Development Intent
AtlasLambethPolicyEN1
Planning AtlasLambethEN1
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Lambeth · Local Plan · Policy

EN1 — Open space, green infrastructure and biodiversity.

How Lambeth actually applies EN1: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

EN1 is a published Lambeth planning policy. This page records where it appears in the council's published planning decisions.

Cited under: Lambeth Local Plan (adopted)

Lambeth · EN1
Where EN1 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~22
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
163
times cited
in parsed decision notices
67%
appeal survival
6 dismissed · 3 allowed at appeal
42 of 70
officer reach
60% of officers recorded in this period
Clapham Town
top hotspot ward
22 citations
What this policy is about

Policy EN1 requires the protection and maintenance of open spaces and green infrastructure in Lambeth. Development proposals must meet one of three tests to replace lost open space, prevent harm to biodiversity, or enhance nature conservation. The council will encourage urban greening measures, including living roofs and walls, and seek planning obligations for maintenance.

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

The policy — as adopted

Open space, green infrastructure and biodiversity

The council will meet requirements for open space and green infrastructure by: A. Protecting and maintaining open spaces, green infrastructure and their function. Development which would involve the loss of existing public or private open space will not be permitted unless at least one of the following tests is met: i. Replacement open space of equivalent or better quality and quantity is provided within a suitable location in the local area. ii. In the case of housing estate amenity areas, significant regeneration and community benefits would be achieved that could not be achieved in any other way, and appropriate compensatory provision for the loss of open space is made, including improvements to the quality of the remaining open space. iii. It is for the provision of facilities directly related to the use of open space including ecology centres, indoor sports facilities, changing rooms, toilets or cafes as long as these are appropriate in scale and form to the size and character of the open space and acceptable in terms of impact on openness and do not harm the function and operation of the open space. B. Preventing development which would result in loss, reduction in area or significant harm to the nature conservation or biodiversity value of an open space including any designated or proposed Local Nature Reserves (LNR) or Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) unless adequate mitigation or compensatory measures of equivalent or better biodiversity value are included, appropriate to the nature conservation value of the assets involved. In the case of SINCs, the mitigation hierarchy in London Plan policy G6 C will apply. C. In accordance with London Plan policy G6, development proposals should wherever possible protect, enhance, create or manage nature conservation and biodiversity interest in accordance with the borough’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) and the Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy. D. Increasing the quantity of open space and green infrastructure in the borough through proposals such as the Vauxhall Square initiative, the  To table of contents Lambeth Local Plan 2020–2035 | Section 9: Environment and Green Infrastructure extension of Jubilee Gardens and by linking existing spaces through green chains, the Greenway and Thames Path National Walking trail initiatives, but also through: i. The provision of open space in new developments appropriate to their scale, the uses involved and the location of the development. ii. Requiring major development in areas of open space deficiency and/ or in areas of access to nature deficiency to provide new on-site open space/access to nature improvements. Where the development proposal includes residential units, this new open space should be in addition to the external amenity space requirements in Local Plan policy H5. Where it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the council that new on-site open space provision or access to nature improvements would not be feasible and/or effective, a payment in lieu will be sought as a planning obligation to enable the provision of new open space or improvements to the accessibility of existing public open space in the vicinity of the development, including their nature conservation and biodiversity value. Planning obligations will also be sought towards management and maintenance of new or improved open space. iii. Where appropriate and feasible, ensuring that development is designed so as to contribute to the creation or extension of green chains and links (‘green corridors’) involving safe, healthy, convenient and attractive access for pedestrians and cyclists and to promote migration and protection of plants, animals and habitats of biodiversity importance. E. Improving the quality of, and access to, existing open space and green infrastructure, including the range of facilities available and its biodiversity and nature conservation value and heritage value, through various means including the implementation of the Lambeth Open Spaces Strategy and Lambeth Green Infrastructure Strategy. F. Applying London Plan policy G5 in relation to the urban greening factor for major developments. For other developments the council will strongly encourage inclusion of urban greening measures. Development proposals should incorporate living roofs and walls where feasible and appropriate to the character and context of the development. All proposals should include a maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development. Planning obligations may be sought to cover future maintenance of green infrastructure.

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

How it lands
83% in approvals · 16% in refusals
163 citations in the selected period
The approval/refusal split is subscriber intelligenceUnlock →
Where it bites
Clapham Town22
Streatham St Leonard's12
Knights Hill11
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 EN1 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

EN1 appears most often in Clapham Town, Streatham St Leonard's, Knights Hill. It appears across 42 of 70 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
83%
in approvals
136 citations
16%
in refusals
26 citations

This shows the decision reports in which EN1 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 1 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 EN1 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
67% survival
6 dismissed · 3 allowed9 PINS appeal decisions cite EN1

From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite EN1. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing EN1 traced to their specific appeals — is still to come.

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