Alex Jones.
Active — last recorded decision May 2026
A case officer at Westminster with an approval rate of 85% across 318 decided planning applications, spanning 12 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 Westminster reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Jones records the negotiation process explicitly — a scheme reduced in scale and switched from brick to timber cladding after officer/consultee concern — and reviews comparable nearby approved extensions to establish what design treatment is typical before assessing acceptability. On repeat resubmissions of an about-to-expire permission, he explicitly checks whether new POLICY (a since-adopted City Plan) requires a different assessment even though the physical scheme is unchanged.
· records the specific negotiation history (a scheme reduced in size, materials changed from brick to timber cladding) made in direct response to officer/consultee concern, describing before and after
· reviews comparable nearby approved extensions to establish the typical design treatment before assessing whether the current proposal fits that pattern
· on repeat resubmissions of an about-to-expire permission, explicitly checks whether an intervening change of adopted policy (a new City Plan) requires reassessment even though the physical scheme itself is unchanged
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: the specific negotiated 'before' and 'after' of a scheme's scale/materials made in response to officer or consultee concern
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: what design treatment is typical among comparable nearby approved extensions
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether an intervening change of adopted policy requires reassessment of an otherwise-unchanged repeat scheme
“Having reviewed other extensions approved nearby, they have typically been lightweight, and read as distinct from the host building. A revised proposal has therefore been received that is smaller in width”
21/08775/FULL
“In the intervening time since the approval of the extant 2019 permission, Westminster City Council adopted (April 2021) our new City Plan 2019-2040, which contains a suite of new and updated policies. The acceptability of the proposal will therefore be assessed in accordance with these updated policies”
22/00826/FULL
Measured from 233 published Westminster 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 233 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 12 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.
- [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Westminster planning register and published decision notices, 2020–26. · 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 Westminster 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 233 published Westminster 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.