Kurt Henry1.
Active — last recorded decision May 2026
A case officer at Waltham Forest with an approval rate of 72% across 410 decided planning applications, spanning 20 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 Waltham Forest reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Henry's larger mixed-use/multi-flat applications are distinctive for a pragmatic, context-sensitive application of space and amenity standards rather than mechanical enforcement -- he is willing to accept a small shortfall against the combined kitchen/dining space standard where every individual bedroom exceeds its own minimum, or to accept limited external amenity space in a town-centre location where nearby green space is within walking distance, explicitly weighing the whole package rather than failing a scheme on one shortfall alone. Where drawings are internally inconsistent (a balustrade shown on one elevation but not another), he states plainly that officers cannot reach a firm privacy/overlooking conclusion rather than guessing in the applicant's favour, and on refusals he identifies the single decisive test that was not met (a cramped living environment from inadequate GIA) as the operative reason.
· weighs a package of space-standard results together (accepting one shortfall where other elements exceed minimums) rather than failing a scheme on a single shortfall in isolation
· where submitted drawings are internally inconsistent across elevations/plans, states explicitly that officers cannot reach a firm assessment rather than resolving the ambiguity in the applicant's favour
· on refusals, isolates the single decisive failed test (e.g. inadequate GIA producing a cramped living environment) as the operative reason for refusal
· whether a shortfall against one space-standard metric is offset by the rest of the unit's layout exceeding requirements, assessed as a whole package rather than metric-by-metric pass/fail
· whether the submitted elevations and plans are internally consistent enough to support a firm privacy/overlooking conclusion for neighbouring properties
· which single test, if any, was decisively not met, to be named as the operative reason for refusal rather than a general dissatisfaction with the scheme
“There is however a shortfall of 5sq.m with regard to the combined kitchen/ dining space, but, as all of the bedrooms exceed minimum space standards officers consider this shortfall acceptable in this instance”
240809
“officers are unable to assess if the privacy implications to the existing dwellings at 3 Bromley Road are unreasonable to justify a reason for refusal due to inconsistent plans”
240688
“The proposed development would create a cramped living environment where apart from the kitchen there is no form of living space”
242051
Measured from 84 published Waltham Forest 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 84 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 20 rows
Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2021–26.[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 Waltham Forest planning register and published decision notices, 2021–26. · 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 Waltham Forest 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 84 published Waltham Forest 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.