Appeal Survival Rates
Not every refusal reason is equally fatal. We read thousands of PINS decision letters and measured which contested issues actually survive appeal — nationally and in your authority — plus how often a revised resubmission succeeds instead.
Which refusal reasons survive appeal on change of use in Leeds City Council?
Share of decided appeals raising each issue that were allowed. Higher = softer refusal reason. Authority rates shown where at least 10 decided appeals raise the issue; grey bars are the national baseline.
| Refusal reason | Leeds City Council | National | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green Belt | n=9 — too few to rate | 32.9% (n=1,181) | |
| Principle of development / location | no indexed appeals | 30.9% (n=1,312) | |
| Highway safety / parking | n=8 — too few to rate | 30.4% (n=2,125) | |
| Residential amenity (privacy, light, outlook, noise) | 22.2% (n=18) | 28.6% (n=4,513) | |
| Planning obligations / s.106 | no indexed appeals | 28.6% (n=199) | |
| Character & appearance / design | 9.1% (n=11) | 27.8% (n=4,296) | |
| Heritage (listed buildings, conservation areas) | n=6 — too few to rate | 26.5% (n=1,484) | |
| Flood risk / drainage | no indexed appeals | 26.2% (n=1,041) | |
| Trees / ecology | n=1 — too few to rate | 24.9% (n=1,011) | |
| Standard of accommodation / space standards | n=8 — too few to rate | 23.7% (n=2,303) | |
| Overdevelopment / cramming | n=1 — too few to rate | 22.0% (n=173) |
Derived from PINS decision letters with extracted text (not every appeal is indexed). A reason being "raised" means the Inspector identified it among the main issues — observational data, not a prediction for any individual scheme.
Refused? Resubmitting often beats appealing
Measured from refusals in our decision corpus that were followed by a fresh application at the same address.
67.9%of first resubmissions approved nationally (n=1167) ~147 days
typical refusal-to-redecision gap
Not enough measured resubmissions in this authority yet to quote a local rate.
The designation reality check
Measured approval rates for decided applications inside each designation vs the same authorities outside it. The gap is smaller than most people assume — the risk is usually the proposal, not the postcode.
| Designation | Approval inside | Approval outside | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservation area | 87.4% (n=5,433) | 83.1% | +4.3 points |
| Article 4 area | 82.7% (n=6,867) | 85.5% | -2.8 points |
| Green Belt | 80.0% (n=4,501) | 87.1% | -7.1 points |
National figures across authorities with a full decisions stream; conservation-area and Article 4 rows use precisely-located applications only. Observational, not causal — the mix of what people apply for differs inside designations.
About this tool: Appeal Survival Rates
Which refusal reasons actually survive appeal — measured from thousands of PINS decision letters, by authority vs national. Includes measured resubmission success rates and the designation reality check.
Use after a refusal to decide between appealing and resubmitting, or before submitting to see which issues your authority fights hardest. Updated nightly from the decision corpus.
PINS appeal decision analysis, consistency in decision-making
Use these tools to understand how your Local Planning Authority behaves — what they approve, what they refuse, how often appeals succeed, and what strategy gives you the best chance. This is behavioural intelligence, not just policy research.
Guidance to help you prepare — not formal planning advice. Check the current policy text and your council's local plan before relying on it.