Development Intent
AtlasCroydonOfficersHelen Furnell
Case officer · Croydon Planning

Helen Furnell.

Active — last recorded decision Mar 2026

A case officer at Croydon with an approval rate of 75% across 6 decided planning applications, spanning 6 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer6 decisions75% approvalSave
Croydon · 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 →
6
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%100%202050%2021
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compareVersus peers
Approval rate75% · 28th of 83
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 reports43 officer reports parsed
0%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
0%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
0%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
74%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
Assigned Helen Furnell 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 proposed extended roof to the building would be in excess of 4 metres in height. The extended roof of the building would form part of an outbuilding that would be within 2 metres of the boundary and the extended part of the roof would exceed 2.5 metres in height

21/00555/LP

Measured from 43 published Croydon 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 43 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

SP3.9
1 times cited
SP3.11
1 times cited
DM4Development in Croydon Metropolitan Centre, District and Local Centres
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
1
Show all 6 rows

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
21/03248/FUL
Full planning permission
Refused
2021-10-22
21/02897/HSE
Householder Application
Approved
2021-10-01
21/03248/FUL
Full planning permission
Refused
2021-10-22
21/02897/HSE
Householder Application
Approved
2021-10-01
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 6 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Colin Smith Planning Ltd
2. Carter Jonas LLP
3. Quod
4. Studio Cullinan & Buck Architects Ltd
At a glance
OfficerHelen Furnell
BoroughCroydon
RolePlanning officer
Experience
Applications6 (2020–26)
Approval rate75%
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 Croydon 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 Croydon 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 43 published Croydon 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.