Planning Atlas
AtlasConsultantsDavid Rosemont
Planning AtlasConsultantsDavid Rosemont Associates Ltd
Planning consultancy · London

David Rosemont Associates Ltd.

A planning consultancy acting for applicants across London. Wins consent on 77% of applicationsclose to the London average of 79% — across 58 applications in 6 boroughs, 1997–10.[1] Where they win, and how, is below.

Planning consultancy14 years active6 boroughs77% approval
Where they win — by borough · tap to focus
FewerMore applications
This is an individual's record. These applications are part of the Rosemont Associates Ltd record, which is the firm's public profile.
ShowingAll years · subscriber →across all years on record — a period re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
Headline figures count substantive applications only — full, householder and listed building. 1 further procedural applications (S73 variations, condition discharges, prior approvals, certificates, trees, adverts) are on the record: toggle All to include them.
At a glanceEach metric links to the investigation behind it
All investigations →
58
Applications
London 1997–10
0
Appeals
no appeal on record — every decision stood
8 wks
Decision time
median, validation to decision · 53 decided applications
Why is David Rosemont Associates Ltd listed as a consultant?It is recorded as the planning agent on 58 applications.Is this your firm? Claim it — free →Add your logo, contact details and project photos, and correct your record — free.
Record component
Applications
Approval rate
Basis
David Rosemont Associates Ltd
46
77%
Primary organisation name recorded as the planning agent
David Rosemont Associates
12
80%
Verified alias on the planning record — merged into this identity
Total
58
77%
Each application counted once across all components
David Rosemont Associates Ltd
46
77%
Primary organisation name recorded as the planning agent
David Rosemont Associates
12
80%
Verified alias on the planning record — merged into this identity
Total
58
77%
Each application counted once across all components
Recorded on council registers as: David Rosemont Associates Ltd” (37) · David Rosemont Associates” (12) · David Rosemont” (7) · David Rosemont Associates Limited” (2) · DAVID ROSEMONT ASSOCIATES LTD” (1)
Possible matches that cannot be tied to this checked identity are excluded rather than guessed.
Something not right?
Worked on an application here but didn't submit it? Team credits — architects and project teams shown on schemes they worked on — are coming. Claim your profile and we'll tell you when it's live.
Approval rate over time — improving or slippingDashed line = London average
0%50%100%’97’01’02’03’04’05’06’10
What they submit — by scheme type
59decisions

Click a slice to reshade the London map by that type.

Policies they argue — and how often it wins[3]

The policies this consultancy leans on most across its applications — how often each appears, and how often a scheme citing it wins consent.

Policies argued are coded from each officer report and decision notice — this table publishes when decision-notice ingestion lands. No policy playbook is shown until it's real.
Case officers — win rate when this firm submits— subscriber data

How often each named case officer grants consent on this firm's applications. Pairing patterns from the public register — not endorsements.

Applications by borough
Borough
Applications
Approval rate
40
68% (27/13)
7
6 approved · 1 refused
5
4 approved · 1 refused
4
2 approved · 2 refused
1
1 approved · 0 refused
1
1 approved · 0 refused
40
68% (27/13)
7
6 approved · 1 refused
5
4 approved · 1 refused
Show all 6 rows
4
2 approved · 2 refused
1
1 approved · 0 refused
1
1 approved · 0 refused

Where this firm's applications concentrate, 1997–10.[1] Click the map above to focus a borough, or a row to open it.

