Development Intent
AtlasBarnetOfficersAlissa Fawcett
Planning Atlas›Barnet›Alissa Fawcett
Case officer · Barnet Planning

Alissa Fawcett.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Barnet with an approval rate of 79% across 183 decided planning applications, spanning 16 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer183 decisions79% approvalSave
Barnet · 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 →
183
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%84%202076%202150%2022100%202385%202471%202567%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate79% · 57th of 85
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 reports57 officer reports parsed
29%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
43%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
21%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
52%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Barnet's average officer

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

Trees & landscape
2.15× borough avg
Character & heritage
1.64× borough avg
Energy & sustainability
1.6× borough avg
Flooding & drainage
1.59× borough avg
Materials & detailing
1.4× borough avg

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

Assigned Alissa Fawcett 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

“Page 36 of the Hampstead Garden Suburb Design Guidance SPD (2010) states”

20/0100/LBC

“Hampstead Way curves sinuously along the edge of the Hampstead Heath Extension. There are no grass verges and only a few street trees in the far south”

20/0100/LBC

Measured from 57 published Barnet 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 57 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

CS1 arnet’s place shaping strategy – protection,
50 times cited
CS5 rotecting and enhancing Barnet’s character
48 times cited
CS NPPF
45 times cited
DM01Protecting Barnet’s character and amenity Page
44 times cited
DM02Development standards Page
43 times cited
DM06Barnet’s heritage and conservation Page
29 times cited
CS9Enlargement of School Facilities CS10 DM
15 times cited
DM17Travel Impact and Parking Standards
12 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
88
93%
25
79%
19
56%
10
17%
9
83%
5
25%
5
50%
5
100%
4
75%
3
67%
3
33%
2
100%
2
0%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
88
93%
25
79%
19
56%
Show all 16 rows
10
17%
9
83%
5
25%
5
50%
5
100%
4
75%
3
67%
3
33%
2
100%
2
0%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%

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.

Recent applications
Address
Reference
Type
Outcome
Date
25/3776/HSE
Householder Application
Approved
2026-06-12
25/3627/FUL
Full Application
Refused
2026-06-01
25/3776/HSE
Householder Application
Approved
2026-06-12
25/3627/FUL
Full Application
Refused
2026-06-01
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 183 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Simon Miller Architects Ltd
2. Roz Archer Ltd
3. Brill + Owen Architects
4. Xul Architecture
At a glance
OfficerAlissa Fawcett
BoroughBarnet
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications183 (2020–26)
Approval rate79%
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 Barnet planning register and published decision notices, 2020–26. · 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 Barnet 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 57 published Barnet 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.