Rushcliffe planning statistics
Householder applications decided in the year to June 2026, compared with the rest of England.
How long does planning permission take in Rushcliffe?
Rushcliffe decided 52.1% of householder applications within 8 weeks without an extension in the year to June 2026, against 62.7% across England.
Rushcliffe is highlighted on the map. See on the map
Within 8 weeks, no extension
52.1%
228th of 297
10.6 points slower than England
Granted
94.5%
99th of 297
4.0 points higher than England
Extension of time
40.0%
212th of 297
7.7 points higher than England
Decisions (12 months)
455
Rushcliffe decided 455 householder applications in the year to June 2026, granting 94.5%.
52.1% were decided within 8 weeks with no extension, against 62.7% across England (228th of 297 for speed).
A further 40.0% were decided under an extension of time agreed with the applicant.
That is down from 62.7% a year earlier.
Of 11 householder appeals decided in the same period, 36.4% were allowed.
How quickly decisions are made
Rushcliffe against England, share of householder decisions each quarter
- Within 8 weeks, no extension
- Extension of time
- England, within 8 weeks
Show data
| Quarter | Within 8 weeks, no extension | Extension of time | England, within 8 weeks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 Q1 | 96.1% | 0.0% | 89.5% |
| 2008 Q2 | 92.0% | 0.0% | 89.4% |
| 2008 Q3 | 94.3% | 0.0% | 89.7% |
| 2008 Q4 | 96.1% | 0.0% | 90.3% |
| 2009 Q1 | 94.8% | 0.0% | 90.3% |
| 2009 Q2 | 95.9% | 0.0% | 91.7% |
| 2009 Q3 | 92.7% | 0.0% | 91.4% |
| 2009 Q4 | 95.7% | 0.0% | 91.0% |
| 2010 Q1 | 93.7% | 0.0% | 88.8% |
| 2010 Q2 | 85.1% | 0.0% | 89.8% |
| 2010 Q3 | 88.8% | 0.0% | 88.4% |
| 2010 Q4 | 87.8% | 0.0% | 87.7% |
| 2011 Q1 | 86.1% | 0.0% | 86.4% |
| 2011 Q2 | 85.1% | 0.0% | 85.9% |
| 2011 Q3 | 91.5% | 0.0% | 84.9% |
| 2011 Q4 | 92.8% | 0.0% | 84.9% |
| 2012 Q1 | 87.5% | 0.0% | 83.7% |
| 2012 Q2 | 88.1% | 0.0% | 84.2% |
| 2012 Q3 | 87.7% | 0.0% | 82.9% |
| 2012 Q4 | 94.3% | 0.0% | 85.2% |
| 2013 Q1 | 94.3% | 0.0% | 85.7% |
| 2013 Q2 | 87.8% | 0.0% | 86.3% |
| 2013 Q3 | 88.1% | 0.0% | 85.3% |
| 2013 Q4 | 88.6% | 0.0% | 86.3% |
| 2014 Q1 | 95.3% | 0.0% | 85.4% |
| 2014 Q2 | 90.8% | 0.0% | 84.9% |
| 2014 Q3 | 85.2% | 0.0% | 82.5% |
| 2014 Q4 | 92.8% | 0.0% | 82.1% |
| 2015 Q1 | 91.0% | 0.0% | 80.4% |
| 2015 Q2 | 86.8% | 0.0% | 80.6% |
| 2015 Q3 | 66.7% | 0.0% | 79.2% |
| 2015 Q4 | 83.8% | 0.0% | 80.0% |
| 2016 Q1 | 74.1% | 9.6% | 78.3% |
| 2016 Q2 | 89.5% | 4.2% | 79.8% |
| 2016 Q3 | 91.6% | 4.2% | 77.7% |
| 2016 Q4 | 89.7% | 5.9% | 78.0% |
| 2017 Q1 | 88.9% | 5.3% | 77.3% |
| 2017 Q2 | 88.6% | 7.9% | 78.5% |
| 2017 Q3 | 84.4% | 9.3% | 76.1% |
| 2017 Q4 | 91.0% | 4.2% | 77.1% |
| 2018 Q1 | 81.5% | 12.9% | 73.7% |
| 2018 Q2 | 79.5% | 15.2% | 74.0% |
| 2018 Q3 | 72.8% | 19.4% | 72.7% |
