Development Intent
AtlasWaltham ForestOfficersAmy Lee
Planning Atlas›Waltham Forest›Amy Lee
Case officer · Waltham Forest Planning

Amy Lee.

Last recorded decision Jul 2022 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Waltham Forest with an approval rate of 74% across 78 decided planning applications, spanning 20 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer78 decisions74% approvalSave
Waltham Forest · 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 →
78
Applications
2020–22
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%192185%202172%2022
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate74% · 21st of 49
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 Amy Lee'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 Amy Lee decided — 25 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

CS15Waltham Forest plan
25 times cited
DM29Waltham Forest plan
25 times cited
DM4Waltham Forest plan
23 times cited
DM32Waltham Forest plan
19 times cited
CS13Waltham Forest plan
17 times cited
CS2Waltham Forest plan
4 times cited
D4London Plan
1 times cited
CS7Waltham Forest plan
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
8
75%
7
86%
6
100%
6
50%
5
80%
5
100%
5
75%
4
75%
4
75%
4
50%
4
100%
4
100%
3
100%
2
50%
2
0%
2
50%
2
50%
2
50%
2
50%
1
100%
8
75%
7
86%
6
100%
Show all 20 rows
6
50%
5
80%
5
100%
5
75%
4
75%
4
75%
4
50%
4
100%
4
100%
3
100%
2
50%
2
0%
2
50%
2
50%
2
50%
2
50%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–22.[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
220555
Householder Planning
Approved
2022-10-20
221297
Householder Planning
Approved
2022-10-07
220555
Householder Planning
Approved
2022-10-20
221297
Householder Planning
Approved
2022-10-07
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 78 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Resi
2. Arks Design Studio Limited
3. George Beedle Architects Ltd
4. Bahara Designs LTD
At a glance
OfficerAmy Lee
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications78 (2020–22)
Approval rate74%
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 Waltham Forest planning register and published decision notices, 2020–22. · 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 Waltham Forest 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.