Monika Vistartaite.
Last recorded decision Dec 2023 — no decisions in this record since
A case officer at Hammersmith And Fulham with an approval rate of 96% across 25 decided planning applications, spanning 9 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.
Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Hammersmith And Fulham reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Vistartaite's smaller caseload is dominated by roof extensions, terraces and AC unit installations, and she is distinctive for noting SITE-VISIT observations directly (e.g. observing on a site visit that a terrace's ridge line already varies and the application property's ridge is already lower than its neighbours) as the basis for finding a minor ridge-height increase acceptable, rather than relying solely on desk-based drawings. On lawful-use questions for an existing but historically-restricted terrace, she is willing to accept photographic evidence (aerial imagery) establishing continuous use since a specific year as sufficient to find a terrace lawful through the passage of time, notwithstanding an original restrictive condition.
· records a specific SITE VISIT observation (e.g. noting the existing variation in ridge lines along a terrace) as direct evidence supporting a finding, rather than relying only on desk-based drawings
· accepts photographic evidence (e.g. aerial imagery) demonstrating continuous use of a feature since a specific year as sufficient to establish it as lawful through the passage of time, notwithstanding an original restrictive condition
· on roof terraces that formally breach the 45-degree line to a specific named neighbour's window, weighs the modest depth, scale and lightweight appearance of the screening as reducing impact 'beyond the existing situation' rather than in absolute terms
· direct site-visit observations of existing physical conditions (e.g. ridge-line variation along a terrace) as evidence supporting or undermining a design finding
· photographic or aerial evidence of continuous use of a feature since a specific year, sufficient to establish lawful use through the passage of time
· whether terrace screening's modest depth, scale and lightweight appearance would limit any 45-degree breach's impact beyond the existing situation
“A site visit was conducted where it was noted that the terrace has some variation in ridge lines; and the ridge of the application property is slightly lower than those of the adjacent properties.”
2023/02013/FUL
“the agent has submitted evidence in the form of aerial photogrpahy showing that the terrace has been in use since 2013. As such it is considered that the existing terrace would be lawful through the passage of time.”
2023/02865/FUL
Measured from 23 published Hammersmith And Fulham 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.
The policies this officer cites most in their own reports — times cited across 23 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 9 rows
Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2023.[1] Click the map above to focus this page on a ward, or a row to open the ward.
- [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Hammersmith And Fulham planning register and published decision notices, 2023. · methodology
- [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]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]"How this officer decides", the policy playbook and all quotes — parsed from 23 published Hammersmith And Fulham 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.