Fairholme is a privately owned homeless hostel in Kenywn Street SE5 (a side street towards the Camberwell end of Coldharbour Lane near the "Norris Bedding" shop). The hostel owners had an application in to increase the number of rooms by 27 (50%) by adding an extra floor on top of existing building. The Brixton Society did not comment on this application, since it is slightly out-of-area, but I went along to the Planning Committee with a friend (JH) who is a resident of the hostel.

When the item was taken, JH was refused permission to speak as he had not notified the clerk of the committee by noon the previous day (which was true). Two neighbouring residents were allowed to put their objections which were as follows:-

1.  nuisance from existing residents more than enough – especially with Kids Company in the same street as well. 2. There had been unauthorised changes of use since the hostel opened in 1969 as a home for elderly drinkers run by St Mungos.  This had been categorised as "Class 2".

Since that time Lambeth council had given themselves planning permission to use the premises to house Asylum seekers (same class), but the private owner was now housing a general cross-section of homeless people (which Lambeth Planning say is SUI GENERIS).  

The planning committee councillors were greatly exercised by these distinctions, but the legal officers, who incidentally seems poorly briefed on the point, insisted at least 4 times in different ways that this was insufficient grounds for refusing the application.

JH would have raised the issue of what was happening to the residents whilst the works were done – and in fact one of the councillors (Seve Bradley I think) did ask that question – but the applicant's architect did not know.
  
The application was duly approved, and my friend JH had the satisfaction of giving the architect a good ear-bending after the meeting, so he at least was reasonably happy.

Having followed planning applications in Brixton since the early 80s, I was astounded to see that Barratt Homes are preparing the former Labour Exchange site in Coldharbour Lane – between Walton Lodge Laundry and "The Viaduct" for a sales drive.

I remember well how Ken Dixon, our late great planning boffin, and myself were invited by a small property developer from Tooting to accompany him to Courtney House (the then Planning Office) in 1983 to discuss what is now "The Viaduct" with officials.  The developer  was swiftly snubbed and left in no uncertain terms that this derelict garage and ex used car tyre depot was "employment generating" – in a derelict condition.  Even a "mixed use development" was out of a question then.

In the space of 25 years Lambeth have performed a complete volt-face on planning issues.  Derelict garages become luxury flats, and appropriately enough in the Lilliputian world of Lambeth, a former Labour Exchange is now going to become more upmarket flats, this time for sale rather than rent.

How did it happen?

Stage 1 – planning permission was given in the mid 1990s for a large 2 star hotel, said to be capable of generating 200 jobs. The developers were forbidden to demolish until matters were in hand to begin work on building the hotel. They demolished the site anyway.  

Stage 2 – planning permission for 155 social housing units was granted to "Places for People" a social housing/shared ownership outfit.

Stage 3 – Places for People do a sale or land-swap with Barratt Homes – with planning permission – at a much higher price.  Quids in for Places for People. Lambeth Council happy – the Notting Hill style upgrade of Brixton speeds on, and council tax receipts continue to increase. The new-look Brixton Village proprietors, traders and customers are pleased – more skinny latées all round.

Frankly this bending of the rules behind closed doors must stop. I grant that a "Co-operative Council" sounds very PC, but this is cooperative Peter Jones, not Rochdale pioneers. Brixton is getting overcrowded with "new money" and the masses have been dumped and dumped on.

I personally stand to gain in terms of my own house price – but I believe this property development madness should be brought under democratic control. Part of Brixton's charm used to be that it catered to the marginalised and oppressed. If it goes on like this they will be cleansed out of the zone. And we will all end up having to use Ocado, because there is no decent large or small supermarket on this side of Brixton.

David Warner 

Coldharbour Lane carwash – update 10/5/12
Although the carwash in front of Southwyck House (the Barrier Block) is authorised for 2 more years under a Lambeth Planning decision the advertising hoardings which aggressively dominate the flank fencing to the carwash site are not authorised and Lambeth have served an enforcement notice (a year ago).  If anyone sees an enforcement officer please let us know! (Cue much whinging and washing of hands from LBL) 

Regarding ownership of the land – the vice chair has (twice) asked Councillor Rachel Heywood to give us information on this. We had hoped that in the end we can get Lambeth to unite the green spaces in front of the barrier block. 

Lambeth did deal with a planning application from Ujima Housing Trust to build a block of flats there about 7 years ago, but the application was withdrawn and Ujima subsequently collapsed. Our guess is that Lambeth Housing still own the site, and are sitting on it hoping to find another housing developer. 

Your comments would be welcome to: planning@brixtonsociety.org.uk

We had a fantastic day today at the Friends of Windmill Gardens' May Day Parade and Festival. Although the weather kept numbers lower than last year, the sunny spells lifted people's spirits and saw us meet lots of new people and even sign up a few new members. 

Many thanks to the FoWG for having us along at their event, here's to another successful year.

8A Electric Avenue London SW9 8JX

11/02759/FUL (15 Feb) – proposal to use the space above shop unit in Electric Avenue as residential – opposed roof extension

368 To 372 Coldharbour Lane

11/04431/S106 – variation of section 106 agreement (25 Jan)
We objected to reducion  of social housing units proposed in the scheme.  

Upstairs former Woolworths Brixton Road 

11/02066/FUL – use upper floors as an hotel.  We supported this, proved external appearance was maintained in original period style and structural issue relating to original Woolworth signage was resolved.  

63 Barrington Road (Loughborough Park CA)

11/04059/FUL; 11/04060/CON (22 Jan) we objected to a modern side-addition to a pair of 1840s houses in Loughborough Park conservation area. Application subsequently refused.

1a Brailsford Road

11/03190/FUL (4 Nov) substanial block of flats on site adjoining the Water Lane entrance to Brockwell Park. We objected – asking for conditions to protect the view within the park. Application refused by planning committee on 20th March.

Land rear of 359-361 Brixton Road

11/02907/FUL 20 Oct – demolition of the former registry office ceremonial suite and replacement with bland modern residential block fronting Gresham Road. We objected on aesthetic grounds – planning application refused on appeal