Development Intent
AtlasEalingOfficersJames Young
Planning Atlas›Ealing›James Young
Case officer · Ealing Planning

James Young.

Last recorded decision Feb 2023 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Ealing with an approval rate of 62% across 80 decided planning applications, spanning 17 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer80 decisions62% approvalSave
Ealing · 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 →
80
Applications
2020–23
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%63%202053%2021100%2022100%2023
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate62% · 43rd of 44
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 reports25 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
70%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Ealing's average officer

Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Ealing reports. Attention, not stance.

Outlook & amenity
1.06× borough avg
Privacy & overlooking
1× borough avg
Transport & parking
0.8× borough avg
Character & heritage
0.66× borough avg
Materials & detailing
0.58× borough avg

Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.

Assigned James Young 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 →

Measured from 25 published Ealing 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 25 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

D4
5 times cited
D6
3 times cited
S1
1 times cited
S2
1 times cited
S3
1 times cited
SPG 10
1 times cited
D1
1 times cited
E5
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
9
50%
9
44%
8
75%
7
83%
6
40%
6
83%
6
83%
6
67%
4
75%
4
33%
3
67%
3
67%
3
0%
2
0%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%
9
50%
9
44%
8
75%
Show all 17 rows
7
83%
6
40%
6
83%
6
83%
6
67%
4
75%
4
33%
3
67%
3
67%
3
0%
2
0%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–23.[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
222341FUL
Full Application
Approved
2023-02-09
222378LBC
Listed Building Consent
Approved
2022-10-26
222341FUL
Full Application
Approved
2023-02-09
222378LBC
Listed Building Consent
Approved
2022-10-26
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 80 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Planning Insight
2. Modhwadia Design Services
3. J E Architectural Design ltd
4. PLANS 4 U LTD
At a glance
OfficerJames Young
BoroughEaling
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications80 (2020–23)
Approval rate62%
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 Ealing planning register and published decision notices, 2020–23. · 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 Ealing 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 25 published Ealing 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.