Development Intent
AtlasLewishamOfficersAmanda Ghani
Planning Atlas›Lewisham›Amanda Ghani
Case officer · Lewisham Planning

Amanda Ghani.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Lewisham with an approval rate of 59% across 942 decided planning applications, spanning 16 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer942 decisions59% approvalSave
Lewisham · 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 →
942
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%46%202056%202153%202260%202371%202470%202558%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate59% · 49th of 52
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 Amanda Ghani'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 Amanda Ghani decided — 319 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

NPPFNPPF
154 times cited
127NPPF
64 times cited
130NPPF
33 times cited
D3London Plan
20 times cited
QD1Delivering high-quality design in LewishamLewisham plan
18 times cited
D6London Plan
15 times cited
124NPPF
14 times cited
QD8High-quality housing design for diverse needsLewisham plan
12 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
117
60%
109
62%
108
64%
98
62%
97
68%
96
56%
82
63%
67
49%
55
55%
36
48%
35
22%
20
65%
15
67%
5
75%
1
0%
1
–
117
60%
109
62%
108
64%
Show all 16 rows
98
62%
97
68%
96
56%
82
63%
67
49%
55
55%
36
48%
35
22%
20
65%
15
67%
5
75%
1
0%
1
–

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–26.[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
DC/26/143319
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2026-06-02
DC/26/143616
Householder Application
Approved
2026-06-02
DC/26/143319
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2026-06-02
DC/26/143616
Householder Application
Approved
2026-06-02
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 942 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. LJT Architects Ltd
2. ARCCI DESIGNS
3. Resi
4. ARCCIDESIGNS
At a glance
OfficerAmanda Ghani
BoroughLewisham
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications942 (2020–26)
Approval rate59%
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 Lewisham planning register and published decision notices, 2020–26. · 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 Lewisham 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.