The latest evidence from three complementary sources, Landmark’s Planning Applications 2025, Searchland and SLG’s The Planning Slowdown and the Government’s Q1 2026 planning statistics, collectively paints a detailed and increasingly consistent picture of a planning system under strain, where ambition, activity and delivery are becoming progressively misaligned.

At a high level, the Landmark data shows that total planning application volumes across the UK remained subdued throughout 2025, with just under 690,000 applications processed and rates falling to their lowest level since 2012. This reflects a sustained slowdown following the post‑pandemic peak, with reduced activity observed across all regions. Alongside this decline in volume, there has also been a shift in the composition of applications, with alterations and conversions now accounting for almost 40% of all submissions, overtaking both extensions and new build proposals. This signals a structural change in market behaviour, with developers and homeowners increasingly favouring lower‑risk, more viable schemes that reuse or adapt existing assets, rather than committing to large‑scale new development.

The Government’s most recent quarterly statistics reinforce this downward trajectory. Between January and March 2026, local planning authorities in England received approximately 79,600 applications, representing a 10% decrease compared to the same period the previous year, while decisions also declined by 4%. Over the year to March 2026, total applications fell to around 315,900, a 5% reduction year‑on‑year, continuing the downward trend seen since the post‑pandemic rebound. Even within residential development, the number of applications granted declined, with 6,700 residential permissions approved in the quarter, down 5% from the previous year. These figures confirm that the slowdown identified in longer-term datasets is not cyclical but ongoing, driven by structural pressures.

Despite these falling volumes, decision-making outcomes themselves remain relatively stable. Approval rates continue to sit at high levels, with the Government data showing that 87% of applications were granted in early 2026, broadly consistent with previous years. This aligns with Landmark’s finding that approximately two-thirds of applications are approved, suggesting that refusal is not the primary barrier to delivery. Instead, the issue lies elsewhere in the system, particularly in the interaction between timescales, complexity and confidence.

It is in this context that The Planning Slowdown provides critical insight, shifting the focus from how many applications are submitted to how long they take to determine. The findings are stark. Since 2010, the median determination period for major residential applications has increased from 107 days to 349 days, more than tripling over fifteen years. Outline applications now take even longer, averaging around 439 days, highlighting the increasing difficulty and complexity of establishing the principle of development. Even smaller schemes have not escaped this trend, with decision times rising sharply across all categories and growing disparities between delegated and committee decisions. Committee decisions now take significantly longer than officer decisions, with the time gap expanding dramatically over time, reflecting both procedural requirements and political dynamics.

Interestingly, the Government’s headline performance figures can appear more positive at first glance, with 91% of major applications reported as being decided within 13 weeks or an agreed timeframe. However, this masks the growing reliance on extensions of time and Planning Performance Agreements, which are now used in 77% of major applications. In practice, this means that while formal targets are being met on paper, actual times are significantly longer, aligning with the extended timelines identified in the slowdown analysis.

When these datasets are considered together, a clear set of systemic pressures emerges. Planning departments are operating with constrained resources, following years of reduced funding, while simultaneously being expected to manage increasingly complex applications that must address a growing array of policy requirements, including biodiversity net gain, design standards and infrastructure provision. At the same time, frequent changes to national policy frameworks and political uncertainty have introduced further difficulty into the system, complicating decision-making for both officers and applicants. These factors combine to slow the process at every stage, from validation through to determination and post-consent delivery.

The market response to these conditions is evident in the changing profile of applications. As risk, cost and uncertainty increase, developers are shifting toward projects that are quicker, simpler and more deliverable, such as conversions and smaller-scale adaptations. Larger new-build schemes remain essential to meeting housing targets but are increasingly difficult to progress efficiently through the system. This divergence between policy ambition, particularly the emphasis on delivering significant volumes of new housing, and market behaviour highlights a widening gap between what the system is intended to achieve and what it is currently capable of delivering.

Another key theme emerging across the reports, is the growing importance of location quality and place-making. The Landmark analysis shows that access to amenities, infrastructure and connectivity is becoming a defining factor in planning outcomes, reflecting both policy priorities and community expectations. This places additional emphasis on site selection and reinforces the need to assess development potential not only in policy terms but in relation to the broader context of services, accessibility and liveability.

Ultimately, the combined evidence suggests that the challenges facing the planning system are less about whether development can be approved and more about whether it can be progressed efficiently and delivered in practice. Application volumes are declining, determination periods are lengthening, and the system is becoming more complex to navigate. While approval rates remain relatively high, the time, cost and uncertainty associated with securing those approvals are increasing, creating a drag on delivery at precisely the moment when housing output needs to accelerate.

The overarching conclusion is that the planning system is increasingly constrained not by a lack of policy direction, but by capacity, complexity and time. Without addressing these underlying issues through greater resourcing and improved process efficiency, the gap between housing ambition and delivery is likely to persist.

In this environment, the ability to assess risk, identify viable opportunities early, and navigate the system strategically becomes not just advantageous, but essential. To discuss how the team at Berrys can help with your planning and development projects please contact:

Kirsten Sloth-Nielsen (Towcester) 01327 356140

Lauren May (Kettering) 01536 412464