Planning Approval Rates by Council: UK Planning Application Success Rates 2024-2025
England's local planning authorities approved 87% of all planning decisions in the year ending June 2025, yet approval rates vary dramatically by council—from as low as 29% (Woking) to 97% (Knowsley) in top-performing authorities.
Decision timelines present an even starker contrast: while 91% of major applications meet the statutory 13-week target nationally, some councils take over 3.7 years to make decisions, destroying project viability and business cases.
Key Findings
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| National Approval Rate (Year Ending June 2025) | 87% |
| Major Applications Within 13-Week Deadline | 91% |
| Highest Approval Council | 97% (Knowsley) |
| Lowest Approval Council (Major Developments) | 29% (Woking) |
| Worst Decision Timeline | 3.75 years (Dorset) |
| County-Level Approval Rate | 95% |
| Overall S78 Appeal Success Rate | 31% |
Planning Approval Rates by Council
National Average: 87% approval rate (year ending June 2025)
Highest: 97% (Knowsley) | Lowest: 29% (Woking)
Data covers planning applications decided in the year ending June 2025. Approval rates by council range from 60% to 100% for major developments.
Why This Matters
In the year ending June 2025, district-level planning authorities in England processed 80,400 applications and granted 70,800 decisions, representing an 87% approval rate (up 1 percentage point from the previous year). However, this masks critical variance: approval rates by council range from 29% to 97% for major developments—a 68 percentage point gap that is not random variation.
This variance reflects different planning philosophies, housing targets, staffing capacity, and political pressure. A developer's success depends heavily on geography. The starkest insight: some councils take 3.7 years to decide applications legally required to be resolved in 91 days, destroying project viability and business cases.
The critical insight: approval rates by council range from 60% to 100% for major developments, 60% to 100% for minor applications, and 77% to 100% for other development types. This 40-point range (60% to 100%) reflects structural differences in how councils approach development, not just application quality.
Implications for Stakeholders
For Landowners
- High-risk geographies: Woking, Maldon, Wychavon—expect 44–57% approval rates; factor in appeal costs
- High-approval geographies: Knowsley, Gosport, North East councils—plan with 90%+ confidence
- Decision timeline risk: Rural councils take 6x+ longer; secure option agreements with long negotiation windows
For Developers
- Pre-application engagement: Councils with structured pre-app processes (Islington, Boston) show faster, higher approvals
- Appeal strategy: If facing refusal, inquiries (76% success) may be cost-justified for £5M+ schemes
- Council profiling: Spend £2–5K on planning advice before land purchase—approval likelihood drives site value by 30–50%
For Self-Builders
- Approval clustering: Certain councils dominate self-build (Cotswold, Forest of Dean, Mid Devon)—target these
- Plot size flexibility: Councils accepting 0.05–0.07 acre plots have faster timelines than those demanding larger footprints
- Self-builders more successful in rural areas with available land (80%+ approval typical); urban/suburban councils more resistant (50–70% range)
For Investors
- Planning uplift: Land approved for 80+ units is worth 5–10x more than agricultural land; council approval rate directly impacts return
- Zoning arbitrage: Councils improving approval rates (Boston +38.7%, Islington +24%) represent value play—invest in pipeline before reputation shifts
- Rural vs. urban: Rural councils slower but less competitive; urban councils faster but more expensive per plot
Best-Performing Councils: Quick Decisions & High Approvals
| Council | Approval Rate | Decision Speed | Notable Factors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowsley | 97% | Within statutory limits | Pro-growth stance |
| Gosport | 92% | Timely | Demand for development |
| Boston | Improved 38.7% | Improved | Institutional learning; staffing investment |
| Islington | Improved 24% | Timely | Pre-application engagement |
Common Patterns: Pre-application engagement, clear planning policies, delegated authority to officers (not committee), and a growth mindset characterize high-performing councils.
