Richmond has 85 conservation areas, more than any other London borough, and refused 249 householder applications last year. It also decides faster than almost anywhere and loses more appeals than most. The design has to answer the character question before it answers anything else.
Richmond's profile is genuinely unusual: a hard borough to persuade, a quick one to hear from, and a productive one to appeal in. All figures come from the same MHCLG return for the same four quarters, and the same five-year Inspectorate casework file.
| Measure | Richmond upon Thames | London | England |
|---|---|---|---|
| Householder applications decided | 1,362 | 24,758 | 151,867 |
| Householder approval rate | 81.7% | 85.6% | 90.3% |
| Householder refusals | 249 | — | — |
| Determined within 8 weeks | 97.9% | — | — |
| Householder appeals allowed | 44.9% | 39.9% | 34.4% |
| Conservation areas | 85 — the most in London | — | — |
Approval and speed: MHCLG district planning application statistics (PS1/PS2), financial year 2025-26. Appeals: Planning Inspectorate casework, five years to 30 June 2026 — 145 of 323 determined householder appeals allowed. Conservation areas: MHCLG Planning Data Platform register, August 2026. Derived in scripts/aggregate/.
Nearly half of the householder appeals brought against Richmond succeed — 145 of 323 determined over five years, the highest rate of any borough handling that volume of appeals. That is a large sample, not a statistical accident.
Read alongside an 81.7% approval rate, it describes a council that applies its conservation policies firmly and is, more often than most, found by an independent inspector to have applied them too firmly on the particular facts. It does not mean refusals here are arbitrary: 55.1% of appeals still fail, and an appeal takes months.
What it does mean is that a Richmond refusal is worth reading carefully rather than treating as final. Where the reason cites harm to the character of a conservation area — the most common ground here — the question on appeal is whether that harm is real and material, and that is precisely the sort of judgement inspectors are willing to reach differently.
Outside a conservation area, the ordinary permitted development limits apply and many projects need no application. Inside one — and 85 are designated here — the answer changes for a much wider range of work. You will need an application if:
85 conservation areas across a borough of 84,970 homes is the densest designation coverage in London — Bromley is next with 69, across two-thirds more housing. 38.1% of the stock predates 1919 and a further 24.3% is interwar, so the fabric being protected is genuinely varied: Georgian and Victorian riverside terraces, Edwardian villas, and interwar suburbs with their own coherent character. A design that reads as generic will be assessed against whichever of those it sits in, and generic is what gets refused.
Tell us about your project and get a fixed, no-obligation quote back within one working day. If you don't need planning permission at all, we'll tell you that too — for free.
The larger home extension route allows a single-storey rear extension of up to 6m on an attached house or 8m on a detached one, without a planning application, provided no adjoining neighbour objects within 21 days.
Richmond refused 30 of the 108 it decided in 2025-26 — 27.8%, against 8.6% in Hillingdon and 12.5% in Barking and Dagenham. Prior approval is judged on neighbour amenity alone, and the borough's older, tighter plots produce more objections that can carry than the regular interwar estates of outer London.
That changes the calculation. Where the plot is generous the route remains worth using; where neighbours are close, a full application at a slightly shallower depth gives the council room to negotiate rather than a binary decision, and on this borough's numbers it frequently reaches a built extension sooner.
In a borough where character is the decisive test, the drawings have to make the character argument rather than leave it to the officer.
Which of the 85 areas the property falls in, whether it is listed, and what the area's character appraisal says the council is protecting. Free, and it shapes the design rather than merely permitting it.
An accurate record of the existing building — essential where 38.1% of the stock is pre-1919 and previous extensions have often consumed part of the permitted development allowance.
Materials, fenestration rhythm, roof form and the relationship to neighbouring properties, drawn so that the conservation judgement is made on the sheet rather than left open to interpretation.
We submit and handle the officer's questions. If a refusal comes, we tell you honestly whether it is the sort inspectors overturn here, given that 44.9% of them are.
Richmond's approval rate as each quarter is published, so you can watch whether the 81.7% above moves.
Source: MHCLG planning application statistics (householder decisions, England, 1 April 2025 - 31 March 2026). Compare every borough on our London approval-rate league table.
