Planning Atlas
AtlasDevelopersJames Taylor Construction Ltd
Planning AtlasDevelopersJames Taylor Construction Ltd
Developer · London

James Taylor Construction Ltd.

A developer bringing schemes forward across London. Has 8 applications in 5 boroughs, seeking 13 residential units, at a 3 approved · 3 refused approval rate, 2007–16.[1] Where they build, and how, is below.

Developer13 units sought5 boroughs3 approved · 3 refused approval
Where they build — by borough · tap to focus
FewerMore applications
ShowingAll years · subscriber →across all years on record — a period re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
Headline figures count substantive applications only — full, householder and listed building. 11 further procedural applications (S73 variations, condition discharges, prior approvals, certificates, trees, adverts) are on the record: toggle All to include them.
At a glanceEach metric links to the investigation behind it
All investigations →
8
Applications
London 2007–16
0
Refusals overturned
no refusal has been overturned at appeal
Why is James Taylor Construction Ltd listed as a developer?It is recorded as the applicant bringing forward 8 applications.Is this your organisation? Claim it — free →Add your logo, contact details and project photos, and correct your record — free.
Record component
Applications
Approval rate
Basis
James Taylor Construction Ltd
8
Organisation name or verified alias recorded as the applicant
James Taylor Construction Ltd
8
Organisation name or verified alias recorded as the applicant
Recorded on council registers as: James Taylor Construction Ltd” (18) · ` James Taylor Construction Limited” (1)
Possible matches that cannot be tied to this checked identity are excluded rather than guessed.
Something not right?
Worked on an application here but didn't submit it? Team credits — architects and project teams shown on schemes they worked on — are coming. Claim your profile and we'll tell you when it's live.
Approval rate over time — improving or slippingtheir London-wide rate by year
0%50%100%’07’08’09’10’13’14’15’16
What they build — by scheme type
19decisions

Click a slice to reshade the London map by that type.

Their planning record — policies in play

The policies most in play across this developer's schemes — how often each appears, and how often a scheme citing it wins consent.

Policies are coded from each officer report and decision notice — this table publishes when decision-notice ingestion lands. No policy record is shown until it's real.
Case officers — win rate when this developer submits

How often each named case officer grants consent on this developer's schemes. Pairing patterns from the public register — not endorsements.

The officer↔developer pairing isn't joined in the data layer yet — this table publishes when it is. Each borough's officers are already ranked in Track Records.
Applications by borough
Borough
Applications
Approval rate
10
70% (7/3)
4
1 approved · 3 refused
3
0 approved · 3 refused
1
1 approved · 0 refused
1
0 approved · 1 refused
10
70% (7/3)
4
1 approved · 3 refused
3
0 approved · 3 refused
Show all 5 rows
1
1 approved · 0 refused
1
0 approved · 1 refused

Where this developer builds, 2007–16.[1] Click the map above to explore spatially, or a row to open the borough.

Outcomes secured — S106 by borough
S106 outcomes per unit aren't traced per developer yet — the borough-by-borough table publishes when the section 106 agreements and committee reports are ingested against this developer's consents.
Recent applications
Address
Borough
Type
Outcome
Date
Barnet
Non Material Amendment
Approved
2016-02-17
Islington
Certificate of Lawfulness (Proposed)
Refused
2015-11-26
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Refused
2015-02-20
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Refused
2014-10-14
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Approved
2014-09-12
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Withdrawn
2014-08-21
Islington
Non-Material Amendment
Refused
2013-09-06
Brent
Removal of condition(s)
Withdrawn
2009-11-30
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2009-11-06
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2009-08-18
Brent
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2009-08-10
Brent
Variation of Conditions
Approved
2009-08-05
Hackney
Removal/Variation of Condition(s)
Withdrawn
2009-04-02
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2009-01-19
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Other
2008-10-14
Brent
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2008-06-26
Brent
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2007-11-15
Barnet
Non Material Amendment
Approved
2016-02-17
Islington
Certificate of Lawfulness (Proposed)
Refused
2015-11-26
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Refused
2015-02-20
Show all 19 rows
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Refused
2014-10-14
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Approved
2014-09-12
Harrow
Full Planning Application
Withdrawn
2014-08-21
Islington
Non-Material Amendment
Refused
2013-09-06
Brent
Removal of condition(s)
Withdrawn
2009-11-30
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2009-11-06
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2009-08-18
Brent
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2009-08-10
Brent
Variation of Conditions
Approved
2009-08-05
Hackney
Removal/Variation of Condition(s)
Withdrawn
2009-04-02
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2009-01-19
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Other
2008-10-14
Brent
Full Planning Permission
Approved
2008-06-26
Brent
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2007-11-15
Consultants they instruct— subscriber data
At a glance
DeveloperJames Taylor Construction Ltd
Coverage5 London boroughs
Applications8 (2007–16)
Units sought13
Approval rate3 approved · 3 refused
London rank#2582 of 14,955
Related investigations
How every developer ranks →
Approval rate, units sought and borough coverage across London developers, consultants, officers and inspectors.
Refusal Hotspots — where it's hard →
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
Sources & method
  1. [1]Applications, approval rate, borough breakdown and units — the planning applications across London on which this company is the named applicant, from borough planning registers. Individual householders are excluded. Units = residential units conservatively parsed from each proposal (sought, not delivered); not every scheme states a count. · methodology
  2. [2]Agents — the named planning agent on each of this developer’s applications, joined to the London consultant record. · methodology
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.