Planning application · Lewisham
DC/26/142844.
FLAT BST, 9 ALPHA ROAD, LONDON, SE14 6TZ
Full / Other Planning at FLAT BST, 9 ALPHA ROAD, LONDON, SE14 6TZ, received 30 Jan 2026 — refused on 30 Apr 2026 (delegated, Anna Redmond).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationLewisham profile →
Refused
Outcome
30 Apr 2026
13 wks
Decision time
5 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
19
Documents
19 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Lewisham 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?
Construction of a single storey lower ground extension to the rear and all associated works at Basement Flat, 9 Alpha Road SE14.
Reference
DC/26/142844
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
30 Jan 2026
Validated
5 Mar 2026
Target date
30 Apr 2026
Decision date
30 Apr 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
DC/26/142844
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
30 Jan 2026
Validated
5 Mar 2026
Target date
30 Apr 2026
Decision date
30 Apr 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Lewisham portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 30 Apr 2026, delegated decision by Anna Redmond — 13 weeks from submission (5 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
30 Jan 2026
Application received
5 Mar 2026
Application validated
30 Apr 2026
Statutory target date
30 Apr 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Anna Redmond
30 Jan 2026
Application received
5 Mar 2026
Application validated
30 Apr 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
30 Apr 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Anna Redmond
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed extension, by reason of its excessive depth and scale, would result in
an visually dominant and unsympathetic form of development that would fail to respect
the original form and architecture or the property resulting in harm to the appearance
of the host building and wider terrace contrary to Paragraph 135 of the National
Planning Policy Framework (2025), Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Policy QD9
of the Lewisham Local Plan (2025) and the provisions of the Alterations and
Extensions SPD (2019).
2
The proposed extension, by reason its siting coupled with its excessive height and
depth, would result in a materially harmful impact to living conditions at No. 11 Alpha
Road in terms of overbearing enclosure and reduced outlook contrary to Paragraph
135 of The National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D3 of the London Plan
(2021), Policy QD9 of the Lewisham Local Plan (2025), and the provisions of the
Council's Alterations and Extensions SPD (2019).
1
The proposed extension, by reason of its excessive depth and scale, would result in
an visually dominant and unsympathetic form of development that would fail to respect
the original form and architecture or the property resulting in harm to the appearance
of the host building and wider terrace contrary to Paragraph 135 of the National
Planning Policy Framework (2025), Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Policy QD9
of the Lewisham Local Plan (2025) and the provisions of the Alterations and
Extensions SPD (2019).
2
The proposed extension, by reason its siting coupled with its excessive height and
depth, would result in a materially harmful impact to living conditions at No. 11 Alpha
Road in terms of overbearing enclosure and reduced outlook contrary to Paragraph
135 of The National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D3 of the London Plan
(2021), Policy QD9 of the Lewisham Local Plan (2025), and the provisions of the
Council's Alterations and Extensions SPD (2019).
Policies cited
National Planning Policy Framework 135D3QD9NPPF
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.