## Strategy Title Subtitle

# London Plan Annual Monitoring Report 14 2016/17 September 2018

Date

## Contents Copyright

Greater London Authority September 2018 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen's Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk Enquiries 020 7983 4100 Minicom 020 7983 4458 All data is from the Mayor's London Development Database (LDD) except where stated. https://maps.london.gov.uk/map/?ldd Crown Copyright all rights reserved. GLA 10032216 (2018) Front cover photo: Eleanor Ward/GLA Copies of this document are available from http://www.london.gov.uk

## Main Contents

Executive Summary	

1

## Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 2 - Performance Against Key Performance Indicator Targets 13

| Key Performance Indicator 1	                               |   14 |
|------------------------------|------|
| Key Performance Indicator 2  |   16 |
| Key Performance Indicator 3  |   18 |
| Key Performance Indicator 4  |   20 |
| Key Performance Indicator 5  |   23 |
| Key Performance Indicator 6  |   28 |
| Key Performance Indicator 7  |   29 |
| Key Performance Indicator 8  |   30 |
| Key Performance Indicator 9  |   37 |
| Key Performance Indicator 10 |   39 |
| Key Performance Indicator 11 |   40 |
| Key Performance Indicator 12 |   42 |
| Key Performance Indicator 13 |   44 |
| Key Performance Indicator 14 |   46 |
| Key Performance Indicator 15 |   48 |
| Key Performance Indicator 16 |   49 |
| Key Performance Indicator 17 |   52 |
| Key Performance Indicator 18 |   54 |
| Key Performance Indicator 19 |   56 |
| Key Performance Indicator 20 |   60 |
| Key Performance Indicator 21 |   63 |
| Key Performance Indicator 22 |   65 |
| Key Performance Indicator 23 |   66 |
| Key Performance Indicator 24 |   68 |

## Chapter 3 - Additional Performance Measures And Statistics 71

| Housing Provision Annual Monitor 2016/17	                                                | 72   |
|-----------------------------------------------|------|
| Affordable Housing Delivery Monitor           | 149  |
| Achieving an Inclusive Environment            | 160  |
| PTAL Map                                      |      |
| Progress With Supplementary Planning Guidance | 174  |
| London Borough Local Plans and Progress       | 174  |
| Opportunity Areas                             |      |
| Planning Decisions                            |      |
| London Planning Awards                        |      |

## Chapter 4 - Other Contextual Data Sources 185 Figures And Maps

| Figure 2.1	 Affordable Housing - Three Year Average Performance by Borough 	                                                                                |    |   26 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----|------|
| Figure 2.2 Office Starts and Year-end Permissions in Central London, 1985-2017 | 32 |      |
| Figure 2.3 Largest pre-lets in Central London during 2017                      |    |   34 |
| Figure 3.1 Total Housing Delivery 2016/17                                      |    |   92 |
| Figure 3.2 Total Housing Delivery against London Plan Housing Targets          |    |   94 |
| Figure 3.3 Total Housing Provision by Year                                     |    |   96 |
| Figure 3.4 Net affordable housing delivery by tenure 2016/17                   |    |  110 |

Figure 3.5 Affordable Housing Delivery as a percentage of net conventional housing 

| delivery 2016/17	   |    | 112   |
|---|----|-------|

Figure 3.6 Net Conventional Housing pipeline as at 31/03/2017	

140

Figure 3.7 Affordable housing delivery in London 1991/92 - 2015/16	
150

Figure 3.8 London Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) Map 2016 	

166

## Tables

| Table 1.1 KPI Performance Overview	                                                                                         |    |   5 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----|-----|
| Table 2.1 Development on Brownfield Land 2006/07 to 2016/17                             |    |  14 |
| Table 2.2 Development on Brownfield Land by Borough 2016/17                             |    |  15 |
| Table 2.3 Residential Approvals Compared to the Density Matrix - All Schemes            |    |  17 |
| Table 2.4 Residential Approvals Compared to the Density Matrix - Schemes of 15 Units or |    |     |
| More                                                                                    |    |  17 |
| Table 2.5 Loss of Designated Open Space (Approvals) 2016/17                             |    |  19 |
| Table 2.6 Number of Net Housing Completions by Borough 2016/17                          |    |  22 |
| Table 2.7 Affordable Housing Output as a Proportion of Overall Conventional Housing     |    |     |
| Provision Over the Three Years to 2016/17                                               | 24 |     |
| Table 2.8 Working Age London Residents in Employment by Calendar Year                   |    |  29 |
| Table 2.9 Ratio of Planning Permissions to Three Year Average Starts in Central London  |    |  30 |
| Table 2.10 Industrial Land Release (hectares) in Planning Approvals 2001-2016/17        |    |  38 |
| Table 2.11 Number (000s) and Percentage of Jobs in Outer London, 2004-2016              | 39 |     |
| Table 2.12 Employment Rates for White and BAME Groups, Aged 16-64, by Calendar Year     |    |     |