| 2018 Q4 | 69.7% | 21.8% | 72.7% |
| 2019 Q1 | 63.5% | 27.6% | 69.9% |
| 2019 Q2 | 72.5% | 16.7% | 72.1% |
| 2019 Q3 | 79.0% | 10.8% | 69.6% |
| 2019 Q4 | 79.9% | 8.5% | 71.5% |
| 2020 Q1 | 81.0% | 14.1% | 68.4% |
| 2020 Q2 | 82.2% | 12.7% | 63.9% |
| 2020 Q3 | 68.2% | 15.6% | 63.8% |
| 2020 Q4 | 70.6% | 18.2% | 65.3% |
| 2021 Q1 | 75.1% | 16.9% | 59.4% |
| 2021 Q2 | 72.6% | 16.3% | 58.4% |
| 2021 Q3 | 50.2% | 19.4% | 53.1% |
| 2021 Q4 | 33.2% | 35.4% | 53.0% |
| 2022 Q1 | 49.5% | 24.7% | 51.6% |
| 2022 Q2 | 61.7% | 23.5% | 56.0% |
| 2022 Q3 | 58.2% | 26.5% | 53.3% |
| 2022 Q4 | 58.3% | 35.4% | 54.1% |
| 2023 Q1 | 60.1% | 34.8% | 53.5% |
| 2023 Q2 | 74.0% | 16.9% | 58.5% |
| 2023 Q3 | 67.2% | 24.1% | 59.0% |
| 2023 Q4 | 80.2% | 15.3% | 59.8% |
| 2024 Q1 | 68.6% | 26.3% | 58.8% |
| 2024 Q2 | 65.3% | 31.5% | 64.4% |
| 2024 Q3 | 64.8% | 34.4% | 64.2% |
| 2024 Q4 | 66.1% | 29.6% | 65.6% |
| 2025 Q1 | 66.9% | 31.5% | 62.1% |
| 2025 Q2 | 52.8% | 40.7% | 65.0% |
| 2025 Q3 | 46.6% | 47.3% | 62.5% |
| 2025 Q4 | 50.8% | 41.5% | 64.7% |
| 2026 Q1 | 56.7% | 38.5% | 60.6% |
| 2026 Q2 | 55.9% | 30.4% | 62.7% |
Share of applications granted
Rushcliffe against England
- Rushcliffe
- England
Show data
| Quarter | Rushcliffe | England |
|---|---|---|
| 2008 Q1 | 89.3% | 85.1% |
| 2008 Q2 | 89.0% | 86.1% |
| 2008 Q3 | 88.5% | 86.3% |
| 2008 Q4 | 94.8% | 85.3% |
| 2009 Q1 | 90.4% | 85.9% |
| 2009 Q2 | 92.4% | 86.8% |
| 2009 Q3 | 94.4% | 87.4% |
| 2009 Q4 | 94.9% | 86.9% |
| 2010 Q1 | 84.5% | 87.0% |
| 2010 Q2 | 91.9% | 88.0% |
| 2010 Q3 | 90.0% | 87.7% |
| 2010 Q4 | 84.7% | 87.5% |
| 2011 Q1 | 90.3% | 87.9% |
| 2011 Q2 | 91.9% | 88.5% |
| 2011 Q3 | 84.7% | 88.3% |
| 2011 Q4 | 87.0% | 88.3% |
| 2012 Q1 | 94.4% | 88.2% |
| 2012 Q2 | 86.9% | 89.2% |
| 2012 Q3 | 92.9% | 89.0% |
| 2012 Q4 | 89.9% | 88.9% |
| 2013 Q1 | 92.6% | 89.8% |
| 2013 Q2 | 92.5% | 90.6% |
| 2013 Q3 | 93.8% | 90.3% |
| 2013 Q4 | 92.8% | 89.6% |
| 2014 Q1 | 90.7% | 89.8% |
| 2014 Q2 | 94.8% | 90.5% |
| 2014 Q3 | 93.4% | 90.0% |
| 2014 Q4 | 88.3% | 89.2% |
| 2015 Q1 | 96.6% | 89.3% |
| 2015 Q2 | 92.5% | 90.2% |
| 2015 Q3 | 93.3% | 90.0% |
| 2015 Q4 | 93.6% | 89.2% |
| 2016 Q1 | 93.4% | 90.0% |
| 2016 Q2 | 93.2% | 90.3% |
| 2016 Q3 | 93.0% | 90.2% |
| 2016 Q4 | 93.1% | 89.7% |
| 2017 Q1 | 91.8% | 89.9% |
| 2017 Q2 | 93.4% | 90.5% |
| 2017 Q3 | 91.7% | 90.0% |
| 2017 Q4 | 94.2% | 90.1% |
| 2018 Q1 | 93.8% | 90.5% |
| 2018 Q2 | 93.8% | 91.0% |
| 2018 Q3 | 95.1% | 91.2% |
| 2018 Q4 | 95.2% | 90.5% |
| 2019 Q1 | 94.1% | 90.3% |
| 2019 Q2 | 95.4% | 91.0% |
| 2019 Q3 | 95.7% | 90.6% |
| 2019 Q4 | 90.2% | 89.8% |
| 2020 Q1 | 95.8% | 89.9% |
| 2020 Q2 | 97.5% | 90.2% |
| 2020 Q3 | 93.9% | 90.6% |
| 2020 Q4 | 93.5% | 90.3% |
| 2021 Q1 | 96.4% | 90.9% |
| 2021 Q2 | 95.2% | 91.2% |
| 2021 Q3 | 93.8% | 91.0% |
| 2021 Q4 | 92.4% | 90.1% |
| 2022 Q1 | 93.4% | 90.0% |
