Development Intent
AtlasBrentOfficersCharlie Van Oppen
Planning Atlas›Brent›Charlie van Oppen
Case officer · Brent Planning

Charlie van Oppen.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Brent with an approval rate of 77% across 350 decided planning applications, spanning 16 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer350 decisions77% 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 →
350
Applications
2023–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%33%202373%202482%202571%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate77% · 17th 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 reports25 officer reports parsed
17%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
11%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
0%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
56%
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.

Privacy & overlooking
2× borough avg
Flooding & drainage
1.87× borough avg
Daylight & sunlight
1.65× borough avg
Materials & detailing
1.09× borough avg
Outlook & amenity
0.69× borough avg

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

Assigned Charlie van Oppen 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

“Y/N B.1 A) Has permission been granted under Class G, M, MA, N, P, PA or Q of the GPDO?”

23/3767

“The revised proposals in this application are considered to satisfactorily address the reasons for refusing the previous application.”

24/0017

Measured from 25 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 25 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

D12a
6 times cited
DMP1DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT GENERAL
6 times cited
BD1Leading the Way in Good Urban Design
6 times cited
BHC1BRENT’S HERITAGE ASSETS
4 times cited
BSUI4ON-SITE WATER MANAGEMENT AND
3 times cited
BGI1GREEN AND BLUE INFRASTRUCTURE IN BRENT
2 times cited
HC1Heritage conservation and growth
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
70
80%
41
76%
33
82%
32
57%
28
89%
23
68%
23
73%
21
74%
19
76%
16
88%
14
82%
13
62%
11
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%
70
80%
41
76%
33
82%
Show all 16 rows
32
57%
28
89%
23
68%
23
73%
21
74%
19
76%
16
88%
14
82%
13
62%
11
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2023–26.[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
26/1360
Householder
—
2026-05-26
26/1310
Householder
—
2026-05-25
26/1360
Householder
—
2026-05-26
26/1310
Householder
—
2026-05-25
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 350 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Construct 360 T/AS DontMoveExtend.com
2. Smart Planning Designs Ltd
3. Sterling Town Planning
4. KDB Building Designs Ltd
At a glance
OfficerCharlie van Oppen
BoroughBrent
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications350 (2023–26)
Approval rate77%
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, 2023–26. · 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 — 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 25 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.