41

| Table 2.13 Lone parents on income support in London vs England & Wales	                                                                                             |    |   41 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----|------|
| Table 2.14 Average size of one teacher classes                                              |    |   43 |
| Table 2.15 Public and private transport indexes                                             | 44 |      |
| Table 2.16 Traffic (billion vehicle kilometres, all vehicles) in London                     | 46 |      |
| Table 2.17 Cycle journey stages and mode shares, 2001 to 2016                               |    |   48 |
| Table 2.18 Passengers on the River Thames                                                   |    |   51 |
| Table 2.19 Cargo Trade on the River Thames Within Greater London                            |    |   51 |
| Table 2.20 B1 Floorspace by PTAL level - All Permissions 2016/17                            | 53 |      |
| Table 2.21 Loss of Protected Habitat (Approvals) 2016/17                                    |    |   55 |
| Table 2.22 Waste Treatment Methods of London's Local Authority Collected Waste              |    |      |
| (thousands of tonnes)                                                                       | 58 |      |
| Table 2.23 Targets and their periods of applicability (for applications received by the GLA |    |      |
| at Stage II from 1 January - 31 December 2016)                                              | 61 |      |
| Table 2.24 Estimate of Annual Renewable Energy Installed Capacity and Generation in         |    |      |
| London Electricity: 2011-2016                                                               |    |   64 |
| Table 2.25 River Restoration in London 2000 to 2017                                         | 67 |      |
| Table 2.26 Number and condition of designated heritage assets                               |    |   69 |
| Table 3.1 Key Statistics and Findings                                                       |    |   74 |
| Table 3.2 Net Housing Supply in London                                                      | 88 |      |
| Table 3.3 Net Conventional Housing Approvals                                                | 88 |      |
| Table 3.4 Net Conventional Housing Pipeline in London as at End of Financial Year           |    |   88 |
| Table 3.5 Net Conventional Housing Completions                                              |    |   88 |
| Table 3.6 Total Net Completions Against London Plan Benchmark 2016/17                       | 90 |      |
| Table 3.7 Total net completions against London Plan benchmark for the three year period     |    |      |
| 2014/15 to 2016/17                                                                          |    |   98 |
| Table 3.8 Gross conventional housing completions by tenure and number of bedrooms           |    |      |
| 2016/17                                                                                     | 99 |      |
| Table 3.9 Gross conventional housing completions by number of bedrooms 2016/17              |    |      |

100

Table 3.10 Gross conventional affordable housing completions by number of bedrooms 
2016/17	
101
Table 3.11 Net Conventional Completions by Development Type 2016/17	 
102
Table 3.12 Conventional Completions by Tenure FY2016/17	 
104
Table 3.13 Conventional Completions in Major Planning Permissions by Tenure FY2016/17	

106

Table 3.14 Net conventional affordable housing completions by tenure 2014/15 to 2016/17 	

108

Table 3.15 Affordable housing completions as a proportion of total net conventional supply 
2014/15 to 2016/17	

114
Table 3.16 Density of Residential Completions by Borough (dwellings per hectare) 2008/09 
to 2016/17 	

117
Table 3.17 Net Conventional Housing Completions by Permission Type 2016/17	 
118
Table 3.18 Conventional Approvals by Tenure FY2016/17	

120
Table 3.19 Conventional Approvals in Major Planning Permissions by Tenure FY2016/17	

122
Table 3.20 Gross Conventional Housing Approvals by Number of Bedrooms 2016/17	

124

| Table 3.21 Net Non-conventional Housing Approvals by Use 2016/17	                                                                                           |     |   125 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----|-------|
| Table 3.22 Density of Residential Approvals by Borough (dwellings per hectare) 2008/09 to |     |       |
| 2016/17                                                                                   | 126 |       |
| Table 3.23 Net Conventional Housing Approvals by Permission Type 2016/17                  |     |   128 |
| Table 3.24 Conventional Starts by Tenure 2016/17                                          |     |   130 |
| Table 3.25 Conventional Starts in Major Planning Permissions by Tenure 2016/17            |     |   132 |
| Table 3.26 Net Conventional Housing Starts by Permission Type 2016/17                     | 134 |       |
| Table 3.27 Gross Conventional Housing Starts by Number of Bedrooms 2016/17                | 136 |       |
| Table 3.28 Gross Conventional Housing Pipeline by Number of Bedrooms as at                |     |       |
| 31/03/2017                                                                                |     |   137 |
| Table 3.29 Conventional Pipeline at 31/03/2017	                                                                                  |     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----|
| Table 3.30 Conventional Pipeline by Tenure 2016/17                               | 142 |
| Table 3.31 Conventional Pipeline in Major Planning Permissions by Tenure 2016/17 |     |

