Development Intent
AtlasBrentOfficersFaye Mcelwain
Planning Atlas›Brent›Faye McElwain
Case officer · Brent Planning

Faye McElwain.

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

A case officer at Brent with an approval rate of 59% across 293 decided planning applications, spanning 14 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer293 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 →
293
Applications
2020–23
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%58%202161%202252%2023
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate59% · 38th 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 reports367 officer reports parsed
26%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
7%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
5%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
69%
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.

Noise & disturbance
2.02× borough avg
Bulk & massing
1.51× borough avg
Precedent & consistency
1.33× borough avg
Privacy & overlooking
1.3× borough avg
Outlook & amenity
1.11× borough avg

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

Assigned Faye McElwain 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

“Whilst the Council tax information might demonstrate that the property has been subdivided and the letters suggest that there have been tenants living in the premises at various times in the past, there is no strong evidence to help corroborate the claim that each of the flats have been continuous residential use as flats for at least four years prior to the date of submission.”

21/1133

“Combining the two flats creates a GIA of 46.6sqm which is still below the minimum standard of 50sqm for a one bedroom two person flat of table 3.1 of Policy D6.”

21/1337

Measured from 367 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 367 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

DMP1DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT GENERAL
218 times cited
BD1Leading the Way in Good Urban Design
192 times cited
BSUI4ON-SITE WATER MANAGEMENT AND
150 times cited
BGI1GREEN AND BLUE INFRASTRUCTURE IN BRENT
148 times cited
D12a
82 times cited
T5Cycling
74 times cited
T6Car parking
70 times cited
BH13New dwellings external private amenity space requirement
59 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
65
79%
34
59%
33
36%
31
57%
25
38%
20
63%
16
56%
15
73%
15
57%
12
58%
10
70%
9
67%
6
17%
2
0%
65
79%
34
59%
33
36%
Show all 14 rows
31
57%
25
38%
20
63%
16
56%
15
73%
15
57%
12
58%
10
70%
9
67%
6
17%
2
0%

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
23/1612
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2023-09-01
23/1749
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2023-09-01
23/1612
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2023-09-01
23/1749
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2023-09-01
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 293 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. QPAD
2. Resi
3. ARCHPL LTD
4. Locksley Architects
At a glance
OfficerFaye McElwain
BoroughBrent
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications293 (2020–23)
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, 2020–23. · 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 — 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 367 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.