Development Intent
AtlasEalingOfficersSophie Hennessy
Planning Atlas›Ealing›Sophie Hennessy
Case officer · Ealing Planning

Sophie Hennessy.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Ealing with an approval rate of 92% across 286 decided planning applications, spanning 29 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer286 decisions92% 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 →
286
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%202194%202285%202388%202496%202586%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate92% · 4th 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 reports161 officer reports parsed
14%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
4%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
4%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
44%
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.

Bulk & massing
1.67× borough avg
Character & heritage
1.07× borough avg
Privacy & overlooking
1.05× borough avg
Daylight & sunlight
1.03× borough avg
Materials & detailing
0.78× borough avg

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

Assigned Sophie Hennessy 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 →
In their own words

“This adjoining neighbour is located towards west side of the application site, although directly being west of the property and the extension may cause some loss of morning light, this is not considered detrimental to no. 45 Chinnor Crescent”

221247PALHE

“The proposed raised platform will be above 0.3m and is therefore unlawful”

224319PALHE

Measured from 161 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 161 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

D3
54 times cited
D4
53 times cited
D6
39 times cited
D8
31 times cited
GG1
23 times cited
D5
22 times cited
HC1
17 times cited
SP1
13 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
26
100%
24
91%
22
90%
22
95%
18
94%
18
82%
15
86%
15
100%
14
83%
11
91%
11
100%
10
89%
10
88%
9
86%
8
100%
8
100%
7
83%
6
100%
6
67%
5
80%
5
100%
3
100%
3
100%
3
100%
2
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
–
1
100%
26
100%
24
91%
22
90%
Show all 29 rows
22
95%
18
94%
18
82%
15
86%
15
100%
14
83%
11
91%
11
100%
10
89%
10
88%
9
86%
8
100%
8
100%
7
83%
6
100%
6
67%
5
80%
5
100%
3
100%
3
100%
3
100%
2
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
–
1
100%

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
261258FUL
Full Application
No determination
2026-06-03
251909FUL
Full Application
Withdrawn
2026-06-02
261258FUL
Full Application
No determination
2026-06-03
251909FUL
Full Application
Withdrawn
2026-06-02
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 286 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Freedom Homes Architects
2. chalkline
3. MoreSpace
4. Faluck Raman Patel
At a glance
OfficerSophie Hennessy
BoroughEaling
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications286 (2020–26)
Approval rate92%
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, 2020–26. · 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 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 161 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.