144

Table 3.32 Net Conventional Housing Pipeline by Permission Type as at 31/03/2017	

146

|                                                                                 | Table 3.33 Net Non-conventional Pipeline at 31/03/17	     |   148 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----|-------|
| Table 3.34 Affordable Housing Delivery by Type                                  |     |   149 |
| Table 3.35 Affordable Delivery in London by Tenure 2016/17                      | 152 |       |
| Table 3.36 Affordable Housing Policy by Borough                                 |     |   154 |
| Table 3.37 New Build Homes Meeting Accessible Housing Standards M4(2) and M4(3) |     |       |
| Approved 2016/17                                                                |     |   162 |
| Table 3.38 Net approvals of specialist housing 2016/17                          |     |   163 |
| Table 3.39 Developer Contributions Towards Funding Crossrail (£M). Net of CIL   |     |       |
| Administration Costs                                                            | 169 |       |
| Table 3.39A Use of CIL Receipts                                                 | 169 |       |
| Table 3.40 Progress on Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations            | 170 |       |
| Table 3.41 London Borough Policy Documents Published in 2017                    |     |   175 |
| Table 3.42 Planning Applications Referred to the Mayor                          |     |   178 |
| Table 3.43 London Planning Awards - Winners                                     | 180 |       |

## Executive Summary

i.	
This Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) provides information about progress being made in implementing the policies and addressing the objectives of the London Plan by showing how London is performing against 24 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) identified in Chapter 8 of the Plan. Although this is the 14th AMR published by the Mayor, it is the second one that monitors the policies introduced in the 2015 London Plan using the slightly modified set of KPI targets introduced through that Plan. 
ii.	
Chapter 2 provides greater detail on each of the 24 KPIs, and Table 1 summarises progress against each of them. The KPIs are not policies; they have been chosen as yardsticks to show the direction of travel in implementing the London Plan, and the extent of change, to help monitor progress and identify areas where policy changes may need to be considered. 
iii.	
The London Plan sets six strategic objectives to be delivered by its detailed policies. These are that London should be: •	Objective 1- A city that meets the challenges of economic and population 
growth, 
•	Objective 2- An internationally competitive and successful city, 
•	Objective 3- A city of diverse, strong, secure and accessible 
neighbourhoods, 
•	Objective 4- A city that delights the senses, •	Objective 5- A city that becomes a world leader in improving the 
environment, 
•	Objective 6- A city where it is easy, safe and convenient for everyone to 
access jobs, opportunities and facilities. 
iv.	
Different KPIs contribute to measuring the performance of the London Plan against these six objectives; •	Objective 1 - KPIs 1,2,4,5,6,12,14 •	Objective 2 - KPIs 2,7,8,9,10,12,17,24 •	Objective 3 - KPIs 2,5,10,11,12,15 •	Objective 4 - KPIs 1,3,15,19,22,23,24 •	Objective 5 - KPIs 1,3,18,19,20,21,22,23 •	Objective 6 - KPIs 1,13,14,15,16,17 
v.	
11 of the 24 KPI targets have been met or are heading in the right direction. Table 1.1 provides an overview of the performance of all KPIs. The performance against the individual London Plan Objectives is summarised as follows: 

## Objective 1- A City That Meets The Challenges Of Economic And Population Growth

vi.	
Net provision of new affordable housing has increased to 7,347 units, 4% more than in 2015/16. In total, over 45,500 dwellings were completed in 2016/17, 7% above the London Plan target. An above-target proportion of new residential developments in London have been built on previously developed land in the last year. 43% of developments fall within the London Plan density matrix range.

## Objective 2 - An Internationally Competitive And Successful City

vii.	
At nearly 74%, London's employment rate has continued to rise since 2009. Over 400,000m2 of office floorspace was started in 2016/17, and the office pipeline remains above the benchmark. The rate of loss of industrial land was 72 hectares (ha), 35 ha above the monitoring benchmark.

## Objective 3- A City Of Diverse, Strong, Secure And Accessible Neighbourhoods

viii.	
The employment rate gap between the BAME and white population is almost 1% lower than in the previous year, and lone parents claiming income support in London is 1% lower than in England and Wales. Employment in Outer London remains the same as the previous year. The pupil/ teacher ratio across London has dropped slightly. Net affordable housing completions have been significantly below the numeric target with the three-year average affordable homes share down by a further 3%.

