Development Intent
AtlasBrentOfficersPaige Ireland
Case officer · Brent Planning

Paige Ireland.

Last recorded decision Dec 2021 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Brent with an approval rate of 59% across 60 decided planning applications, spanning 11 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer60 decisions59% approvalSave
Brent · 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 →
60
Applications
2020–21
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%56%202063%2021
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate59% · 37th of 43
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 reports68 officer reports parsed
18%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
24%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
2%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
90%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Brent's average officer

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

Energy & sustainability
2.83× borough avg
Transport & parking
1.57× borough avg
Noise & disturbance
1.52× borough avg
Privacy & overlooking
1.27× borough avg
Precedent & consistency
1.08× borough avg

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

How they reason — coded from their reports

Ireland's reports on employment/office conversions and larger residential schemes cite specific census car-ownership data (2011/2021) to justify parking allowance assumptions, and refusals for backland/infill housing set out DMP19 amenity space compliance calculations per unit type with the shortfall explained rather than merely stated.

Observable habits

· cites specific 2011/2021 census car-ownership data to justify a parking demand assumption for flats

· sets out DMP19 amenity space compliance per unit with the shortfall explained, not just noted

· notes historical evidence (aerial photos, prior planning conditions) for whether an existing space was genuinely used for parking before assessing its loss

What their reports consistently look for

· what this officer's reports consistently look for: specific census car-ownership data used to justify a parking demand assumption

· what this officer's reports consistently look for: DMP19 amenity space compliance calculated and explained per unit type, not just a pass/fail flag

· what this officer's reports consistently look for: historical evidence (aerial photography, prior conditions) of whether a space was genuinely used for parking before assessing its loss

Assigned Paige Ireland 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

The six proposed new flats would then generate further parking demand, estimated at about four cars (75% of the maximum parking allowance and consistent with 2011 Census data for car ownership for flats in the area).

20/0694

The existing drawing shows that the garages each have a single door access and therefore they are unlikely to have been used for parking for some time. To confirm this, google view 2012 also shows the garages have a single door access.

20/0120

Measured from 68 published Brent 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 68 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

DMP 1
16 times cited
CP17
13 times cited
DMP 19
12 times cited
DMP 12
11 times cited
CP2
9 times cited
CP1
7 times cited
CP21
7 times cited
DMP 18
7 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Recent applications
Address
Reference
Type
Outcome
Date
21/3879
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2021-12-17
21/2976
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2021-11-30
21/3879
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2021-12-17
21/2976
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2021-11-30
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 60 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Sterling Town Planning
2. Collins & Coward
3. Archway Building Consultancy
4. JLL
At a glance
OfficerPaige Ireland
BoroughBrent
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications60 (2020–21)
Approval rate59%
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 Brent planning register and published decision notices, 2020–21. · 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 — Brent's decision-notice parsing is limited coverage, so no borough or officer figure is shown.
  4. [4]"How this officer decides", the policy playbook and all quotes — parsed from 68 published Brent 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.