Development Intent
AtlasEalingOfficersJeremy Brydon
Planning Atlas›Ealing›Jeremy Brydon
Case officer · Ealing Planning

Jeremy Brydon.

Last recorded decision Mar 2023 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Ealing with an approval rate of 80% across 64 decided planning applications, spanning 21 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer64 decisions80% approvalSave
Ealing · 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 →
64
Applications
2020–23
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%83%202275%2023100%2024
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate80% · 26th of 44
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 reports23 officer reports parsed
18%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
12%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
4%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
50%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Ealing's average officer

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

Noise & disturbance
1.82× borough avg
Transport & parking
1.77× borough avg
Trees & landscape
1.56× borough avg
Character & heritage
1.3× borough avg
Outlook & amenity
1.04× borough avg

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

Assigned Jeremy Brydon 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

“N/A N/A As shown above, Flat 2 does not meet the minimum floor area requirements and would lead to poor quality of living within the unit which is considered unacceptable.”

225164FUL · recommendation: Refuse planning permission.

Measured from 23 published Ealing 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 23 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

D4
16 times cited
D3
14 times cited
D6
12 times cited
D14
12 times cited
D1
11 times cited
T4
9 times cited
D5
9 times cited
T6
9 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
10
89%
8
86%
5
80%
5
80%
5
100%
4
50%
3
33%
3
67%
3
100%
2
100%
2
50%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
2
0%
1
100%
1
–
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
10
89%
8
86%
5
80%
Show all 21 rows
5
80%
5
100%
4
50%
3
33%
3
67%
3
100%
2
100%
2
50%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
2
0%
1
100%
1
–
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–23.[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
230132FUL
Full Application
Approved
2024-02-26
222114FUL
Full Application
Approved
2024-02-14
230132FUL
Full Application
Approved
2024-02-26
222114FUL
Full Application
Approved
2024-02-14
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 64 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Humble & Humble
2. Line Design Limited
3. Ace Engineering Solutions
4. ArkiPlan.co.uk
At a glance
OfficerJeremy Brydon
BoroughEaling
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications64 (2020–23)
Approval rate80%
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 Ealing planning register and published decision notices, 2020–23. · 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 Ealing 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 23 published Ealing 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.