Development Intent
AtlasWestminsterOfficersJennie Humphrey
Case officer · Westminster Planning

Jennie Humphrey.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Westminster with an approval rate of 98% across 409 decided planning applications, spanning 15 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer409 decisions98% approvalSave
Westminster · 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 →
409
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%202095%2021100%202297%2023100%202497%2025100%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate98% · 6th of 76
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 reports297 officer reports parsed
4%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
3%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
4%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
49%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Westminster's average officer

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

Character & heritage
1.64× borough avg
Outlook & amenity
1.47× borough avg
Materials & detailing
0.76× borough avg
Precedent & consistency
0.73× borough avg
Bulk & massing
0.35× borough avg

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

How they reason — coded from their reports

Humphrey handles some of the corpus's highest-significance heritage assets — Wellington Barracks, the MOD Building's Tudor wine cellar, the Royal Albert Hall, the London Coliseum — nationally important Grade I/II* buildings where her reports open by establishing the specific historical/architectural basis for that significance before turning to the works. On functional back-of-house alterations to major venues she is willing to permit substantial physical intervention (new lift shafts, structural platforms) provided it is confined to already-functional, lower-significance areas away from the architecturally important spaces, and she credits conservation-led solutions (traditional lime mortar repairs by a specialist conservator) as necessary to safeguard fabric rather than as an imposition.

Observable habits

· opens major-heritage-asset reports by establishing the specific historical basis for the building's significance (who built it, when, what it incorporates) before assessing the works

· permits substantial structural intervention (lifts, platforms) in major venues provided it is confined to functional back-of-house areas away from architecturally significant spaces

· treats a conservation specialist's traditional-materials repair method (e.g. lime-based mortar) as necessary to safeguard exceptional fabric, not merely an acceptable option among others

· weighs a proposed change's health-and-safety benefit (preventing damage from unsafe existing equipment) alongside its heritage impact rather than treating them separately

What their reports consistently look for

· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether physical intervention is confined to functional, lower-significance areas away from a building's architecturally important spaces

· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether a specialist conservator's traditional-materials method is proposed for exceptionally significant fabric repair

· what this officer's reports consistently look for: a genuine health-and-safety driver for a proposed change, weighed alongside (not separately from) heritage impact

Assigned Jennie Humphrey 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 fabric is of exceptional significance and importance. As such the repairs are to be undertaken by a brick conservator using traditional materials (lime-based mortar) and techniques.

20/00371/LBC

Whilst extensive, the works are confined to the functional back of house areas of the theatre and avoid the more architecturally significant areas of the building.

20/00417/LBC

The current equipment presents a health and safety risk when manoeuvring cables, which in turn has resulted in damage to the plaster work on the gallery ledge.

20/00374/LBC

Measured from 297 published Westminster 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 297 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

S25
22 times cited
DES 1
21 times cited
S28
20 times cited
DES10
14 times cited
DES9
6 times cited
DES 10
3 times cited
KBR1
3 times cited
DES 5
2 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward

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
26/00341/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2026-05-22
26/00340/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2026-05-22
26/00341/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
Approved
2026-05-22
26/00340/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2026-05-22
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 409 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Gerald Eve LLP
2. Feilden+Mawson LLP
3. The Planning Lab
4. OSBORNES
At a glance
OfficerJennie Humphrey
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications409 (2020–26)
Approval rate98%
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 Westminster 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 Westminster 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 297 published Westminster 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.