Development Intent
Case officer · Hammersmith And Fulham Planning

Matthew Lawton.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Hammersmith And Fulham with an approval rate of 100% across 62 decided planning applications, spanning 11 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer62 decisions100% approvalSave
Hammersmith And Fulham · 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 →
62
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%2020100%2021100%2022100%2023100%2024100%2025100%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate100% · 1st of 45
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 Matthew Lawton'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 Matthew Lawton decided — 1 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

DC1Built environment quality and integrationHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
DC4High standard of design for alterations and extensionsHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
DC8Heritage and conservation: Buildings at riskHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
HO11Detailed Residential StandardsHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
CC11Noise and Vibration Control for DevelopmentsHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
DC2New build design standards and compatibilityHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
CC2Sustainable Design and Construction in Major DevelopmentsHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
CC3Flood Risk Assessment RequirementHammersmith And Fulham plan
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–26.[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
2021/00706/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2026-04-13
2021/00707/LBC
Listed Building Consent
Approved
2026-04-13
2021/00706/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2026-04-13
2021/00707/LBC
Listed Building Consent
Approved
2026-04-13
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 62 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Julia Mitchell / Lewis and Co Planning SE Ltd
2. Miss Amara Roca Iglesias / Burrell Foley Fischer LLP
3. Architon LLP / Architon LLP
4. Mr Daniel Hyde / Freeths LLP
At a glance
OfficerMatthew Lawton
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications62 (2020–26)
Approval rate100%
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 Hammersmith And Fulham 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 Hammersmith And Fulham 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.