Planning Atlas · Track records

Track Records.

Performance rankings for every decision-maker and actor in the London planning system — sortable on every measure, focused to any borough from the map. Approval rates free. Condition load, overturn rates and detailed breakdowns are subscriber data.[1][2][3]

⌕

Loading map…

City Of London

2559

98%

—

Hammersmith And Fulham

9026

92%

—

Wandsworth

16361

92%

—

Camden

12736

91%

—

Southwark

11513

91%

—

Kensington And Chelsea

16429

89%

—

Westminster

27722

89%

—

Haringey

16508

87%

—

Merton

8286

87%

—

#10

Islington

9406

85%

—

#11

Bexley

10712

83%

—

#12

Ealing

14405

83%

—

#13

Tower Hamlets

6021

81%

—

#14

Lewisham

9604

80%

—

#15

Richmond Upon Thames

12763

80%

—

#16

Barnet

17945

79%

—

#17

Bromley

15834

79%

—

#18

Hackney

7668

79%

—

#19

Hillingdon

23057

79%

—

#20

Lambeth

11393

78%

—

#21

Newham

6983

78%

—

#22

Sutton

8613

75%

—

#23

Waltham Forest

8624

75%

—

#24

Harrow

10045

74%

—

#25

Redbridge

11392

74%

—

#26

Enfield

11482

73%

—

#27

Greenwich

9292

73%

—

#28

Havering

13405

71%

—

#29

Kingston Upon Thames

9902

71%

—

#30

Brent

11809

70%

—

#31

Hounslow

10236

70%

—

#32

Croydon

12458

68%

—

#33

Barking And Dagenham

4862

63%

—

Locked columns contain overturn rates, condition load, S106 averages, and detailed breakdowns.Subscribe →

The read · London

City Of London leads on approval at 98% — 35% points ahead of Barking And Dagenham.

Leader

City Of London

98%

Laggard

Barking And Dagenham

63%

Spread

35%

33 boroughs · 389,051 applications in this view.Average approval 79.9% — London-wide 81%.

Overturn, condition load and S106 figures are subscriber data. Subscribe →

Sources & method

[1]Officer and borough approval rates, decision times and delegation — London borough planning registers and published decision notices. · methodology
[2]Inspector overturn rates and appeal outcomes — Planning Inspectorate (PINS) published appeal decisions. · PINS appeals casework
[3]Consultant and developer track records, condition load and S106 averages — application case files, committee reports and section 106 agreements.
[4]Policy citation counts — parsed from published decision notices, high-confidence extractions only; how often a policy appears on refusal notices is subscriber data.

Rankings are computed, not editorial — every actor is scored on the same published record. Every figure on this page is computed from the loaded planning record; measures whose source data is not loaded yet show a dash until they are real. Methodology is published in full so every ranking is traceable to its primary source.