## Objective 4- A City That Delights The Senses

ix.	
The proportion of designated heritage assets at risk has increased by one asset. Progress has been made against the 2020 river restoration target, with over 50% already achieved. 13 ha designated open space was lost last year, down by 3 ha on the previous year. In terms of cycling, the mode share has increased by 0.2%. 

## Objective 5- A City That Becomes A World Leader In Improving The Environment

x.	
Rates for waste recycling have increased slightly on the previous year while waste going to landfill has fallen by nearly 8%. Average carbon dioxide emission savings have exceeded the Building Regulation target. The estimated generation of renewable energy increased by another 4% but is still well below target. There has been a loss of 3 ha of protected habitat based on development approvals, lower than previous year's figure of 6 ha.

## Objective 6- A City Where It Is Easy, Safe And Convenient For Everyone To Access Jobs, Opportunities And Facilities

xi.	
There was a small drop in public transport usage last year with private transport usage up slightly. More than 70% of B1 development occurred in locations with high public transport access levels, well above the target. In terms of the use of London's waterways, both passenger and freight transport on the Thames were up on the previous year.

| KPI Target                         | Comment                          |
|------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| +                                  | 98% of units approved during     |
| 2016/17 on brownfield land         |                                  |
| 1                                  | Maintain at least 96 per cent of |
| new residential development to be  |                                  |
| on previously developed land       |                                  |
| -                                  | Compliance has decreased to      |
| 43%                                |                                  |
| 2                                  | Over 95 per cent of development  |
| to comply with the housing density |                                  |
| location and the density matrix    |                                  |
| 3                                  | No net loss of open space        |
| designated for protection in LDFs  |                                  |
| due to new development             |                                  |
| +                                  | Loss of 13.9 ha an improvement   |
| on the previous years loss of 16   |                                  |
| ha.                                |                                  |
| 4                                  | Average completion of a minimum  |
| of 42,000 net additional homes     |                                  |
| per year                           |                                  |
| +                                  | Over 45,500 completions during   |
| 2016/17. 3,000 above the London    |                                  |
| Plan target                        |                                  |
| -                                  | 7,300 affordable homes           |
| completed during 2016/17           |                                  |
| 5                                  | Completion of 17,000 net         |
| additional affordable homes per    |                                  |
| year                               |                                  |
| n/a                                | Data no longer available         |
| expectancy between those living    |                                  |
| in the most and least deprived     |                                  |
| areas of London (split by gender)  |                                  |
| +                                  | 0.8% increase on previous year   |
| working age London residents in    |                                  |
| employment 2011-2031               |                                  |
| +                                  | Ratio 5.4:1                      |
| at least three times the average   |                                  |
| rate of starts over the previous   |                                  |
| three years                        |                                  |
| -                                  | 71.7 ha released (35 Ha higher   |
| than the benchmark)                |                                  |
| 9                                  | Release of industrial land to be |
| in line with benchmarks in the     |                                  |
| Industrial Capacity SPG            |                                  |
| 10                                 | Growth in total employment in    |
| Outer London                       |                                  |
| +                                  | /                                |
| remains at 38%                     |                                  |
| 11                                 | Reduce employment rate gap       |
| between BAME groups and the        |                                  |
| white population; and reduce       |                                  |
| the gap between lone parents       |                                  |
| on income support in London vs     |                                  |
| England & Wales average            |                                  |
| +                                  | The employment rate gap          |
| continues to fall and is 0.8%      |                                  |
| below the previous year. The gap   |                                  |
| between lone parents on IS in      |                                  |
| London versus England & Wales      |                                  |
| falls to 1%                        |                                  |
| 12                                 | Reduce the average class size in |
| primary schools                    |                                  |
| +                                  | Average number of pupils per     |
| one teacher class has dropped by   |                                  |
| 0.2                                |                                  |
| KPI Target                         | Comment                             |
|------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
| 13                                 | Use of public transport per head    |
| grows faster than use of private   |                                     |
| car per head                       |                                     |
| -                                  | Public transport use down 4%        |
| and private transport use slightly |                                     |
| up by 0.4%                         |                                     |
| -                                  | Traffic volume up 1.4%              |
| as a whole                         |                                     |
| -                                  | 0.2% increase of cycle mode         |
| share compared to previous year    |                                     |
| 15                                 | Increase in share of all trips by   |
| bicycle from 2 per cent in 2009 to |                                     |
| 5 per cent by 2026                 |                                     |
| +                                  | 3.1% increase in passengers and     |
| 9% increase in freight traffic in  |                                     |
| 2016/17                            |                                     |
| 16                                 | A 50% increase in passengers and    |
| freight traffic transported on the |                                     |
| Blue Ribbon Network from 2011-     |                                     |
| 2021                               |                                     |
| 17                                 | Maintain at least 50 per cent of B1 |
| development in PTAL zones 5-6      |                                     |
| +                                  | More than 70% of B1                 |
| development in PTAL zones 5-6      |                                     |
| 18                                 | No net loss of Sites of Importance  |
| for Nature Conservation.           |                                     |
| +                                  | Loss of 2.9 ha of SINC. Lower       |
| than previous year's loss of 6 ha  |                                     |
| 19                                 | At least 45 per cent of waste       |
| recycled/composted by 2015 and     |                                     |
| 0 per cent of biodegradable or     |                                     |
| recyclable waste to landfill by    |                                     |
| 2026                               |                                     |
| -                                  | Recycling rate stands at 30% for    |
| Local Authority collected waste    |                                     |
| (LACW) which is a 0.5% increase    |                                     |
| on the previous year. LACW to      |                                     |
| landfill fell by 7.8% to 12.5%.    |                                     |
| +                                  | 35% on-site carbon reduction        |
| target exceeded by 0.7% across     |                                     |
| all applications in 2016.          |                                     |
| 20                                 | Annual average % carbon             |
| dioxide emissions savings for      |                                     |
| strategic development proposals    |                                     |
| progressing towards zero carbon    |                                     |
| in residential developments by     |                                     |
| 2016 and in all developments by    |                                     |
| 2019                               |                                     |
| -                                  | 1,048 GWh of renewable energy       |
| generated during 2016.             |                                     |
| 21                                 | Production of 8,550 GWh of          |
| energy from renewable sources by   |                                     |
| 2026                               |                                     |
| n/a                                | No new data available               |
| roofs in the CAZ.                  |                                     |
| +                                  | 56% of additional 10km delivered    |
| streams 2009-2015 with an          |                                     |
| additional 10km by 2020            |                                     |
| -                                  | The addition of one conservation    |
| area at risk. All other            |                                     |
| designations remain the same.      |                                     |
| 24                                 | Reduction in proportion of          |
| designated heritage assets at      |                                     |
| risk as a % of the total number    |                                     |
| of designated heritage assets in   |                                     |
| London.                            |                                     |

