Planning Atlas
AtlasDevelopersDalrymple Ltd
Planning AtlasDevelopersDalrymple Ltd
Developer · London

Dalrymple Ltd.

A developer bringing schemes forward across London. Has 3 applications in 8 boroughs, at a 100% approval rate, 1996–09.[1] Where they build, and how, is below.

Developer8 boroughs100% approval
Where they build — by borough · tap to focus
FewerMore applications
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 →
3
Applications
London 1996–09
Avg S106 / unit
awaits s106 ingestion
Why a developer? Listed as a developer because every application we hold for them names them as the applicant.Something not right? Claim · Correct · Merge
Is this your developer?This profile is built from public planning records. Claim it to add your intro, logo and project images.
Claim this profile →
Approval rate over time — improving or slippingtheir London-wide rate by year
90%95%100%’96’97’98’01’04’05’07’08’09
What they build — by scheme type
3decisions

Click a slice to reshade the London map by that type.

Their planning record — policies in play

The policies most in play across this developer's schemes — how often each appears, and how often a scheme citing it wins consent.

Policies are coded from each officer report and decision notice — this table publishes when decision-notice ingestion lands. No policy record is shown until it's real.
Case officers — win rate when this developer submits

How often each named case officer grants consent on this developer's schemes. Pairing patterns from the public register — not endorsements.

The officer↔developer pairing isn't joined in the data layer yet — this table publishes when it is. Each borough's officers are already ranked in Track Records.
Applications by borough
Borough
Applications
Approval rate

Where this developer builds, 1996–09.[1] Click the map above to explore spatially, or a row to open the borough.

Outcomes secured — S106 by borough
S106 outcomes per unit aren't traced per developer yet — the borough-by-borough table publishes when the section 106 agreements and committee reports are ingested against this developer's consents.
Recent applications
Address
Borough
Type
Outcome
Date
Greenwich
Tree works in a Conservation Area
Approved
2009-02-25
Greenwich
Tree works in a Conservation Area
Approved
2008-10-30
Greenwich
Tree works in a Conservation Area
Approved
2007-01-17
Wandsworth
Works to a T.P.O. Tree
Approved
2004-06-03
Westminster
Applic. for works to trees in CA
No objection
2004-06-01
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
2001-02-13
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1998-03-24
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1998-03-24
Hammersmith And Fulham
Works to Tree(s) in Conservation Area
Approved
1997-10-16
Richmond Upon Thames
Reserved Matters DD Submission
Approved
1997-09-18
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1997-07-21
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1997-07-10
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1997-05-28
Merton
Tree Work
Other
1997-04-24
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1997-01-21
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1996-10-23
Richmond Upon Thames
Works to Trees Under TPO
Approved
1996-10-11
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1996-08-20
Lambeth
DO NOT USE HISTORIC PLANNING APPS ONLY
Approved
1996-08-15
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1996-07-30
Islington
Tree Works Notification in Conservation Area
Approved
1996-05-14
Islington
Tree Works Notification in Conservation Area
Approved
1996-05-14
Lambeth
DO NOT USE HISTORIC PLANNING APPS ONLY
Approved
1996-05-03
Greenwich
Tree works in a Conservation Area
Approved
2009-02-25
Greenwich
Tree works in a Conservation Area
Approved
2008-10-30
Greenwich
Tree works in a Conservation Area
Approved
2007-01-17
Show all 24 rows
Wandsworth
Works to a T.P.O. Tree
Approved
2004-06-03
Westminster
Applic. for works to trees in CA
No objection
2004-06-01
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
2001-02-13
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1998-03-24
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1998-03-24
Hammersmith And Fulham
Works to Tree(s) in Conservation Area
Approved
1997-10-16
Richmond Upon Thames
Reserved Matters DD Submission
Approved
1997-09-18
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1997-07-21
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1997-07-10
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1997-05-28
Merton
Tree Work
Other
1997-04-24
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1997-01-21
Wandsworth
Work to trees in conservation area
Approved
1996-10-23
Richmond Upon Thames
Works to Trees Under TPO
Approved
1996-10-11
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1996-08-20
Lambeth
DO NOT USE HISTORIC PLANNING APPS ONLY
Approved
1996-08-15
Westminster
Applic. for wks to trees subject to TPO
Approved
1996-07-30
Islington
Tree Works Notification in Conservation Area
Approved
1996-05-14
Islington
Tree Works Notification in Conservation Area
Approved
1996-05-14
Lambeth
DO NOT USE HISTORIC PLANNING APPS ONLY
Approved
1996-05-03
Consultants they instruct— subscriber data
At a glance
DeveloperDalrymple Ltd
Coverage8 London boroughs
Applications3 (1996–09)
Units sought
Approval rate100%
London rank#13505 of 16,342
Related investigations
How every developer ranks →
Approval rate, units sought and borough coverage across London developers, consultants, officers and inspectors.
Refusal Hotspots — where it's hard →
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
Sources & method
  1. [1]Applications, approval rate, borough breakdown and units — the planning applications across London on which this company is the named applicant, from borough planning registers. Individual householders are excluded. Units = residential units conservatively parsed from each proposal (sought, not delivered); not every scheme states a count. · methodology
  2. [2]Agents — the named planning agent on each of this developer’s applications, joined to the London consultant record. · methodology
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.