Development Intent
AtlasSouthwarkOfficersMichle Sterry
Planning Atlas›Southwark›Mich�le Sterry
Case officer · Southwark Planning

Mich�le Sterry.

Recently active — last recorded decision Apr 2025

A case officer at Southwark with an approval rate of 81% across 255 decided planning applications, spanning 22 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer255 decisions81% approvalSave
Southwark · 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 →
255
Applications
2020–25
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%83%202086%202167%202286%202379%202488%2025
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate81% · 61st of 79
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 reports243 officer reports parsed
7%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
7%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
9%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
58%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Southwark's average officer

Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Southwark reports. Attention, not stance.

Flooding & drainage
1.97× borough avg
Energy & sustainability
1.85× borough avg
Noise & disturbance
1.3× borough avg
Bulk & massing
1.15× borough avg
Character & heritage
1× borough avg

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

Assigned Mich�le Sterry 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

“Any views from the roof terrace into the rear garden of the church when in use would be seasonal and not continuous and would only occur when there are any church events”

20/AP/0164

“The window overlooking the school sports court will serve a bathroom and therefore not habitable and therefore there are no privacy issues if conditioned”

20/AP/0358

Measured from 243 published Southwark 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 243 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

P56Protection of amenity
105 times cited
P14Design quality
88 times cited
P70Energy
81 times cited
P15Residential
68 times cited
P69Sustainability standards
68 times cited
P13Design of places
48 times cited
P20Conservation areas
48 times cited
P21Conservation of the historic environment and
42 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
27
73%
25
75%
24
91%
19
94%
15
85%
13
50%
13
75%
11
82%
11
100%
11
80%
10
90%
9
100%
9
22%
9
100%
8
100%
8
100%
7
60%
6
67%
5
100%
5
100%
5
80%
5
75%
27
73%
25
75%
24
91%
Show all 22 rows
19
94%
15
85%
13
50%
13
75%
11
82%
11
100%
11
80%
10
90%
9
100%
9
22%
9
100%
8
100%
8
100%
7
60%
6
67%
5
100%
5
100%
5
80%
5
75%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–25.[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
25/AP/0139
Minor application
Withdrawn
2025-06-26
25/AP/1271
Householder Application
Approved
2025-06-18
25/AP/0139
Minor application
Withdrawn
2025-06-26
25/AP/1271
Householder Application
Approved
2025-06-18
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 255 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Resi
2. ByOthers
3. M.A. Newsome & Co Ltd
4. Baily Garner LLP
At a glance
OfficerMich�le Sterry
BoroughSouthwark
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications255 (2020–25)
Approval rate81%
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 Southwark planning register and published decision notices, 2020–25. · 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 Southwark 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 243 published Southwark 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.