Development Intent
AtlasWestminsterOfficersNathan Barrett
Planning Atlas›Westminster›Nathan Barrett
Case officer · Westminster Planning

Nathan Barrett.

Last recorded decision Apr 2022 — no decisions in this record since

A case officer at Westminster with an approval rate of 88% across 26 decided planning applications, spanning 12 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer26 decisions88% approvalSave
Westminster · 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 →
26
Applications
2020–22
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%83%202090%2021100%2022
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate88% · 46th of 76
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 reports20 officer reports parsed
43%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
50%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
15%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
94%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Westminster's average officer

Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Westminster reports. Attention, not stance.

Transport & parking
1.64× borough avg
Bulk & massing
1.27× borough avg
Noise & disturbance
1.06× borough avg
Materials & detailing
0.83× borough avg
Outlook & amenity
0.74× borough avg

Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.

Assigned Nathan Barrett 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 applicant has significantly reduced the size of the first-floor outdoor learning space (from 183 sqm as refused to 85 sqm), added acoustic screening and set it back from Stockleigh Hall (from 8 m as refused to over 14 m)”

20/03192/FULL

“The Council also has no record of noise complaints from the hotel in the 13 years it has existed on-site, and no one has objected to the hotel during public consultation”

20/03979/FULL

Measured from 20 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.

Policy playbook — what this officer cites[3]

The policies this officer cites most in their own reports — times cited across 20 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

S28
2 times cited
S29
2 times cited
ENV 13
2 times cited
T5
2 times cited
S34
1 times cited
SOC1
1 times cited
SOC3
1 times cited
DES 5
1 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
5
80%
4
100%
3
50%
3
50%
2
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
5
80%
4
100%
3
50%
Show all 12 rows
3
50%
2
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2020–22.[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
21/08448/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2022-04-01
21/05565/COFUL
Full Application for Council's Own Dev.
Approved
2022-02-21
21/08448/FULL
Full Planning Permission Application
Approved
2022-04-01
21/05565/COFUL
Full Application for Council's Own Dev.
Approved
2022-02-21
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 26 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Turley
2. Daniel Watney LLP
3. South Studio Ltd
4. Qualitas London
At a glance
OfficerNathan Barrett
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications26 (2020–22)
Approval rate88%
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 Westminster planning register and published decision notices, 2020–22. · 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 Westminster 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 20 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.
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.