| 2022 Q2 | 90.1% | 90.4% |
| 2022 Q3 | 92.3% | 89.8% |
| 2022 Q4 | 93.7% | 89.4% |
| 2023 Q1 | 94.2% | 89.3% |
| 2023 Q2 | 94.2% | 89.2% |
| 2023 Q3 | 94.9% | 88.6% |
| 2023 Q4 | 91.0% | 88.2% |
| 2024 Q1 | 92.7% | 88.2% |
| 2024 Q2 | 89.5% | 89.1% |
| 2024 Q3 | 94.4% | 89.4% |
| 2024 Q4 | 90.4% | 88.6% |
| 2025 Q1 | 92.3% | 89.3% |
| 2025 Q2 | 95.9% | 90.4% |
| 2025 Q3 | 94.7% | 90.1% |
| 2025 Q4 | 92.4% | 90.1% |
| 2026 Q1 | 96.2% | 90.6% |
| 2026 Q2 | 95.1% | 91.0% |
How long decisions took
Householder decisions over the last 12 months
- Within 8 weeks52.1%
- 8 to 13 weeks3.3%
- 13 to 26 weeks3.7%
- Over 26 weeks0.9%
- Extension of time agreed40.0%
Show data
| Time taken | Decisions |
|---|---|
| Within 8 weeks | 237 |
| 8 to 13 weeks | 15 |
| 13 to 26 weeks | 17 |
| Over 26 weeks | 4 |
| Extension of time agreed | 182 |
Appeals
- Decided
- 11
- Allowed
- 36.4%
- Median wait
- 12 weeks
Householder appeals to the Planning Inspectorate decided in the same 12 months. England: 34.4% allowed.
Refusals overturned at appeal
6.3% of refusals were later overturned at appeal (July 2021 to June 2026): 13 appeals allowed against 206 refusals.
70th lowest of 299 planning authorities. England: 8.9% (July 2021 to June 2026).
Householder refusals from MHCLG table PS2; appeals allowed from the Planning Inspectorate. Approximate: appeals decided in the period, which can relate to earlier refusals.
Larger home extensions (prior approval)
Single-storey rear extensions deeper than 4 metres on a detached house (3 metres otherwise), up to 8 metres (6 metres), can use prior approval instead of a planning application, except in conservation areas, National Landscapes and other protected areas.
Of 17 larger extension notifications between July 2025 and June 2026, 7 needed no approval, 2 were approved and 8 were refused.
Where Rushcliffe had to decide, it refused 8 of 10 (80.0%), against 56.1% across England (2,210 of 3,939 decided).
Figures as first published (provisional).
MHCLG live table PDR 1.
Enforcement
9 planning enforcement notices issued in the year to June 2026.
0.16 per 1,000 homes, against 0.17 across England. 88th highest of 294 planning authorities.
Covers all types of development, not only extensions.
MHCLG table P130; homes from the VOA Council Tax stock of properties.
Protected areas
36 conservation areas: Aslockton Conservation Area, Bingham Conservation Area, Bradmore Conservation Area, Bunny Conservation Area, Car Colston Conservation Area, Colston Bassett Conservation Area, Costock Conservation Area, Cropwell Bishop Conservation Area, Cropwell Butler Conservation Area, East Bridgford Conservation Area, East Leake Conservation Area, Edwalton Conservation Area and 24 more.
Rushcliffe has not published its Article 4 directions to the national planning data service, so the count may be incomplete.