Councils with Lowest Approval Rates
Major Housing Developments (Highest Rejection Risk)
| Council | Major Development Approval Rate | Strategic Issue |
|---|---|---|
| Woking | 29% | Green Belt constraints; Conservative opposition |
| Maldon | 44% | Coastal/environmental; political resistance |
| Wychavon | 57% | Rural; Green Belt protection |
| Central Bedfordshire | 50% | Mixed urban/rural; political composition |
Policy Implication: 18 councils rejected one in four major housing projects (10+ units), directly undermining government housing targets. These councils are in effect veto-ing central government housing policy at the local level.
Worst-Performing Councils: Decision Timelines
The starkest insight: some councils take 3.7 years to decide applications legally required to be resolved in 91 days.
| Council | Average Decision Time | Ratio to Legal Limit | Issue Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dorset | 1,372 days (3.75 years) | 15x legal requirement | Rural backlog; legacy applications from pre-2020 |
| Mid Suffolk | 381 days | 4.1x limit | Rural; complexity + staffing |
| Bamburgh District | 344 days | 3.7x limit | Coastal/rural; environmental constraints |
| Richmondshire | 415 days | 4.5x limit | Rural North; limited resource |
Root Causes Identified: Legacy backlogs (rural councils sitting on applications from 2007–2019), staffing shortages (rural councils lack specialist planners), complexity (environmental, flooding, or highways constraints), and political paralysis (some councillors delay decisions to avoid electoral risk).
Real-World Impact: One business lost an entire season and £30,000 in revenue due to a single planning delay, only to build the approved structure in two weeks for £800—a 4:1 cost ratio between process and execution.
Regional Variation
North vs. South Approval Rates
North East: 91% approval rate
- Strong pro-growth culture
- Lower land values reduce NIMBY pressure
- Councils competing for investment
London: 82% approval rate
- Lower than national average due to density, conservation, and environmental constraints
- However, certain boroughs (e.g., Islington, Newham) show 80%+ approval rates
County vs. District Variation
- County-level authorities: 95% approval rate—these handle highways, minerals, and waste (less contentious)
- District-level authorities: 87% approval rate—handle residential/commercial (more politically fraught)
Appeal Success Rates & Overturn Data
When applications are refused, appeals succeed approximately 31% of the time (2024/25 data).
| Appeal Type | Success Rate | Volume | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Written Representations | 29% | 93% of appeals | Cost-effective but risky; 7 in 10 lose |
| Hearings Procedure | 59% | 5% of appeals | More resource-intensive; higher success |
| Inquiries | 76% | 2% of appeals | Most expensive; highest success (suitable for major schemes) |
Strategic Insight: If you face a refusal from a restrictive council (Woking, Maldon), an inquiry may be justified despite cost—local inspector lacks political pressure that influenced original decision.
Development Type Variation
Approval rates vary significantly by application type:
| Development Type | Approval Rate Range | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Major (10+ units) | 60%–100% | Widest range; most politically contested |
| Minor (1–9 units) | 60%–100% | High variance; highly council-dependent |
| Householder (extensions, etc.) | 80%+, typically high | Most approvals; least contentious |
| Other | 77%–100% | Agricultural, commercial; narrow range |
Householder Approvals Are Safest: The 44,000 householder applications decided in Q2 2025 had consistently high approval rates, suggesting home improvers face less political friction than developers.
Data Sources & Methodology
This report relies on government quarterly releases (most authoritative) and Planning Resource/Appeal Finder analysis. Data covers the year ending June 2025, with some metrics updated through Q3 2025.
| Data Point | Source | Frequency | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|
| National approval rates, decision timelines | GOV.UK Planning Statistics | Quarterly | Government official |
| Council-specific approval rates | Planning Resource / Appeal Finder | Annual/quarterly | Industry expert |
| Appeal success rates | Planning Inspectorate | Quarterly | Government official |
| Decision time outliers | FOIA requests (Country Land & Business Assoc.) | Adhoc | Freedom of Information |
| Housing-specific approvals | Glenigan / HBF | Quarterly | Industry consensus |
Key Gaps: Live council-by-council approval rates require manual extraction from GOV.UK Live Tables P120–P138. Decision timeline data by council is only available for a subset of councils. Housing-specific rates require FOIA requests.
Report Date: January 2026 | Data Current To: Q3 2025 (Sept 2025) | Next Update: April 2026