Jonathan Kwok.
Active — last recorded decision May 2026
A case officer at Harrow with an approval rate of 68% across 173 decided planning applications, spanning 21 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.
Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Harrow reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Kwok's reports cluster around HMO conversions and Green Belt extensions, and his HMO assessments consistently break out cycle/refuse storage provision as its own discrete sub-topic with a specific storage figure, distinct from the amenity assessment. On Green Belt schemes he tabulates footprint/floor area/volume percentage increases from both the original and existing building before reaching a proportionality conclusion.
· on HMO schemes, assesses cycle parking and refuse storage provision as its own discrete named sub-topic with an exact space count, separate from the general amenity paragraph
· on Green Belt extensions, tabulates footprint/GEA/GIA/volume percentage increase from BOTH the original AND the existing building before assessing proportionality
· cites the specific HMO policy criterion (DM30 a/b/c, HO10 sub-numbers) by letter/number when assessing large HMO conversions
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: the exact cycle parking space count and refuse storage arrangement for HMO/flat conversions, assessed separately from general amenity
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: the percentage increase in footprint, GEA, GIA and volume from BOTH the original and the existing building on Green Belt sites
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether Secured by Design measures (gates, fencing, natural surveillance) have been addressed for larger schemes
“Policy DM30 of the Harrow DMP (2013) supports the provision of large houses in multiple occupation (HMO's), residential hostels and secure accommodation subject to compliance with the following criteria”
PL/0173/23
“Although the proposed increase to the footprint, the Gross External Area (GEA), the Gross Internal Area (GIA) in respect to the existing house would be less than 30% when compared to the existing dwelling, the percentage increase to all the aforementioned parameters would”
PL/1610/24
Measured from 172 published Harrow 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.
The policies this officer cites most in their own reports — times cited across 172 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 21 rows
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.
- [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Harrow planning register and published decision notices, 2023–26. · methodology
- [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]Condition load — mean effective conditions attached to Harrow decision notices (grant/split), parsed from the published notice text; a borough figure, not yet split per case officer.
- [4]"How this officer decides", the policy playbook and all quotes — parsed from 172 published Harrow 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.