Development Intent
AtlasCroydonOfficersLucy Andrews
Planning Atlas›Croydon›Lucy Andrews
Case officer · Croydon Planning

Lucy Andrews.

Last recorded decision Feb 2021 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Croydon with an approval rate of 97% across 29 decided planning applications, spanning 8 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer29 decisions97% approvalSave
Croydon · 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 →
29
Applications
2020–21
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%202096%2021
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate97% · 1st of 83
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 reports32 officer reports parsed
0%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
0%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
0%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
98%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
Assigned Lucy Andrews on a live case?What they pay attention to, how they reason, and what their reports consistently look for — so you can address it before they raise it.Subscribe to unlock →
In their own words

“The proposed elevation does not contain any windows and the neighbouring elevation that it faces onto does not have any windows in it either. Therefore there is no risk of overlooking”

21/00547/HSE

“The applicant has failed to demonstrate through the submission of an appropriate arboricultural report that this excavation within the RPAs would not cause harm to the long term health and visual amenity that these trees provide.”

21/00140/HSE

Measured from 32 published Croydon officer reports written by this officer, with recited policy boilerplate stripped before any counting. These describe how this officer works and writes — they are not outcome predictions. Every quote is from a named public report.

Policy playbook — what this officer cites[3]

The policies this officer cites most in their own reports — times cited across 32 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

DM10.1
2 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
5
80%
5
100%
4
100%
4
100%
4
100%
3
100%
2
100%
2
100%
5
80%
5
100%
4
100%
Show all 8 rows
4
100%
4
100%
3
100%
2
100%
2
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–21.[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
21/00553/FUL
Full planning permission
Approved
2021-03-30
21/00560/HSE
Householder Application
Approved
2021-03-29
21/00553/FUL
Full planning permission
Approved
2021-03-30
21/00560/HSE
Householder Application
Approved
2021-03-29
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 29 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. LPR Design
2. Focus Property Consultancy Ltd
3. A. Leonard
4. Hamilton Design and Build Ltd
At a glance
OfficerLucy Andrews
BoroughCroydon
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications29 (2020–21)
Approval rate97%
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 Croydon planning register and published decision notices, 2020–21. · 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 Croydon decision notices (grant/split), parsed from the published notice text; a borough figure, not yet split per case officer.
  4. [4]"How this officer decides", the policy playbook and all quotes — parsed from 32 published Croydon officer reports written by this officer, recited policy boilerplate stripped before counting; disposition text coded from their own reasoning with every quote machine-verified verbatim. Descriptive of how they work — not outcome predictions.
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.