## Chapter 1 - Introduction Scope And Purpose Of The Amr

1.1	
This is the 14th London Plan Annual Monitoring Report (AMR 14). Section 346 of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Act 1999 places a duty on the Mayor to monitor implementation of his Spatial Development Strategy (the London Plan) and collect data about issues relevant to its preparation, review, alteration, replacement or implementation. The AMR is the central document in the monitoring process and in assessing the effectiveness of the London Plan. It is important for keeping the London Plan under review and as evidence for plan preparation.
1.2	
While this is the 14th AMR published by the Mayor of London, it is the seventh that uses the six strategic objectives and the suite of 24 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) introduced in the London Plan published in July 2011. These were slightly modified through the revised Plan published in March 2015. The amended targets are listed below: •	KPI 4 - Target net additional homes figure changed from 32,210 to 42,000 •	KPI 5 - Target net additional affordable homes figure changed from 13,200 
to 17,000
•	KPI 19 - Target date for zero biodegradable and recyclable waste to landfill 
brought forward from 2031 to 2026
•	KPI 21 - Target production figure of 8,550 GWh of energy from renewables 
included 
1.3	
The AMR does not attempt to measure and monitor each Plan policy, as this would not recognise the complexity of planning decisions which are based on a range of different policies. It could also be unduly resource intensive and would raise considerable challenges in setting meaningful indicators for which reliable data would be available. However, these indicators together do give a detailed picture of how London is changing, and of the significant contribution the planning system is making to meeting these changes.
1.4	
Although the KPIs form the core of the AMR, it should be recognised that a wide range of factors outside the sphere of influence of the London Plan influence the KPIs. The inclusion of additional relevant performance measures and statistics helps to paint a broader picture of London's performance (see chapter 3). Whilst recognising longer-term trends where available, the focus of the monitoring in this AMR is on the year 2016/17.
1.5	
Paragraph 8.18 of the London Plan clarifies that the target for each indicator should be regarded as a benchmark, showing the direction and scale of change. These targets contribute to measuring the performance of the objectives set out in Policy 1.1 and paragraph 1.53 of the London Plan but do not represent additional policy in themselves.
1.6	
This report draws on a range of data sources, but the GLA's London Development Database (LDD) is of central importance (see further details about LDD in the following section). The LDD is a "live" system monitoring planning permissions and completions. It provides good quality, comprehensive data for the GLA, London boroughs and others involved in planning for London. In addition to the LDD, this report draws on details provided by the GLA's Intelligence Unit, the GLA's Transport and Environment Team, the GLA's Housing and Land, Transport for London (TfL), Historic England, the Environment Agency and the Port of London Authority.