Richmond granted 81.7% of the householder applications it decided in the 2025-26 financial year — 1,113 of 1,362, with 249 refused. That is below the London average of 85.6% and England's 90.3%, and it is among the lower rates in outer London. The borough also handles one of the largest householder caseloads in the capital, so the rate rests on a substantial number of decisions rather than a small sample.
The published statistics record outcomes rather than reasons, so any single explanation would be speculation. What is measurable is the constraint: Richmond has 85 conservation areas, more than any other London borough, and 38.1% of its housing predates 1919. Inside a conservation area the council assesses design against the character of the area, a judgement with far more scope for refusal than the dimensional tests that govern unconstrained sites. The high appeal success rate suggests inspectors sometimes reach that judgement differently.
It is worth serious consideration here, more than in most boroughs. The Planning Inspectorate allowed 44.9% of householder appeals against Richmond over the five years to 30 June 2026 — 145 of 323 — against 34.4% nationally and 39.9% across London. That is the highest rate among boroughs handling comparable appeal volumes. An appeal still takes several months and more than half fail, so the decision should rest on the specific reason for refusal — but a Richmond refusal is genuinely more overturnable than most.
Quickly. The council determined 97.9% of its non-agreement householder decisions within the statutory eight weeks in 2025-26 — 938 of 958 — one of the strongest records in London. Around three in ten of its householder cases run instead on an agreed extension of time, which is normal for a borough handling this much conservation-area work. As always the eight weeks begin at validation rather than submission, so an incomplete drawing pack costs you time before the clock starts.
85 conservation areas are recorded for Richmond in the national planning data register — the most of any London borough, ahead of Bromley's 69 across a much larger housing stock. Inside one, permitted development rights are curtailed: side extensions, roof alterations, cladding and window replacement typically require an application, and the design is assessed against the area's character appraisal. Boundaries often follow individual streets or riverside frontages, so the address rather than the district decides.
Outside a conservation area, often not: a single-storey rear extension on a house can be built under permitted development if it projects no more than 3m from the original rear wall on a semi-detached or terraced property, or 4m on a detached one, and stays within 4m in height. Inside one of the 85 conservation areas, and on any flat, the position is different and an application is usually needed. Because 38.1% of the borough's homes predate 1919, the other frequent complication is that part of the allowance has already been used by an earlier extension.
Less often than in outer London. Richmond refused 27.8% of the 108 large householder extension prior approvals it decided in 2025-26 — 30 refusals — against 8.6% in Hillingdon and 12.5% in Barking and Dagenham. The route is judged on neighbour amenity alone and gives the council no room to negotiate, and Richmond's older, tighter plots generate more objections that succeed. On a generous plot it remains the quickest route; where neighbours are close, a full application at a shallower depth often gets there faster.
On a house outside a conservation area, usually yes: a rear dormer or hip-to-gable conversion is permitted development if the added volume stays within 40m³ on a terrace or 50m³ on a semi or detached house, nothing rises above the existing ridge, and the dormer is on the rear or side slope. Inside one of the 85 conservation areas, side-facing roof alterations and anything visible from the street will generally need permission, and a rear dormer may still be assessed for its effect on the roofscape. Flats have no such rights at all.
All of it — Richmond, Twickenham, Teddington, East Sheen, Barnes, Kew, Ham, Petersham, Whitton, Hampton, Hampton Hill and Mortlake. Every application is decided by the same authority against the same local plan, but with 85 conservation areas the relevant character appraisal changes from one part of the borough to the next, and that appraisal is what a design has to answer.
Existing and proposed floor plans and elevations, sections where roof form or levels change, a site plan and a 1:1250 location plan with the site edged red, each at a stated metric scale with a north point on the plans. In a conservation area you should also expect to provide material and window details, and often a short heritage or design statement explaining how the proposal responds to the area's character. In this borough that statement frequently carries the decision.
Answer five quick questions and get a free planning score for your exact address — instantly. Then, if you want the full picture, unlock the detailed analysis: your council's live approval rates, local precedents, constraints on your street and a step-by-step route to permission.
Local, keyword-specific drawings tuned to your council's guidance.
Same fixed quotes, same fast drawings — wherever your project is.