Investigations
Rebuilt weekly from the live feed
London planning, exposed in data.
The Atlas holds a record of every decision-maker. Our investigations turn that record into answers to the questions the system makes hard to ask — who overrides whom, who pays when they get it wrong, and what actually works. Accountability is free; the decision tools are Pro.
Approval rate by borough
Loading map…
LowerHigher
10,156
appeal decisions analysed
502
committee overrides of officers
168
overturned by an inspector
33
boroughs · every decision-maker
Free — accountability investigations
Public-interest. No login required.
The parts of the planning system that ought to be public. Free to read, cite, and share — because scrutiny of public bodies should not sit behind a paywall.
AccountabilityFree
Committee Watch
Where elected members override their planning officers — and how often the override is later overturned at appeal.
33% of overrides
overturned at appeal
502
overrides of officers
Public moneyFree
Costs Paid
Public money awarded against councils for unreasonable refusals — every figure traced to its PINS decision.
£2.3m
awarded, London majors 2018–23
Where it’s hardFree
Refusal Hotspots
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
Loading map…
63–98%
approval range across boroughs
Who really decidesFree
The Delegation Gap
How much each council hands to officers versus committee — and how that shifts your odds and timeline.
96% delegated
4% to committee
96%
decided under delegation, London-wide
The real clockFree
The Approval Clock
How long a decision actually takes by borough and route — not the statutory eight-week fiction.
74 days
London median, full planning
Who decidesFree
Case Officer Variation
The same application can live or die by who picks it up — but the borough predicts more than the officer. Who refuses most, where their refusals cluster, and whose don’t survive appeal.
2,427
officers measured
The real numbersFree
Applications That Aren’t Development
Trees, signs and licences are nearly one in six planning applications — approved almost every time. How much effort goes on applications that build nothing, and the real numbers once they’re stripped out.
84% development
16% trees, signs & licences
1 in 6
isn’t development
PoliticsFree
The Reform Effect
How planning approval has shifted year-on-year — real trends in who gets built.
75.9%–82.3%
London approval rate 2020–2026
Community voiceFree
The Objection Effect
Whether public objections actually change planning outcomes — approval odds by objection count.
84.5%–40.8%
approval range by objection volume
Pro — decision tools
Included with a Development Intent subscription.
The analysis that saves money on a live scheme — odds, comparables, named decision-makers and site histories. This is the work that informs a real development decision, so it sits with the subscription.
Decision tool◆ Pro
Should I Appeal?
Your odds, likely duration and cost of appealing a refusal — modelled on comparable PINS outcomes for your scheme.
26%
of London appeals allowed
Calculator
odds · duration · cost
Playbook◆ Pro
Winning Arguments
A searchable library of the arguments that actually won appeals — policies ranked by win rate.
DesignHousing supplyHeritageGreen BeltAmenity
2,666
allowed appeals in our data
Decision makers◆ Pro
Inspector League
Every PINS inspector ranked by how they decide — overturn rate, policy leanings, and what they reward.
90%
64%
64%
601
inspectors profiled
Site sourcing◆ Pro
Site History
Every application ever lodged at a given plot, over time — the full planning biography of a site.
By UPRN
30-year archive
The viability fight◆ Pro
Viability Wars
Affordable housing promised versus delivered after viability reviews, scheme by scheme.
Promised
37%
Built
23%
−38%
affordable lost to viability
Read the accountability work free. Unlock the tools to act.
Committee Watch and Costs Paid stay open to everyone. Should I Appeal?, Winning Arguments, the Inspector League and Site History come with Pro.