Development Intent
Planning AtlasCamdenA5
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Camden · Local Plan · Policy

A5 — Basements.

How Camden actually applies A5: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

A5 is a published Camden planning policy. This page records where it appears in the council's published planning decisions.

Cited under: Camden Local Plan (adopted)

Camden · A5
Where A5 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~4
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
17
times cited
in parsed decision notices
86%
appeal survival
6 dismissed · 1 allowed at appeal
12 of 57
officer reach
21% of officers recorded in this period
Hampstead Town
top hotspot ward
4 citations
What this policy is about

Policy A5 restricts basement development to prevent harm to neighbours and the area. It applies to homeowners and developers, requiring assessments and plans. The council will resist schemes causing harm or damage.

Plain-English summary of the adopted policy text below. The full text is the rule; this is the gist.

The policy — as adopted

Basements

The Council will only permit basement development where it is demonstrated to its satisfaction that the proposal would not cause harm to: a. neighbouring properties; b. the structural, ground, or water conditions of the area; c. the character and amenity of the area; d. the architectural character of the building; and e. the significance of heritage assets. In determining proposals for basements and other underground development, the Council will require an assessment of the scheme’s impact on drainage, flooding, groundwater conditions and structural stability in the form of a Basement Impact Assessment and where appropriate, a Basement Construction Plan. The siting, location, scale and design of basements must have minimal impact on, and be subordinate to, the host building and property. Basement development should: f. not comprise of more than one storey; g. not be built under an existing basement; h. not exceed 50% of each garden within the property; i. be less than 1.5 times the footprint of the host building in area; j. extend into the garden no further than 50% of the depth of the host building measured from the principal rear elevation; k. not extend into or underneath the garden further than 50% of the depth of the garden; l. be set back from neighbouring property boundaries where it extends beyond the footprint of the host building; and m. avoid the loss of garden space or trees of townscape or amenity value. Exceptions to f. to k. above may be made on large comprehensively planned sites. The Council will require applicants to demonstrate that proposals for basements: n. do not harm neighbouring properties, including requiring the provision of a Basement Impact Assessment which shows that the scheme poses a risk of damage to neighbouring properties no higher than Burland Scale 1 ‘very slight’; o. avoid adversely affecting drainage and run-off or causing other damage to the water environment; p. avoid cumulative impacts; q. do not harm the amenity of neighbours; r. provide satisfactory landscaping, including adequate soil depth; s. do not harm the appearance or setting of the property or the established character of the surrounding area; t. protect important archaeological remains; and u. do not prejudice the ability of the garden to support trees where they are part of the character of the area. The Council will not permit basement schemes which include habitable rooms and other sensitive uses in areas prone to flooding. We will generally require a Construction Management Plan for basement developments. Given the complex nature of basement development, the Council encourages developers to offer security for expenses for basement development to adjoining neighbours.

Verbatim from the adopted Camden plan · source document. The council's published plan is the authoritative version.

How it lands
88% in approvals · 0% in refusals
17 citations in the selected period
The approval/refusal split is subscriber intelligenceUnlock →
Where it bites
Hampstead Town4
Regent's Park2
Belsize2
What cites it — application types
all years on record · click a slice to filter
What it means in practice

Not filled in yet. This will hold how officers actually argue A5 case by case, classified from their decision reports — the classification pass hasn't run. Nothing is paraphrased in its place.

What the published record shows

A5 appears most often in Hampstead Town, Regent's Park, Belsize. It appears across 12 of 57 officers recorded in this period. The map shows the pattern for the selected period.

Who cites it — case-officer spreadfrom parsed decision notices · click an officer
Who leans on this policy — and how often — is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Why it is cited — and what follows
88%
in approvals
15 citations
0%
in refusals
0 citations

This shows the decision reports in which A5 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 2 citations sit outside the approval/refusal split.

Reason · role · consequence

Not filled in yet — the classification pass over the citing passages hasn't run. When it has, this shows why A5 was used, whether it supported approval or refusal, and what changed as a result. No conclusion is shown until that classification has been checked.

Why this policy is cited, and what follows, is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Does it hold up? — appeal performance
86% survival
6 dismissed · 1 allowed7 PINS appeal decisions cite A5

From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite A5. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing A5 traced to their specific appeals — is still to come.

Related — follow the thread
Camden
Back to the borough policy record
Open →
Committee record
What reaches members, and what they do with it
Open →
Case officers
Camden's decision-makers
Open →
Citations, officer spread, ward and application-type counts parsed from published Camden decision notices (high-confidence parses, approvals and refusals), joined to the canonical application record. One citation = one decision citing the policy. See the policy overview for every policy cited.

Atlas intelligence summarises patterns and observations from published planning records. Past decisions do not indicate how any future application will be determined. Every application is assessed on its own merits, having regard to the proposal, site, evidence and policies applying at the time. This information is provided for general information only and is not planning, legal, financial or professional advice.