Both can remove permitted development rights, so check with the council before relying on them. Permitted development rules
To check one postcode for a conservation area, listed buildings nearby, flood zone and radon, use the address check.
planning.data.gov.uk.
Builders
490 registered building and trade firms in 2026, 8.7 per 1,000 homes, about 0.9 householder decisions per firm a year.
90th lowest of 294 planning authorities. England median: 10.1 per 1,000 homes and 0.5 decisions per firm.
Counts VAT or PAYE registered firms only, rounded to 5 by ONS; self-employed builders below the VAT threshold aren't included.
ONS UK Business Counts; homes from the VOA Council Tax stock of properties; decisions from MHCLG table PS2.
Compared with neighbouring councils
Decisions and approvals in the year to June 2026; overturns over each council's appeal window; builders per 1,000 homes in 2026.
Decided within 8 weeks, no extension
- Rushcliffe52.1%
- Nottingham46.1%
- Erewash61.9%
- Charnwood71.8%
- Melton12.8%
- North West Leicestershire45.5%
- Broxtowe79.5%
- Gedling58.7%
- Newark and Sherwood50.0%
- England62.7%
Granted
- Rushcliffe94.5%
- Nottingham90.6%
- Erewash97.1%
- Charnwood89.8%
- Melton91.0%
- North West Leicestershire98.4%
- Broxtowe96.1%
- Gedling93.9%
- Newark and Sherwood96.0%
- England90.5%
Refusals overturned at appeal
- Rushcliffe6.3%
- Nottingham10.1%
- Erewash8.3%
- Charnwood4.8%
- Melton12.5%
- North West Leicestershire16.9%
- Broxtowe15.7%
- Gedling17.2%
- Newark and Sherwood7.3%
- England8.9%
Registered building firms per 1,000 homes
- Rushcliffe8.7
- Nottingham5.3
- Erewash10.0
- Charnwood9.4
- Melton12.1
- North West Leicestershire10.3
- Broxtowe9.1
- Gedling11.1
- Newark and Sherwood9.6
- England median10.1
Questions about planning in Rushcliffe
How long does planning permission take in Rushcliffe?
Rushcliffe decided 52.1% of householder applications within 8 weeks without an extension in the year to June 2026, against 62.7% across England.
Is my house in a conservation area in Rushcliffe?
36 conservation areas: Aslockton Conservation Area, Bingham Conservation Area, Bradmore Conservation Area, Bunny Conservation Area, Car Colston Conservation Area, Colston Bassett Conservation Area, Costock Conservation Area, Cropwell Bishop Conservation Area, Cropwell Butler Conservation Area, East Bridgford Conservation Area, East Leake Conservation Area, Edwalton Conservation Area and 24 more. Most councils publish a conservation area map showing whether a street is inside one.
How many builders are there in Rushcliffe?
490 registered building and trade firms in 2026, 8.7 per 1,000 homes, about 0.9 householder decisions per firm a year. Counts VAT or PAYE registered firms only, rounded to 5 by ONS; self-employed builders below the VAT threshold aren't included.
Do I need planning permission for an extension in Rushcliffe?
Many extensions can be built under permitted development without an application, but conservation areas and Article 4 directions can remove those rights, so check whether your address is in a conservation area or covered by an Article 4 direction before relying on them. Do you need planning permission?
Property prices and energy performance in Rushcliffe
Homes sold July 2023 to June 2026, matched to the floor area and energy rating on their Energy Performance Certificate.
Median price per m²
£3,485
5,921 sales
22% above East Midlands
Homes sold rated EPC A to C
58.3%
Median energy score 70
6.5 points above East Midlands
Value added by extending, per m²
£2,578
26.0% on the sale price
66% above East Midlands
Energy upgrade, no extension
+7.7%
Sale-price uplift when the energy score rose 5+ points
1.3 points above East Midlands
The median home sold in Rushcliffe was £340,000 for 98 m² of floor space. Price per m² is up 46% since 2015 (£2,402 to £3,496 per m², 2025). Across all 41,768 homes with a certificate, 53.5% are rated A to C on their latest one.
450 houses here were extended between two sales (second sale 2016 to 2026), adding a median 31 m². They sold for a median 26.0% more than similar unextended houses, £2,578 for each m² added. Will an extension pay for itself here?
Medians from HM Land Registry sale prices and MHCLG Energy Performance Certificates; groups under 30 sales or 50 extended houses are not shown. These describe past sales across many homes, not a valuation of any one. How these are worked out
Next steps for your extension
Get new blog posts by email
One email each time we publish a new post on project managing your build. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.