Christina Sriramula.
Active — last recorded decision Jan 2026
A case officer at Westminster with an approval rate of 77% across 480 decided planning applications, spanning 14 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 Westminster reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Sriramula's caseload is householder-scale residential work (rear extensions, dormers, basements, garden rooms, balconies) mostly outside the highest-value conservation areas, and her reports show the most visible negotiation pattern in this corpus: she routinely records that an applicant revised a scheme (reduced roof pitch, set back a boundary wall, swapped a flat roof for a green roof) after officers raised concerns during the application, and credits the revised version rather than assessing the original submission. She is unusually explicit about site-visit limitations during the COVID-19 period, noting when an assessment rests on drawings/photos alone. She also gives real weight to personal/exceptional circumstances (a fence retained on a personal condition due to an applicant's son's needs) even where the objective design/amenity judgement is negative.
· explicitly narrates the negotiation history within the report ('following comments from officers, the applicant has reduced...') rather than presenting only the final scheme
· flags when a site visit could not be carried out (COVID-19 restrictions) and states the assessment instead relies on submitted drawings/photos
· gives explicit weight to personal/exceptional circumstances as a material consideration, using a personal condition (removal on change of occupancy) to reconcile a design objection with a genuine need
· separates 'not material planning considerations' (e.g. private arrangements for future maintenance access) from genuine planning harm, naming them as such rather than silently ignoring them
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether a scheme was revised in response to officer concerns during the application, and whether the revision resolves the original objection
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: a specific site-visit or COVID-era drawings-only basis for the assessment, stated plainly rather than assumed
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether an objection or applicant circumstance is a genuine material planning consideration or should be set aside as such
“Whilst this higher fence is considered regrettable in design and amenity terms , the personal circumstances of the applicant is also a material consideration which need to be given weight .”
21/02438/FULL
“Following the design concerns raised in the initial submission, the applicant has been advised to revise the application to propose a more modest alteration.”
21/02902/FULL
“The assessment of this application is based on the drawings contained within the case as site visits could not be undertaken due to current COVID-19 travel restrictions.”
21/03114/FULL
Measured from 438 published Westminster 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 438 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 14 rows
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.
- [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Westminster planning register and published decision notices, 2020–26. · 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 Westminster 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 438 published Westminster 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.