We have published our planning record, refusals included
Every application we made in Barnet since 2014 is now on this site — twenty-four of them, across nine properties, with the two that were refused and the one we withdrew sitting in the same table as the approvals.
Written by Kathy Basheva, Director of Studio Basheva
ARB-registered architect (reg. 078188F) · RIBA member · Chartered planner, RTPI
Published October 2026 · last reviewed October 2026.
Planning decisions have always been public. Anyone can search a council’s register, find an application and read what was decided. What almost no architectural practice does is collect its own applications in one place and publish them — which is a little odd, given how much of what we are hired for turns on getting consent.
So we have. Our planning record lists every application Studio Basheva submitted to the London Borough of Barnet from 2014 onward: twenty-four applications across nine properties, each with its reference, its type and what the council decided.
Including the ones that did not go our way
Eighteen of the twenty-two determined applications succeeded. Two lawful development certificates were refused, one was withdrawn, and one was closed without a decision.
We thought about leaving those out. The argument against doing so is simple: the register is public, so anyone minded to check would find them, and a list of approvals with the refusals quietly missing is worse than no list at all. But the better argument is that the refusals are more informative than the approvals.
Take the 2016 property. We applied for two lawful development certificates — a rear extension and a loft conversion — on the basis that both fell within permitted development. Barnet disagreed, twice. We did not appeal. We submitted a householder planning application for the same works instead, and it was approved with conditions that year.
Or 2017, where a certificate for a single-storey rear extension was withdrawn once it was clear it would not be granted. A full planning application for a substantially larger scheme — front extension, garage conversion, part single part two-storey rear extension — was approved in its place, and a variation of condition approved the year after to add a pitched roof.
What that pattern is actually worth
Permitted development is cheaper and quicker than planning when it works. The job is to know when it will not, and to change route before the delay compounds. In both those cases the project was back on track inside the same year.
A practice that has never had an application refused has either been extraordinarily lucky or has only ever proposed the uncontroversial. Neither is what most people need when they are trying to get a difficult thing built.
What the page does not claim
It covers one borough. We work across Greater London, the Home Counties and the Comunidad Valenciana, and other councils hold their own registers. It begins in 2014, while the practice dates from 2012 — applications made before councils published online are not searchable this way. And not every entry is a planning permission: lawful development certificates, condition discharges, variations and tree works are different kinds of application, labelled as such.
Client addresses are withheld. The references are the public record and anyone can search them, but a list of our clients’ homes is not what the page is for.
If you want to check any of it, Barnet’s planning register takes a reference number and will tell you the same thing we have.