Development Intent
AtlasNewhamOfficersRosie Williams
Case officer · Newham Planning

Rosie Williams.

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

A case officer at Newham with an approval rate of 86% across 10 decided planning applications, spanning 7 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer10 decisions86% approvalSave
Newham · 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 →
10
Applications
2020–21
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%202075%2021
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate86% · 15th of 39
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 Rosie Williams'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 Rosie Williams decided — 2 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

D1London Plan
1 times cited
D4London Plan
1 times cited
SP1BoroughNewham plan
1 times cited
SP3and J1). These are indicated in relevant spatial policies and more extensively but notNewham plan
1 times cited
SP8Neighbourly development and living conditionsNewham plan
1 times cited
NPPFNPPF
1 times cited
G6London Plan
1 times cited
SC1Building PerformanceNewham plan
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward

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
21/00740/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2021-06-21
21/00259/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2021-05-17
21/00740/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2021-06-21
21/00259/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2021-05-17
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 10 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Rolfe Judd Planning
2. Fred Richard & associates
3. Collins & Coward
4. Hertford Planning Service
At a glance
OfficerRosie Williams
BoroughNewham
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications10 (2020–21)
Approval rate86%
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 Newham 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 Newham 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.