EN5 — Flood risk.
How Lambeth actually applies EN5: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.
EN5 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)
Policy EN5 minimises flood impact by avoiding flood risk areas and managing residual risk. It applies to development in flood zones and areas at risk of flooding. The council will resist developments increasing flood risk.
Plain-English summary of the adopted policy text below. The full text is the rule; this is the gist.
Flood risk
Verbatim from the adopted Lambeth plan · source document. The council's published plan is the authoritative version.
205 citations in the selected period
Not filled in yet. This will hold how officers actually argue EN5 case by case, classified from their decision reports — the classification pass hasn't run. Nothing is paraphrased in its place.
EN5 appears most often in Clapham Town, Clapham Common & Abbeville, Streatham Wells. It appears across 43 of 70 officers recorded in this period. The map shows the pattern for the selected period.
This shows the decision reports in which EN5 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 1 citations sit outside the approval/refusal split.
Not filled in yet — the classification pass over the citing passages hasn't run. When it has, this shows why EN5 was used, whether it supported approval or refusal, and what changed as a result. No conclusion is shown until that classification has been checked.
From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite EN5. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. Too few decisive appeals for a rate — the counts are the record. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing EN5 traced to their specific appeals — is still to come.
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.