Development Intent
AtlasLambethOfficersAnna Kaskanlian
Case officer · Lambeth Planning

Anna Kaskanlian.

Last recorded decision Oct 2022 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Lambeth with an approval rate of 78% across 74 decided planning applications, spanning 16 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer74 decisions78% approvalSave
Lambeth · ward map
Approval rate — by ward
Lower ~68%
Higher ~90%
ShowingAll years · subscriber →across all years on record — a period re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
At a glanceEach metric links to the investigation behind it
All investigations →
74
Applications
2021–22
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%78%2022100%2023
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate78% · 40th of 72
higher is betterdashed = London avg
Decision time · publishes with decision notices
in development
Appeal overturn · publishes with decision notices
in development
How this officer decides — from their own reports

Not filled in yet — this needs at least 20 of Anna Kaskanlian's own officer reports parsed, and their reports haven't reached that threshold in the parsing run. It fills automatically as parsing progresses; nothing is estimated in its place.

Policy playbook — what this officer cites[3]

The policies cited most on decision notices for applications Anna Kaskanlian decided — 70 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

Q5Local distinctivenessLambeth plan
49 times cited
Q11Building alterations and extensionsLambeth plan
49 times cited
Q8Design quality: construction detailingLambeth plan
41 times cited
Q2AmenityLambeth plan
16 times cited
Q22Conservation areasLambeth plan
10 times cited
Q20Statutory listed buildingsLambeth plan
8 times cited
NPPFNPPF
5 times cited
T1Sustainable travelLambeth plan
3 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2021–22.[1] Click the map above to focus this page on a ward, or a row to open the ward.

Recent applications
Address
Reference
Type
Outcome
Date
22/01907/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2023-02-02
21/03928/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2023-01-20
22/01907/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2023-02-02
21/03928/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2023-01-20
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 74 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. allPlanning
2. Faithorn Farrell Timms LLP
3. Intellect Civil and Construction Limited
4. Turner Architects Ltd
At a glance
OfficerAnna Kaskanlian
BoroughLambeth
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications74 (2021–22)
Approval rate78%
London approval avg81%
Who decides here
GovernmentMayor of LondonCouncilCommitteeOfficersDecisionsApplicantsInspectorate
Related investigations
When committees overrule officers like this one →
How often members depart from officer recommendations, and how those overrides fare at appeal.
How much gets decided without a committee →
The delegated share by borough and officer — where the real power over decisions sits.
Sources & method
  1. [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Lambeth planning register and published decision notices, 2021–22. · methodology
  2. [2]Appeal overturn and decision-time benchmarks — Planning Inspectorate (PINS) appeal decisions and application date pairs; not yet computed per officer, shown as a dash until they are. · PINS appeals casework
  3. [3]Condition load — mean effective conditions attached to Lambeth decision notices (grant/split), parsed from the published notice text; a borough figure, not yet split per case officer.
  4. [4]Policy citations will be coded from officer reports against the adopted Local Plan, London Plan and NPPF — that parsing has not run for this borough yet.
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.