Development Intent
AtlasLambethPolicyQ22
Planning Atlas›Lambeth›Q22
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Lambeth · Local Plan · Policy

Q22 — Conservation areas.

How Lambeth actually applies Q22: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

Q22 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 · Q22
Where Q22 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~326
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
2,272
times cited
in parsed decision notices
82%
appeal survival
75 dismissed · 17 allowed at appeal
66 of 70
officer reach
94% of officers recorded in this period
Clapham Town
top hotspot ward
326 citations
What this policy is about

Policy Q22 in Lambeth requires development proposals in conservation areas to preserve or enhance the area's character and appearance. This applies to all development proposals in conservation areas. The council will resist façade retention with demolition, but may support demolition if the demolished building does not contribute to the area's character, a replacement has been approved, and a condition or agreement is in place to delay demolition until the replacement is contracted.

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

The policy — as adopted

Conservation areas

A. Development proposals affecting conservation areas will be permitted where they preserve or enhance the character or appearance of conservation areas by: i. respecting and reinforcing the established, positive characteristics of the area in terms of the building line, siting, design, height, forms, materials joinery, window detailing etc; ii. protecting the setting (including views in and out of the area). B. Façade retention with the demolition of the remaining building is generally not considered appropriate in conservation areas as it results in the loss of historic structures. Development involving demolition in a conservation area will only be supported if: i. the structure proposed for demolition does not make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the area; ii. a suitable replacement has been granted planning permission; and iii. a planning condition and/or section 106 agreement has been made that the building shall not be demolished until a contract for the replacement building has been made.

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

How it lands
73% in approvals · 27% in refusals
2,272 citations in the selected period
The approval/refusal split is subscriber intelligenceUnlock →
Where it bites
Clapham Town326
Kennington182
Waterloo & South Bank132
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 Q22 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

Q22 appears most often in Clapham Town, Kennington, Waterloo & South Bank. It appears across 66 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
73%
in approvals
1,651 citations
27%
in refusals
604 citations

This shows the decision reports in which Q22 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 17 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 Q22 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
82% survival
75 dismissed · 17 allowed · 1 split — 93 PINS appeal decisions cite Q22

From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite Q22. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing Q22 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.