Outcomes secured — S106 by borough
S106 agreements aren't yet traced to this firm's consents — the borough-by-borough table of contributions secured publishes when the section 106 agreements are ingested. No figure is shown until it's real.
Recent applications
Address
Reference
Type
Outcome
Date
2009/3487
Alter or Extend a Listed Building
Refused
2010-02-23
2009/3483
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2010-02-23
05/3088/HOT
Householder Application
Approved
2006-01-16
2005/3878
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2005-11-14
05/02453/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2005-10-03
2005/3068
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2005-09-12
2005/1340
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2005-05-20
2005/0980
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2005-05-19
05/00828/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2005-05-12
2005/0128
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2005-03-10
04/05544/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Not required
2004-09-07
2004/2711
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2004-08-27
04/1272
Conservation Area Consent
Approved
2004-06-17
2003/5095
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2004-04-16
2004/0423
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2004-04-13
2004/0029
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2004-03-24
2003/4390
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2004-03-22
2003/4626
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-12-29
03/02863/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2003-12-15
03/00570/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2003-12-02
2003/4625
Conservation Area Consent (alter/extend)
2003-11-25
2003/2913
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-11-18
2002/5363
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-10-02
2003/3424
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-09-30
2003/2778
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-09-04
2003/1059
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-07-31
03/0363/HOT
Householder Application
Refused
2003-03-26
2002/4899
Application for Full Permission
No determination
2003-02-18
02/07191/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2003-01-20
02/07190/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2003-01-20
2002/02651/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2003-01-10
2002/4730
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2002-12-31
2002/4227
Application for Full Permission
2002-11-01
2002/3597
Details (following full perm.)
Approved
2002-10-15
2002/2241
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-09-24
2002/2803
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-08-23
02/03425/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2002-07-23
02/03420/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2002-07-23
2002/2005
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-07-19
2002/1689
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-06-17
2002/2030
Application for Full Permission
2002-06-05
02/0774
Full Application
Approved
2002-05-30
2002/0996
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-05-01
2002/0966
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-04-23
01/09823/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2002-02-20
01/09822/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2002-02-20
2001/2842
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-02-18
2001/4660
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2002-01-24
2001/3607
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-12-21
2001/3172
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-12-14
2001/2248
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-12-06
01/2292
Full Application
Refused
2001-10-10
2001/3076
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-09-26
2001/2696
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-09-03
2001/2609
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-08-24
01/01577/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2001-08-02
2001/2389
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-08-02
C/97/0589
Application for Full Permission
Approved
1997-10-11
C/97/0431
Application for Full Permission
Refused
1997-08-28
2009/3487
Alter or Extend a Listed Building
Refused
2010-02-23
2009/3483
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2010-02-23
05/3088/HOT
Householder Application
Approved
2006-01-16
Show all 59 rows
2005/3878
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2005-11-14
05/02453/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2005-10-03
2005/3068
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2005-09-12
2005/1340
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2005-05-20
2005/0980
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2005-05-19
05/00828/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2005-05-12
2005/0128
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2005-03-10
04/05544/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Not required
2004-09-07
2004/2711
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2004-08-27
04/1272
Conservation Area Consent
Approved
2004-06-17
2003/5095
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2004-04-16
2004/0423
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2004-04-13
2004/0029
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2004-03-24
2003/4390
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2004-03-22
2003/4626
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-12-29
03/02863/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2003-12-15
03/00570/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2003-12-02
2003/4625
Conservation Area Consent (alter/extend)
2003-11-25
2003/2913
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-11-18
2002/5363
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-10-02
2003/3424
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-09-30
2003/2778
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-09-04
2003/1059
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2003-07-31
03/0363/HOT
Householder Application
Refused
2003-03-26
2002/4899
Application for Full Permission
No determination
2003-02-18
02/07191/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2003-01-20
02/07190/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2003-01-20
2002/02651/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2003-01-10
2002/4730
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2002-12-31
2002/4227
Application for Full Permission
2002-11-01
2002/3597
Details (following full perm.)
Approved
2002-10-15
2002/2241
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-09-24
2002/2803
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-08-23
02/03425/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2002-07-23
02/03420/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2002-07-23
2002/2005
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-07-19
2002/1689
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-06-17
2002/2030
Application for Full Permission
2002-06-05
02/0774
Full Application
Approved
2002-05-30
2002/0996
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-05-01
2002/0966
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-04-23
01/09823/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2002-02-20
01/09822/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2002-02-20
2001/2842
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2002-02-18
2001/4660
Application for Full Permission
Refused
2002-01-24
2001/3607
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-12-21
2001/3172
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-12-14
2001/2248
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-12-06
01/2292
Full Application
Refused
2001-10-10
2001/3076
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-09-26
2001/2696
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-09-03
2001/2609
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-08-24
01/01577/FUL
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2001-08-02
2001/2389
Application for Full Permission
Approved
2001-08-02
C/97/0589
Application for Full Permission
Approved
1997-10-11
C/97/0431
Application for Full Permission
Refused
1997-08-28
Developers they act for— subscriber data
At a glance
FirmDavid Rosemont Associates Ltd
TypePlanning consultancy
Coverage6 London boroughs
Years active14 (1997–10)
Applications58
Approval rate77%
London avg79%
London rank
Related investigations
Refusal Hotspots — where it's hard →
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
How every consultancy ranks →
Approval rate and scheme mix across London consultancies — the full track record.
Sources & method
  1. [1]Applications, approval rate and borough breakdown — the London planning applications on which this firm is the named agent, from borough planning registers and published decision notices, 1997–10. The consultant is the COMPANY (a firm filing under several individuals is merged to the firm). "Named agent" means whoever submitted the application to the council — where a separate agent files on behalf of the actual architect or designer, that design credit isn't captured here; this reflects who submitted, not necessarily who designed. Approval rate = approved ÷ (approved + refused), substantive decisions only. · methodology
  2. [2]Case-officer and developer pairings — the named case officer and applicant company on each of this firm’s register records, joined to their own live profiles. Pairing patterns, not endorsements. · methodology
  3. [3]Policies argued are coded from each officer report and decision notice against the adopted Local Plan, London Plan and NPPF — publishes with decision-notice ingestion. · methodology
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.