Development Intent
AtlasWestminsterOfficersNorth Planning Team
Planning Atlas›Westminster›North Planning Team
Case officer · Westminster Planning

North Planning Team.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Westminster with an approval rate of 8% across 124 decided planning applications, spanning 13 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer124 decisions8% 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 →
124
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%0%20200%20210%20220%20230%20240%202580%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate8% · 76th 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 reports80 officer reports parsed
—
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
—
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
1%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
86%
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.

Materials & detailing
2.29× borough avg
Character & heritage
1.74× borough avg
Energy & sustainability
1.16× borough avg
Bulk & massing
0.76× borough avg
Daylight & sunlight
0.63× borough avg

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

Assigned North Planning Team 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 glazing bar is excessively wide (32mm) and flat, using timber beading rather than putty”

20/06444/FULL

“Photographs of the windows show only discoloration from smoke, rather than structural or fire damage, supported by the fact the glazing remains intact. As such, their condition does not merit replacement, they simply need redecorating”

21/00468/FULL

Measured from 80 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 80 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

DES 5
5 times cited
DES 9
3 times cited
S28
3 times cited
DES 1
3 times cited
S25
2 times cited
DES 10
2 times cited
DES 6
1 times cited
HB1i
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
25
9%
23
12%
16
7%
14
9%
12
13%
10
11%
5
0%
5
0%
4
0%
3
0%
3
0%
2
0%
2
0%
25
9%
23
12%
16
7%
Show all 13 rows
14
9%
12
13%
10
11%
5
0%
5
0%
4
0%
3
0%
3
0%
2
0%
2
0%

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
26/03422/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
—
2026-05-26
26/03421/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
—
2026-05-26
26/03422/LBC
Listed Building Consent Application
—
2026-05-26
26/03421/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
—
2026-05-26
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 124 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Britelite Windows Ltd
2. Powell-Tuck Associates
3. Redbrooks Specialist Design ltd.
4. Jones Lang LaSalle Limited
At a glance
OfficerNorth Planning Team
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications124 (2020–26)
Approval rate8%
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 80 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.