeth.gov.uk
SW2 9QQ
REFULZ
and Q22 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021) and the Lambeth Design Guide (2023). The identified harm would not
be outweighed by public benefits, contrary to paragraph 215 of the NPPF (2024).
2
The proposed unit by reason of its insufficient floor to ceiling heights and lack of private amenity space
would result in substandard living conditions and poor-quality residential accommodation. The proposal is therefore
contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021).
3
In the absence of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the development as car-permit free, provision of a
car club membership and cycle hire membership, the transport impacts of the development would not be fully
addressed, and it would fail to promote less private car ownership and sustainable travel. The application is
therefore contrary to Policies T1, T3 and T6 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021)
Policies cited
Q22NPPFD6H5T1T3T6
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
10
In support
0
Total comments
11
Objections
10
In support
0
Total comments
11
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.