Development Intent
AtlasIslingtonOfficersRonan Murray
Planning Atlas›Islington›Ronan Murray
Case officer · Islington Planning

Ronan Murray.

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

A case officer at Islington with an approval rate of 87% across 85 decided planning applications, spanning 17 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.

Planning officer85 decisions87% 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 →
85
Applications
2021–22
Approval rate over time — tougher or softer 🔒Dashed line = London average
avg 81%87%2022100%2023
Approval-rate trend is subscriber dataSubscribe to see the trend →
What they decide — by application type
How they compare — Versus peers
Approval rate87% · 29th 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 reports74 officer reports parsed
0%
Approves despite concerns
of approvals record a documented reservation
5%
Negotiated approvals
approvals mentioning revisions/amendments
0%
"On balance" reports
reports using explicit balancing language
68%
Bespoke reasoning
of report text written for the case, not recited
Assigned Ronan Murray 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 cubic volume of the roof extension is stated in supporting documents as 35 cubic metres and therefore does not exceed the minimum allowance of 40 cubic metres for a mid-terrace house … The resulting cubic content in this scenario is 38.5 cubic metres which is still below the threshold”

P2022/0125/COLP

Measured from 74 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 74 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.

DM2.1
68 times cited
D4Designing in Context
67 times cited
CS8
67 times cited
D6
42 times cited
CS9
42 times cited
DM2.3
40 times cited
HC1
39 times cited
DM2.2
8 times cited
Which policies this officer leans on is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Decisions by ward
Ward
Decisions
Approval rate
9
100%
9
78%
7
71%
6
100%
6
50%
6
100%
5
100%
4
100%
4
75%
4
75%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%
9
100%
9
78%
7
71%
Show all 17 rows
6
100%
6
50%
6
100%
5
100%
4
100%
4
75%
4
75%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
1
100%
1
100%

Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2021–22.[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
P2022/2472/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2023-01-24
P2022/2867/FUL
Full Planning (Householder)
Approved
2022-10-27
P2022/2472/FUL
Full Planning Application
Approved
2023-01-24
P2022/2867/FUL
Full Planning (Householder)
Approved
2022-10-27
Full application history locked
Subscribe to see all 85 decisions →
Consultants approved most— subscriber data
1. Cooke Fawcett Ltd - Mr Oliver Cooke
At a glance
OfficerRonan Murray
BoroughIslington
RolePlanning officer
Experience—
Applications85 (2021–22)
Approval rate87%
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, 2021–22. · 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 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 74 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.