## The London Development Database

1.7	
The London Development Database (LDD) is the key data source for monitoring planning approvals and completions in London. Data is entered by each of the 35 Planning Authorities in London. The Database currently collects data on planning permissions that meet the criteria for submission from approval through to completion or expiry. Its strength lies in the ability to manipulate comparable London-wide data to produce a diverse range of reports. The data can also be exported to GIS systems to give a further level of spatial analysis. The value of the LDD is dependent on the work done by London's planning authorities in providing the data, and the Mayor would like to take this opportunity to thank all of those concerned in supporting this invaluable resource.
1.8	
Work is now well underway on the comprehensive redevelopment of the LDD. Since its creation in 2004 it has been subject to incremental development to keep it up to date with changes in the planning system, but the fundamental design and operation had not changed. Work to update the underlying database to prepare it for the re-write of the web portal used by the London boroughs was completed in 2017, and the new interface is now in development.
1.9	
As part of the Smarter London Together roadmap, the GLA's Chief Digital Officer Theo Blackwell has initiated a London-wide collaboration to streamline 
how planning data passes through the planning system and ultimately to LDD. As part of the re-write, we are improving the automation of data flows to and from the LDD, and the GLA is working with MHCLG, London's planning authorities and other partners in the industry to achieve the maximum benefit from this automation. If successful, this project could lead to cost savings for the London boroughs and improve the quality and quantity of data collected. This improved data will provide better intelligence for planners, infrastructure providers and the development industry as well as helping the Mayor to effectively deliver the London Plan. All Londoners will also have access to the data and can benefit from the improved intelligence it offers.

1.10	 It is expected that the project will take at least a year to make an impact. 
Updates will be published as the project develops.
1.11	 We will continue to develop the LDD and public access to data in parallel to 
this project. In the meantime, the LDD public page can be found at https:// maps.london.gov.uk/map/?ldd and a map showing the number of permissions by use class (rather than residential units and non-residential floor spaces) is available at http://maps.london.gov.uk/ldd/ or via the In My Area section of the GLA website. Finally, a listing of schemes from the LDD is now available on the London Datastore.
1.12	 Any changes to the way data is handled by LDD that affect the data used 
in future AMRs, whether in response to the planning data project or in preparation for revised KPIs in the London Plan will be clearly stated in future AMRs.

## Chapter 2 - Performance Against Key Performance Indicator Targets Key Performance Indicator 1

Maximise the proportion of development taking place on previously developed land Target: Maintain at least 96% of new residential development to be on previously developed land

2.1	
This KPI looks at the proportion of residential planning permissions granted on previously developed land. The figures in tables 2.1 and 2.2 are shown both by number of units and by site area, although the proportion by number of units is considered to be the key measure. The percentages are arrived at by looking for a net loss of greenfield open space on the permission. The area of greenfield land that is lost is then compared with the proposed residential site area to produce a percentage that is applied to the proposed units. Where both residential and non-residential uses are proposed, the greenfield area is divided proportionately between the two uses.
2.2	
98% of units approved during 2016/17 are on brownfield land, 2% above the 96% target.

