Development Intent
AtlasLambethOfficersMuhammad Saleem
Planning Atlas›Lambeth›Muhammad Saleem
Case officer · Lambeth Planning

Muhammad Saleem.

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

A case officer at Lambeth with an approval rate of 64% across 68 decided planning applications, spanning 8 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer68 decisions64% approvalSave
Lambeth · 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 →
68
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 rate64% · 63rd of 72
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 Muhammad Saleem'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 Muhammad Saleem decided — 46 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

Q11Building alterations and extensionsLambeth plan
21 times cited
Q22Conservation areasLambeth plan
13 times cited
Q2AmenityLambeth plan
11 times cited
Q5Local distinctivenessLambeth plan
11 times cited
T6ParkingLambeth plan
10 times cited
T7ServicingLambeth plan
9 times cited
T1Sustainable travelLambeth plan
8 times cited
6.3Superseded
6 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
13
64%
13
50%
9
43%
9
86%
8
63%
8
86%
7
83%
1
0%
13
64%
13
50%
9
43%
Show all 8 rows
9
86%
8
63%
8
86%
7
83%
1
0%

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
20/02986/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2020-12-23
20/03363/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2020-12-23
20/02986/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2020-12-23
20/03363/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2020-12-23
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 68 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Harrison Architects+designers Ltd
2. Aitchison Raffety
3. Artform Architects
4. Maylands Consulting
At a glance
OfficerMuhammad Saleem
BoroughLambeth
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications68 (2020)
Approval rate64%
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 Lambeth 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 Lambeth 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.