Planning Update

450 planning objections have now been submitted – thank you if you were one of the people who took the trouble to object. If you haven’t yet, it’s not too late; you can still file your objection.

An Agreed Expiry Date of 28 November was recently added on the Lambeth website.  This sets a target for a decision and suggests a Planning Committee date may soon be confirmed, though in practice the timing can still slip. We have been advised that the earliest date for the Planning Committee is November, when 7 councillors will determine the outcome based on Lambeth Planning’s report. We expect around a week to 10 days’ notice of the actual date, and to have access to Lambeth’s report beforehand. 

This will be a key meeting, open to the public. Please come if you can. A good turn-out of people objecting to the proposal makes an impression on councillors and can make a difference to the decision. Meetings are usually held every 3 weeks at Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill at 7pm and the current schedule includes 28 October, 18 November, 9 December, and 13 January.  We will let you know which of these dates it is as soon as it has been published and share Lambeth’s report. 

The BBK409 Approach to the Objection

Image taken from the Lambeth Council Website, Design and Access Statement for 409 Kennington Road. Opinion - Showing Brandon Estate as part of the streetscape, we feel is misleading.

We made sure our submission was policy-led and evidence-based, supported by independent expertise and prioritised the conflict with the important conditions to comply with National, London Plan and Lambeth Plan priorities.

We highlighted the special protections given to heritage assets in the Government’s National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF) 2024, which makes clear there is no presumption in favour of development where harm to heritage assets is found, unless public benefits clearly outweigh it.

You can read our full objection letters here

• 17-storey tower on a tiny corner site in a 3–5 storey area – out of scale, out of context, and not good growth.

• Heritage: The tower would cause serious harm to the setting of Kennington Park, conservation areas, Albert Lodge (Grade II*) and the Lycée building (Grade II).

• Overshadows Kennington Park and narrows pavements – harms public amenity for the benefit of a small number of students.

• No mandatory retrofit study. We’d support retrofit or modest redevelopment, including upward extensions, if demolition were truly justified.

• 56% loss of long-term employment space – displacing the Jobcentre Plus and South London District Office.

• PBSA (Purpose-Built Student Accommodation): £525/week (~£2,275/month) luxury rooms, with the developer seeking to buy out on-site affordable provision.

• Over 1,700 student beds recently approved or in development locally – PBSA dominates the pipeline, crowding out affordable housing.

• No explanation why 17 storeys are needed, rather than a mid-rise scheme more in keeping with local character.

These points should be read together with the many well-considered objections submitted by local residents, groups and professionals — some of whom have devoted a great deal of time and expertise to analysing the application.

Independent Heritage Report – Paul Velluet

As mentioned in our previous newsletter, we commissioned Paul Velluet, a chartered architect and former Regional Architect of English Heritage (now Historic England) to prepare an Independent Heritage Report. His detailed report has helped us to reinforce our objection quite considerably.

Paul concludes the 17-storey tower would cause:

• Substantial harm to Kennington Park (Grade II).

• Serious harm to conservation areas, Albert Lodge (Grade II*) and the Lycée building (Grade II).

• Clear conflict with national, London-wide and Lambeth planning policies.

In his words:
“In the absence of clear and convincing justification for the harm caused to these heritage assets, and with no adequate public benefits to outweigh it, the Council is urged to refuse permission.”

AVR from Montague Evans Heritage Report (Note: Official AVRs use a wide-angle format, making distant objects appear smaller than seen in reality).

You can read the full report here

Letter to the GLA

We have also written to the Greater London Authority (GLA), stressing that the proposal is contrary to the London Plan. Tall buildings should be in Opportunity Areas or Town Centres, not forced onto a tiny, heritage-sensitive corner plot in a Local Centre like Kennington.

The letter makes clear that:

• Good Growth must be rooted in context – this scheme is the opposite.

• Strong transport links alone do not justify height where local character weighs heavily against it.

• The scheme narrows pavements, removes employment space, overshadows the park’s amenity space, and offers no genuine public benefit.

• Approval would set a damaging precedent for out-of-scale towers on inappropriate sites across London.

We have asked the GLA to ensure this application receives strategic scrutiny and to call it in if necessary. The Mayor can call in an application, but this happens rarely and usually within a week of the committee decision.

Planning Committee – The Key Hurdle

Taken from The Lambeth Council Website - Montague Evans Heritage Report.

The Planning Committee is the critical decision point. Seven councillors from across Lambeth (not our local ward councillors) will decide the outcome, based on Lambeth Planning’s report. With over 450 objections already submitted, there is clear and substantial public opposition.

We have already communicated our concerns to local ward councillors and our GLA member, Marina Ahmed. While they will not be voting on the application, they can still raise issues and press for proper scrutiny. If you would also like to share your views directly, you can do so by email our with ward councillors:

• Cllr David Amos – damos@lambeth.gov.uk

• Cllr Jacqui Dyer – jdyer3@lambeth.gov.uk

• Cllr Liam Daley – LADaley@lambeth.gov.uk

Support the Campaign

Thank you to everyone who has already supported us. We’re still short of what we need to cover paid costs for the Independent Heritage Report and ongoing website hosting. If you’re able to contribute — no matter how little — it genuinely helps. Donate here.

With warm wishes from all of us at BBK409.