Development Intent
AtlasHillingdonOfficersKatie Crosbie
Case officer · Hillingdon Planning

Katie Crosbie.

Recently active — last recorded decision Apr 2025

A case officer at Hillingdon with an approval rate of 100% across 21 decided planning applications, spanning 13 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer21 decisions100% approvalSave
Hillingdon · 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 →
21
Applications
2021–25
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%2021100%2022100%2023100%2024100%2025
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate100% · 2nd of 59
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 Katie Crosbie'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 Katie Crosbie decided — 10 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

DMT2Highways ImpactsHillingdon plan
5 times cited
DMHB11Design of New DevelopmentHillingdon plan
4 times cited
DMHB14Trees and LandscapingHillingdon plan
4 times cited
G5London Plan
4 times cited
DMEI7Farm DiversificationHillingdon plan
4 times cited
DMHB12Streets and Public Realm sets out how we canHillingdon plan
3 times cited
DMHD2OutbuildingsHillingdon plan
3 times cited
SI2London Plan
3 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2021–25.[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
9762/APP/2025/1162
Planning Application
Approved
2025-10-31
53150/APP/2024/3033
Planning Application
Approved
2025-06-17
9762/APP/2025/1162
Planning Application
Approved
2025-10-31
53150/APP/2024/3033
Planning Application
Approved
2025-06-17
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 21 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Mr Steve Evans & Mrs Sue Pierpont
2. Mr Ian Williams AFA Architects & Planners Limited Abacus House Caxton Place Cardiff CF23
3. Mr Christian Smith GP Planning Ltd. iCon Innovation Centre Eastern Way Daventry NN11
4. Mr Tom Roberts Progress Planning
At a glance
OfficerKatie Crosbie
BoroughHillingdon
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications21 (2021–25)
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 Hillingdon planning register and published decision notices, 2021–25. · 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 Hillingdon 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.