Development Intent
AtlasBarking and DagenhamOfficersAdele Lawrence
Planning Atlas›Barking And Dagenham›Adele Lawrence
Case officer · Barking And Dagenham Planning

Adele Lawrence.

Last recorded decision Jul 2020 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Barking And Dagenham with an approval rate of 33% across 4 decided planning applications, spanning 3 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer4 decisions33% approvalSave
Barking And Dagenham · 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 →
4
Applications
2020
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average

Not enough dated decisions for a trend yet.

What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate33% · 29th of 29
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 Adele Lawrence'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 Adele Lawrence decided — 1 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

7.1Superseded
1 times cited
7.4Superseded
1 times cited
7.6Superseded
1 times cited
D1London Plan
1 times cited
D4London Plan
1 times cited
BP8Barking And Dagenham plan
1 times cited
BP11Barking And Dagenham plan
1 times cited
CP3Barking And Dagenham plan
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
2
0%
1
0%
1
100%
2
0%
1
0%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020.[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
20/00282/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2020-06-12
20/00484/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2020-05-29
20/00282/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2020-06-12
20/00484/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2020-05-29
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 4 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Form Architecture Ltd.
2. Polar Design
At a glance
OfficerAdele Lawrence
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications4 (2020)
Approval rate33%
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 Barking And Dagenham planning register and published decision notices, 2020. · 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 Barking And Dagenham 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.