Development Intent
AtlasRedbridgeOfficersX Emma Clay
Planning Atlas›Redbridge›X Emma Clay
Case officer · Redbridge Planning

X Emma Clay.

Last recorded decision Jun 2024 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Redbridge with an approval rate of 80% across 283 decided planning applications, spanning 22 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer283 decisions80% approvalSave
Redbridge · 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 →
283
Applications
2022–24
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%202278%202383%2024
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate80% · 11th of 32
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 X Emma Clay'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 X Emma Clay decided — 14 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

LP26and LP27). This will enable a largeRedbridge plan
13 times cited
LP30Household ExtensionsRedbridge plan
4 times cited
LP23Cycle and Car Parking StandardsRedbridge plan
3 times cited
LP38Protecting Trees and Enhancing the LandscapeRedbridge plan
3 times cited
LP32Sustainable Design and ConstructionRedbridge plan
3 times cited
LP21Water and FloodingRedbridge plan
2 times cited
6.13Superseded
1 times cited
LP22also sets out a number of publicRedbridge plan
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
33
91%
26
85%
21
86%
20
85%
20
60%
20
90%
19
84%
17
76%
14
71%
14
79%
12
67%
10
90%
9
78%
8
88%
7
40%
6
67%
6
67%
5
80%
5
80%
5
80%
4
75%
1
100%
33
91%
26
85%
21
86%
Show all 22 rows
20
85%
20
60%
20
90%
19
84%
17
76%
14
71%
14
79%
12
67%
10
90%
9
78%
8
88%
7
40%
6
67%
6
67%
5
80%
5
80%
5
80%
4
75%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2022–24.[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
1012/24
Householder
Approved
2024-07-31
0957/24
Householder
Approved
2024-07-31
1012/24
Householder
Approved
2024-07-31
0957/24
Householder
Approved
2024-07-31
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 283 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Consulting Ltd
2. Civils Consulting Ltd
3. Divi-Design Ltd
4. SMART SKILLS LTD
At a glance
OfficerX Emma Clay
BoroughRedbridge
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications283 (2022–24)
Approval rate80%
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 Redbridge planning register and published decision notices, 2022–24. · 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 Redbridge 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.