 
Table 2.1 Development on Brownfield Land 2006/07 to 2016/17
% of Development Approved on Previously Developed Land
% of Development Completed on Previously Developed Land
Year
by units
by site area
by units
by site area
2006/07 
98.6 
98 
97.2 
96.5 
2007/08 
97.3 
96.7 
96.6 
94.8 
2008/09 
98.1 
96.6 
98.9 
98.1 
2009/10 
97.3 
96.8 
98.8 
97.9 
2010/11 
96.8 
95.3 
97.1 
95.7 
2011/12 
99 
97.4 
97.6 
95.0 
2012/13 
98.2 
97.8 
95.7 
95.3 
2013/14 
98.4 
97.2 
97 
96.6 
2014/15 
97.4 
96.7 
98.7 
96.7 
2015/16
98.7
98.6
98.1
97.2
2016/17
98
97.5
98.3
96.6
Table 2.2 Development on Brownfield Land by Borough 2016/17
% of Dev. Approved
% of Dev. Completed
Borough
by units
by site area
by units
by site area
Barking and Dagenham
96.2%
91.9%
100%
100%
Barnet
99.7%
99.7%
100%
100%
Bexley
99.8%
99.9%
100%
100%
Brent
83.3%
89.4%
99.6%
98.5%
Bromley
100%
100%
100%
100%
Camden
99.3%
99.4%
100%
100%
City of London
100%
100%
100%
100%
Croydon
99.6%
99.8%
100%
100%
Ealing
95.5%
92.8%
99.7%
99.8%
Enfield
97.4%
98.1%
98.4%
95.1%
Greenwich
93.4%
75.8%
99.3%
98.4%
Hackney
100%
100%
100%
100%
Hammersmith and Fulham
100%
100%
100%
100%
Haringey
99.7%
99.5%
99.1%
94.7%
Harrow
100%
100%
100%
100%
Havering
98%
96.1%
62.5%
67.8%
Hillingdon
100%
100%
98.8%
97.7%
Hounslow
96.7%
96.5%
80.5%
76.2%
Islington
100%
100%
100%
100%
Kensington and Chelsea
100%
100%
100%
100%
Kingston upon Thames
92.2%
90.6%
100%
100%
Lambeth
100%
99.9%
96.4%
97.4%
Lewisham
99.7%
99.3%
99.9%
99.9%
Merton
99%
98.9%
99.7%
99.4%
Newham
98.6%
99.4%
100%
100%
Redbridge
99.5%
98.8%
99.6%
98.4%
Richmond upon Thames
97.5%
98%
100%
100%
Southwark
100%
99.7%
98.5%
98.5%
Sutton
100%
100%
100%
100%
Tower Hamlets
99.8%
99.3%
99.5%
99.1%
Waltham Forest
100%
100%
100%
100%
Wandsworth
99.8%
99.8%
100%
100%
Westminster
100%
100%
100%
100%
London
98%
97.5%
98.3%
96.6%

## Key Performance Indicator 2 Optimise The Density Of Residential Development

Target: Over 95% of development to comply with the housing density location and the density matrix (London Plan table 3.2)

2.3	
Tables 2.3 and 2.4 compare the residential density achieved for each scheme against the density range set out in the Sustainable Residential Quality (SRQ) matrix in the London Plan, taking into account both the site's Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) and its setting as defined in the 2013 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment. All units in residential approvals for which a site area could be calculated are included. Density is calculated by dividing the total number of units (gross) by the residential site area. In mixed use schemes, the area allocated to non-residential uses and to open space is subtracted from the total site area to give the residential site area. The percentages are based on total units rather than schemes. The same PTAL is calculated for all units on a site within a permission based on the location provided for the scheme as a whole. This will usually be towards the centre of the site.
2.4	
For approvals, compliance during 2016/17 has decreased to 43%. For schemes of 15 units or more, 40% of approved units are in schemes within the range set out in the SRQ matrix.
2.5	
Land in London is a scarce resource. It is important that land is used appropriately and that schemes are designed to suit local circumstances and are deliverable. 

Financial year
% of units approvals Within range
Above range
Below range
2006/07
39%
57%
5%
2007/08
25%
71%
3%
2008/09
35%
60%
5%
2009/10
36%
59%
5%
2010/11
45%
52%
4%
2011/12
37%
58%
4%
2012/13
45%
51%
4%
2013/14
39%
55%
6%
2014/15
32%
61%
7%
2015/16
52%
44%
4%
2016/17
43%
51%
6%
Financial year
% of units approvals schemes 15+ Within range
Above range
Below range
2006/07
40%
59%
1%
2007/08
23%
76%
1%
2008/09
32%
66%
2%
2009/10
35%
62%
3%
2010/11
44%
54%
2%
2011/12
37%
60%
3%
2012/13
46%
53%
2%
2013/14
38%
58%
4%
2014/15
31%
63%
5%
2015/16
53%
45%
2%
2016/17
40%
58%
2%

## Key Performance Indicator 3 Minimise The Loss Of Open Space

Target: No net loss of open space designated for protection in LDFs due to new development

