Development Intent
AtlasLambethOfficersFelicia Onabanjo
Planning Atlas›Lambeth›Felicia Onabanjo
Case officer · Lambeth Planning

Felicia Onabanjo.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Lambeth with an approval rate of 71% across 880 decided planning applications, spanning 32 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer880 decisions71% 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 →
880
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%82%202088%202166%202255%202363%202470%202573%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate71% · 52nd 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 Felicia Onabanjo'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 Felicia Onabanjo decided — 741 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

Q11Building alterations and extensionsLambeth plan
553 times cited
Q5Local distinctivenessLambeth plan
430 times cited
Q8Design quality: construction detailingLambeth plan
393 times cited
Q2AmenityLambeth plan
341 times cited
Q22Conservation areasLambeth plan
213 times cited
Q20Statutory listed buildingsLambeth plan
116 times cited
NPPFNPPF
94 times cited
SI1London Plan
81 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
167
68%
89
67%
59
58%
54
54%
52
80%
50
64%
49
84%
49
78%
49
64%
46
93%
41
58%
37
85%
34
81%
29
82%
24
65%
21
80%
4
50%
4
100%
3
100%
3
100%
2
50%
2
50%
2
100%
1
0%
1
–
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
0%
1
100%
167
68%
89
67%
59
58%
Show all 32 rows
54
54%
52
80%
50
64%
49
84%
49
78%
49
64%
46
93%
41
58%
37
85%
34
81%
29
82%
24
65%
21
80%
4
50%
4
100%
3
100%
3
100%
2
50%
2
50%
2
100%
1
0%
1
–
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
0%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–26.[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
26/00335/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2026-05-28
26/00614/LB
Listed Building Consent
Approved
2026-05-28
26/00335/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2026-05-28
26/00614/LB
Listed Building Consent
Approved
2026-05-28
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 880 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Pellings LLP
2. Resi
3. Faithorn Farrell Timms LLP
4. Zebra Architects Ltd
At a glance
OfficerFelicia Onabanjo
BoroughLambeth
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications880 (2020–26)
Approval rate71%
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, 2020–26. · 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.