Development Intent
AtlasIslingtonOfficersYusif Yusifzada
Planning Atlas›Islington›Yusif Yusifzada
Case officer · Islington Planning

Yusif Yusifzada.

Active — last recorded decision May 2026

A case officer at Islington with an approval rate of 83% across 726 decided planning applications, spanning 17 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer726 decisions83% approvalSave
Islington · 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 →
726
Applications
2020–26
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%61%202085%202181%202288%202389%202475%202587%2026
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate83% · 37th of 55
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 reports256 officer reports parsed
13%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
6%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
15%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
58%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
What they write about — vs Islington's average officer

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

Bulk & massing
1.64× borough avg
Character & heritage
1.55× borough avg
Privacy & overlooking
1.25× borough avg
Noise & disturbance
1.11× borough avg
Materials & detailing
1.1× borough avg

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

Assigned Yusif Yusifzada 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 design and installation of the Air Source Heat Pump shall be such that when operating the cumulative noise level LAeq Tr arising from the proposed plant, measured or predicted at 1m from the facade of the nearest noise sensitive premises, shall not exceed a rating level of 42dBA”

P2022/3742/FUL

“it is not considered that the existing amenities would further be harmed to a degree where the application could be refused, especially given that windows serve non-habitable room”

P2022/2897/FUL

Measured from 256 published Islington 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 256 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

CS8
139 times cited
D4Designing in Context
126 times cited
CS9
110 times cited
DM2.1
82 times cited
D1
78 times cited
HC1
70 times cited
DM2.3
48 times cited
PLAN1Site appraisal, design principles and process
46 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
76
85%
73
65%
51
84%
40
83%
39
77%
38
78%
37
74%
32
87%
30
73%
30
86%
29
81%
27
100%
27
88%
23
95%
22
95%
21
90%
19
95%
76
85%
73
65%
51
84%
Show all 17 rows
40
83%
39
77%
38
78%
37
74%
32
87%
30
73%
30
86%
29
81%
27
100%
27
88%
23
95%
22
95%
21
90%
19
95%

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.

Recent applications
Address
Reference
Type
Outcome
Date
P2026/1014/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2026-06-05
P2026/0009/FUL
Full Planning (Householder)
Approved
2026-06-03
P2026/1014/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2026-06-05
P2026/0009/FUL
Full Planning (Householder)
Approved
2026-06-03
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 726 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Design Principle
2. Humphreys & Sons
3. Plande - Planning Consultants
4. Mimodo Architects Ltd Bianca Valido Leac
At a glance
OfficerYusif Yusifzada
BoroughIslington
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications726 (2020–26)
Approval rate83%
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 Islington planning register and published decision notices, 2020–26. · 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 Islington 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 256 published Islington 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.