Anna Jennings.
Last recorded decision Sep 2023 — no decisions in this record since
A case officer at Barking And Dagenham with an approval rate of 65% across 417 decided planning applications, spanning 22 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 Barking And Dagenham reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Jennings' caseload mixes householder extensions, small infill new-builds and industrial/warehouse alterations in Strategic Industrial Locations, and she is distinctive for engaging directly with enforcement context — several of her reports concern retrospective applications tied to a live enforcement case number, and she cross-references photographic evidence dated to a specific site-visit day against the enforcement record rather than taking the applicant's description at face value. On new-build infill she is thorough about practical service questions applicants often omit — parking provision, cycle storage, refuse/bin arrangements — flagging where 'the applicant has failed to provide any information' as a standalone reason the impact 'cannot be assessed', not simply assumed acceptable by default.
· on retrospective applications tied to a live enforcement case, cross-references dated photographic evidence from a specific site visit against the enforcement record rather than accepting the applicant's own description of what was built
· flags missing practical information (car parking, cycle storage, refuse arrangements) as an assessment gap in itself — 'the impact...cannot be assessed, nor can the impacts on the wider street...be predicted' — rather than defaulting to acceptable
· on Strategic Industrial Location sites, checks the specific SIL protection policy (Policy E5/CE3) before any design or amenity consideration, since the principle of retaining industrial use is itself the primary planning question there
· whether photographic evidence from a specific dated site visit is consistent with what the applicant describes as already built, on retrospective/enforcement-linked applications
· whether the applicant has provided sufficient detail on car parking, cycle storage and refuse arrangements to allow the impact on the street to be assessed at all
· whether an industrial/warehouse proposal is consistent with the site's designation as a Strategic Industrial Location under Policy E5 and Core Strategy Policy CE3
“The applicant's failure to demonstrate that suitable car parking provisions have been identified means that the impact of the proposed development on the parking arrangements of the existing dwelling cannot be assessed, nor can the impacts on the wider street and neighbouring area be predicted”
21/00922/FULL
“The Council will safeguard, promote and manage the Strategic Industrial Locations at River Road Employment Area, Rippleside, and Dagenham Dock. Land within these locations will not be released for other purposes”
21/01053/FULL
Measured from 544 published Barking And Dagenham 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 544 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 22 rows
Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2021–23.[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 Barking And Dagenham planning register and published decision notices, 2021–23. · 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 Barking And Dagenham 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 544 published Barking And Dagenham 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.