Development Intent
AtlasHaveringOfficersLouise Jarrett
Planning Atlas›Havering›Louise Jarrett
Case officer · Havering Planning

Louise Jarrett.

Last recorded decision Aug 2024 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Havering with an approval rate of 78% across 749 decided planning applications, spanning 30 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer749 decisions78% approvalSave
Havering · 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 →
749
Applications
2020–24
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%72%202079%202175%202283%202374%2024
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate78% · 13th of 34
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 reports

Not filled in yet — this needs at least 20 of Louise Jarrett's own officer reports parsed, and their reports haven't reached that threshold in the parsing run. It fills automatically as parsing progresses; nothing is estimated in its place.

Policy playbook — what this officer cites[3]

The policies cited most on decision notices for applications Louise Jarrett decided — 24 parsed notices. From the published notices themselves; their own report wording is parsed separately.

26Urban designHavering plan
18 times cited
7Residential design and amenityHavering plan
10 times cited
T6London Plan
3 times cited
T4London Plan
2 times cited
NPPFNPPF
2 times cited
23Transport ConnectionsHavering plan
1 times cited
6.1Superseded
1 times cited
D1London Plan
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
82
87%
56
73%
53
85%
47
80%
44
77%
38
76%
37
83%
33
70%
32
77%
31
73%
31
77%
29
79%
28
70%
26
87%
25
76%
24
75%
23
70%
21
63%
16
88%
14
86%
13
46%
10
80%
9
67%
9
100%
8
86%
4
75%
2
100%
2
50%
1
100%
1
0%
82
87%
56
73%
53
85%
Show all 30 rows
47
80%
44
77%
38
76%
37
83%
33
70%
32
77%
31
73%
31
77%
29
79%
28
70%
26
87%
25
76%
24
75%
23
70%
21
63%
16
88%
14
86%
13
46%
10
80%
9
67%
9
100%
8
86%
4
75%
2
100%
2
50%
1
100%
1
0%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–24.[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
P1916.20
Full Planning Permission
No determination
2024-10-16
P0828.24
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2024-10-11
P1916.20
Full Planning Permission
No determination
2024-10-16
P0828.24
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2024-10-11
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 749 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Zaavia Design LTD
2. Other Homestead - TP&BRC Kemp House
3. SMART SKILLS LTD OFFICE-19
4. Civils Consulting Ltd
At a glance
OfficerLouise Jarrett
BoroughHavering
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications749 (2020–24)
Approval rate78%
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 Havering planning register and published decision notices, 2020–24. · 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 — Havering's decision-notice parsing is limited coverage, so no borough or officer figure is shown.
  4. [4]Policy citations will be coded from officer reports against the adopted Local Plan, London Plan and NPPF — that parsing has not run for this borough yet.
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.