Development Intent
Planning AtlasKensington And ChelseaCL11
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Kensington And Chelsea · Local Plan · Policy

CL11 — Views.

How Kensington And Chelsea actually applies CL11: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

CL11 is a published Kensington And Chelsea planning policy. This page records where it appears in the council's published planning decisions.

Cited under: Kensington And Chelsea Local Plan (adopted)

Kensington And Chelsea · CL11
Where CL11 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~5
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
47
times cited
in parsed decision notices
62%
appeal survival
50 dismissed · 31 allowed at appeal
23 of 76
officer reach
30% of officers recorded in this period
Redcliffe
top hotspot ward
5 citations
What this policy is about

Policy CL11 requires all development to protect views and the character of the area by resisting development that interrupts views, requiring visual impact assessments, and respecting the setting of listed buildings and conservation areas. The Council will resist development that detracts from strategic and local vistas, and support development that preserves or enhances views, particularly in conservation areas and near landmarks.

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

The policy — as adopted

Views

The Council will require all development to protect that contribute to the character and quality of the a To deliver this the Council will: a. resist development which interrupts, disrupts or and gaps and the skyline; b. require developments whose visual impacts exte to demonstrate how views are protected or enhanc c. require, within conservation areas, development i. identified in conservation area appraisals; ii. generally within, into, and out of conservation iii. that affect the setting of and from developme listed buildings; d. require development to respect the setting of a l elements in its foreground, middle ground or backg Building Heights 22.3.94 The relatively modest and consistent hei reflects the primarily residential characte delivered without recourse to tall building medium-rise, high-density residential are and is central to the borough’s charm. 22.3.95 New buildings can strengthen the traditio carefully designed to respect their imme which can seek to introduce new legible character. (See policy CR2 Three-dimen 22.3.96 Where new larger developments are pro can provide visual interest to the streetsc forms. This could mean differentiation in based on the prevailing building height, t predominantly domestic scale of the bor t has an impact beyond the immediate street, a o be carried out in accordance to the uilding Heights SPD. pment on views within the townscape, including in as of landmarks defining points of townscape n to the strategic view from St Paul’s to King fied in the London Plan, the borough also has mportant to protect. These are set out in the Views and enhance views, vistas, gaps and the skyline area. detracts from strategic and local vistas, views, end beyond that of the immediate street, ced; t to preserve or enhance views: n areas, including the rear of properties; ent on sites adjacent to conservation areas and landmark, taking care not to create intrusive ground. ight of building within Kensington and Chelsea er of the borough. High residential densities are gs. This pattern of development with its low to eas, has produced a very attractive townscape, onal townscape, both through individual buildings ediate context and through larger developments, environments consistent with the borough’s nsional Street Form). o- posed some variation in roofscape and height cape and avoid overbearing and bulky building n roof forms and roof lines within parameters to break up large blocks and reflect the rough. 22.3.97 Tall buildings are very much the exceptio height is thus a critical issue and a very that the Council carefully manages the h erode the borough’s distinctive characte 22.3.98 Tall buildings have a greater impact on t posing problems of microclimate, oversh harmful to residential environments and through careful siting and design (see po 22.3.99 Tall buildings in the wrong location can b character and appearance of a conserva visual amenity of important open space;

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

How it lands
28% in approvals · 72% in refusals
47 citations in the selected period
The approval/refusal split is subscriber intelligenceUnlock →
Where it bites
Redcliffe5
Royal Hospital5
Norland4
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 CL11 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

CL11 appears most often in Redcliffe, Royal Hospital, Norland. It appears across 23 of 76 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
28%
in approvals
13 citations
72%
in refusals
34 citations

This shows the decision reports in which CL11 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes.

Reason · role · consequence

Not filled in yet — the classification pass over the citing passages hasn't run. When it has, this shows why CL11 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
62% survival
50 dismissed · 31 allowed · 4 split85 PINS appeal decisions cite CL11

From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite CL11. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing CL11 traced to their specific appeals — is still to come.

Related — follow the thread
Kensington And Chelsea
Back to the borough policy record
Open →
Committee record
What reaches members, and what they do with it
Open →
Case officers
Kensington And Chelsea's decision-makers
Open →
Citations, officer spread, ward and application-type counts parsed from published Kensington And Chelsea 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.