Planning Atlas
AtlasDevelopersFoxstone Estates
Planning AtlasDevelopersFoxstone Estates
Developer · London

Foxstone Estates.

A developer bringing schemes forward across London. Has 23 applications in 4 boroughs, seeking 19 residential units, at a 73% approval rate, 1999–16.[1] Where they build, and how, is below.

Developer19 units sought4 boroughs73% approval
Where they build — by borough · tap to focus
FewerMore applications
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 →
23
Applications
London 1999–16
Avg S106 / unit
awaits s106 ingestion
Why a developer? Listed as a developer because every application we hold for them names them as the applicant.Something not right? Claim · Correct · Merge
Is this your developer?This profile is built from public planning records. Claim it to add your intro, logo and project images.
Claim this profile →
Approval rate over time — improving or slippingtheir London-wide rate by year
0%50%100%’99’00’06’07’08’09’16
What they build — by scheme type
24decisions

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

Their planning record — policies in play

The policies most in play across this developer's schemes — how often each appears, and how often a scheme citing it wins consent.

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

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

The officer↔developer pairing isn't joined in the data layer yet — this table publishes when it is. Each borough's officers are already ranked in Track Records.
Applications by borough
Borough
Applications
Approval rate
3
33%
Show all 4 rows

Where this developer builds, 1999–16.[1] Click the map above to explore spatially, or a row to open the borough.

Outcomes secured — S106 by borough
S106 outcomes per unit aren't traced per developer yet — the borough-by-borough table publishes when the section 106 agreements and committee reports are ingested against this developer's consents.
Recent applications
Address
Borough
Type
Outcome
Date
Redbridge
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2016-06-13
Redbridge
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2016-03-01
Redbridge
Discharge of Condition(s)
Approved
2009-04-09
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-26
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-26
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Refused
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Refused
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-22
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2007-12-04
Redbridge
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2007-10-17
Redbridge
Major Application
Refused
2007-04-13
Newham
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2007-04-12
Newham
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2007-01-16
Newham
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2006-08-02
Tower Hamlets
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2000-09-12
Hackney
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2000-09-06
Hackney
Full Planning Permission
Refused
1999-12-25
Redbridge
Full Planning Permission
Withdrawn
2016-06-13
Redbridge
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2016-03-01
Redbridge
Discharge of Condition(s)
Approved
2009-04-09
Show all 24 rows
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-04-16
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-26
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-26
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Refused
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Refused
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-25
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2008-02-22
Redbridge
Details Following Outline (Reserved Matters)
Approved
2007-12-04
Redbridge
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2007-10-17
Redbridge
Major Application
Refused
2007-04-13
Newham
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2007-04-12
Newham
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2007-01-16
Newham
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2006-08-02
Tower Hamlets
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2000-09-12
Hackney
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2000-09-06
Hackney
Full Planning Permission
Refused
1999-12-25
Consultants they instruct— subscriber data
At a glance
DeveloperFoxstone Estates
Coverage4 London boroughs
Applications23 (1999–16)
Units sought19
Approval rate73%
London rank#2410 of 16,342
Related investigations
How every developer ranks →
Approval rate, units sought and borough coverage across London developers, consultants, officers and inspectors.
Refusal Hotspots — where it's hard →
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
Sources & method
  1. [1]Applications, approval rate, borough breakdown and units — the planning applications across London on which this company is the named applicant, from borough planning registers. Individual householders are excluded. Units = residential units conservatively parsed from each proposal (sought, not delivered); not every scheme states a count. · methodology
  2. [2]Agents — the named planning agent on each of this developer’s applications, joined to the London consultant record. · methodology
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.