Streatham residents launch legal challenge over Lambeth Council’s approval of Leigham Court Road development

Streatham residents have launched a CrowdJustice campaign to fund the first steps of a legal challenge against Lambeth Council’s approval of a major development on and around Leigham Court Road.

The approved scheme, planning reference 25/02438/FUL, would redevelop land at 35–37 Leigham Court Road and land to the west and rear of 39–49 Leigham Court Road, London SW16 2ND.

The site includes the current council car park, the former synagogue to the rear of South Lodge, and the former bowling green behind 49 Leigham Court Road.

The development by Pocket Living would deliver 92 residential units, alongside community and commercial space.

According to the residents’ campaign, only 15 homes would be social housing, while 77 homes would be retained by the developer as rental-only properties.

The campaign also raises concern that part of the scheme includes 46 en-suite rooms with shared living rooms and kitchens, which residents describe as HMO style accommodation rather than the family-sized affordable homes the area needs.

Streatham Leigham Group, a residents’ group representing people in Leigham Court Road and the surrounding area, has instructed specialist planning solicitors Richard Buxton Solicitors. In a letter sent to Lambeth Council on 21 April 2026, the solicitors asked the council to send the application back to its Planning Applications Committee.

The council’s Planning Applications Committee resolved to approve the application on 18 November 2025, by six votes to one, subject to completion of a section 106 agreement.

This was confirmed at a follow-up meeting on 28 April 2026 after new Heritage consultee comments were received. At the time the legal letter was sent, residents say the formal decision notice had not yet been issued.

A spokesperson for Streatham Leigham Group said:

“We are not against new housing.

We know London needs homes, including genuinely affordable and social housing. Our concern is that this particular decision appears to have been made without properly explaining or weighing up serious harm to nearby residents, the local conservation area, and local environmental standards.

We are asking Lambeth to do the sensible thing: pause, look again, and put the decision back before councillors with the full facts.”

The residents’ case focuses on whether councillors were given the full and accurate picture before voting to approve the scheme.

The group says Lambeth’s own evidence showed serious impacts, but that those impacts were not clearly presented or properly justified.

Right to light

One of the main concerns is daylight and sunlight. The campaign says neighbouring homes, including a sheltered housing building with elderly residents, would lose significant light.

The council’s independent technical review found that the garden at 33A Leigham Court Road would suffer a “major adverse” impact and would not meet recognised guidance.

Residents say this key finding was not clearly brought to councillors’ attention before they voted.

The campaign also raises concern about vulnerable residents.

It says many of the people affected include elderly neighbours, some in their 90s, and that the council’s documents recognised vulnerable residents but did not show a proper assessment of the impact on them.

The campaign says a separate right-to-light assessment has indicated that impacts may be serious and measurable, with many windows in South Lodge and Streatham Close failing relevant daylight guidance.

Residents are also concerned about the impact on the Leigham Court Road (North) Conservation Area, which includes the former bowling green.

The legal letter says the council should have considered its own conservation-area documents, which describe the area’s leafy, spacious character and identify infill development as one of the greatest threats to that character. Residents say this did not happen in a clear or meaningful way.

The legal letter also raises a concern about the way Lambeth applied its town centre policy.

Residents say the council relied on a policy supporting new homes in town centres, but the part of the site said to be within the Streatham Town Centre Boundary would contain community or commercial space, not housing.

The group argues that councillors may therefore have been given the wrong impression about how strongly local planning policy supported the development.

The wider CrowdJustice campaign also highlights concerns about biodiversity, building height, and public consultation.

The campaign says the development falls short of the legal requirement for biodiversity net gain, that two buildings would rise to over 20 metres in a lower-rise area, and that consultation materials did not clearly show the closest distances between new buildings and existing homes, including one building said to be around one metre from an existing home.

Additionally, the financial arrangements between Lambeth Council and Pocket Living have been kept mostly away from public scrutiny. Investigations have revealed that the council car park, the only public car park in Streatham, was sold to Pocket Living for £1 .

Pocket Living’s own financial viability consultant, DS2, calculates a viability deficit of more than £13m compared with the benchmark land value and noted that the development would only be more deliverable over time and with future rental growth (ie. increased rent).

Crowdfunding

Streatham Leigham Group is initially raising £2,500 to fund the first stage of legal action.

If further steps are needed, the campaign estimates that preparing a formal pre-action protocol letter with expert barrister advice would cost around £7,500, and that a full judicial review could cost around £45,000. The group says all funds raised through CrowdJustice go directly to its solicitors.

The residents hope Lambeth Council will return the application to the Planning Applications Committee without the need for court proceedings.

The spokesperson added:

“This is about fairness, transparency, and getting the decision right. People’s homes, gardens, light, outlook and local environment are at stake.

Once the final decision is issued, there is only a very short window to challenge it. That is why residents are acting now.”

Supporters can read more and contribute to the CrowdJustice campaign here.

Background

The planning application reference is 25/02438/FUL. Lambeth Council’s Planning Applications Committee resolved to approve the application on 18 November 2025, subject to completion of a section 106 agreement.

The legal letter dated 21 April 2026 was sent by Richard Buxton Solicitors on behalf of Streatham Leigham Group. It asks Lambeth Council to refer the application back to the Planning Applications Committee for redetermination before a final decision notice is issued.

The residents’ legal concerns, in plain English, are that councillors may not have been given a full and accurate explanation of: the sunlight and daylight harm to neighbours; the impact on the Leigham Court Road (North) Conservation Area; and whether the correct town centre planning policy was properly applied.

The residents’ campaign states that it supports new housing in principle, including social housing, but objects to what it considers a flawed approval process for this particular scheme.

Join the local discussion