2.6	
The following table monitors planning approvals on protected open space for 2016/17. All data for this KPI is extracted from the LDD. It is important to note that the designation or de-designation of protected open space is not done through the planning permission process, and is therefore not recorded on the LDD. This measure records the approvals that have been given for a building or works that will affect the character of the protected open space. The decision as to whether the completed development warrants the dedesignation of the area is a separate one. Re-provision within a planning permission is taken into account when calculating the loss, but positive numbers are only recorded in rare circumstances, meaning a loss is inevitable and therefore no accurate measure of net change can be achieved. The GLA is working with the 35 London Planning Authorities to see if the data for this KPI target can be improved by accurately monitoring change of open space 
designations in local plans.
2.7	
The types of open space protection are Green Belt, Metropolitan Open Land and Local Open Spaces. Any borough specific designations are recorded as Other Designated Protection. These are different from the designations for nature conservation recorded in KPI 18.
2.8	
Table 2.5 shows that the overall loss of protected open space approved during 2016/17 was just under 14 hectares. This is 2 hectares less than the previous financial year. 5% (0.634 hectares) of this potential development is in the Green Belt, 12% (1.666 hectares) is on Metropolitan Open Land and 83% (11.583 hectares) is on local open spaces.
2.9	
The biggest single potential recorded loss is 3.45 hectares of Local Open Space at the Gaelic Athletic Association Sports Grounds off Avery Hill Road in Greenwich (ref 14/3551). The application was refused by the council on the 17/07/2015 but granted by the Planning Inspectorate on the 26/05/2016. This permission is a departure from the Royal Greenwich Local Plan. 
2.10	 The next biggest recorded loss is 2.3 hectares of Local Open Space 
surrounding Wembley Stadium Station in Brent (ref 14/4931). The application was granted by the council on the 23/12/2016. 

Borough Name
Borough Reference
Protection Designation
Area of Open Space (HA)
Barnet
16/6153/FUL
Green Belt
-0.144
Bexley
16/01251/FULM
Metropolitan Open Land
-1.500
Brent
14/4931
Local Open Spaces
-2.323
Bromley
16/03073/FULL1 Green Belt
-0.005
Ealing
161730FUL
Metropolitan Open Land
-0.116
Ealing
PP/2015/3238
Local Open Spaces
-0.882
Ealing
PP/2015/3265
Local Open Spaces
-1.358
Ealing
PP/2015/6021
Green Belt
-0.099
Enfield
15/04983/FUL
Green Belt
-0.061
Greenwich
14/3551
Local Open Spaces
-3.450
Harrow
P/4910/15
Local Open Spaces
-0.341
Hounslow
00461/A/P1
Local Open Spaces
-0.701
Hounslow
00519/D/P5
Local Open Spaces
-1.55
Hounslow
00870/F/P6
Local Open Spaces
-0.347
Hounslow
01359/F/P7
Green belt
-0.325
Newham
14/02893
Local Open Spaces
-0.51
Redbridge
5452/16
Local Open Spaces
-0.121
Total
-13.883

Increase supply of new homes Target: Average completion of a minimum of 42,000 net additional homes per year.

2.11	 This target comprises three elements:
•	conventional completions of self-contained houses and flats, •	the non-conventional supply of student bedrooms, care homes and non-selfcontained accommodation in hostels and houses in multiple occupation
•	long-term empty properties (referred to as 'vacants') returning to use.
2.12	 The first two are monitored using LDD data, the third uses Council Tax data 
published by MHCLG. The components of the target at planning authority level can be found in Annex 4 of the London Plan. This is the second AMR to monitor the targets introduced in the 2015 London Plan. The number of longterm vacant properties returning to use is calculated using the Government's housing live table 615, by taking the net change in the number of long term empty properties (longer than 6 months). The data covers the period to October each year so does not align to the reporting period in the AMR, but represents the best source of information available.
2.13	 Net conventional completions stand at 41,371, non-conventional completions 
at 4,375 and long term vacant properties returning to use are -392. The total of 45,505 represents 107% of the 42,388 target in the 2015 London Plan. This is the highest single-year completions total recorded in a London Plan AMR.
2.14	 However, there is significant variation in delivery compared to the benchmark 
between boroughs, with a total of 20 boroughs exceeding their annual benchmark and 13 missing their target. The London Legacy Development Corporation achieved 15% of their target. The London borough of Sutton's total delivery of 831 homes represents 229% of their benchmark figure of 363 is the highest delivery of all London Boroughs compared to the benchmark. Croydon has achieved 2,854 completions, 199% of their annual target. Bexley, Brent, Bromley, Camden and Wandsworth also exceeded their target by at least 50%. In numeric terms, the highest delivery was achieved in Tower Hamlets with 5,030 completions representing 128% of their target. Barking and Dagenham, City of London, Havering, Kensington and Chelsea and 
Kingston upon Thames have all fallen well short of their annual benchmark, achieving less than 50% of their target. 

2.15	 These are long-term benchmarks and individual years will vary over the 
development cycle. It is recognised in paragraph 1.1.37 of the Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) that housing supply has the potential to be 'lumpy' due to the phasing of key sites.
2.16	 Although non-conventionals bedrooms are considered as one unit when 
measuring against the London Plan housing targets, the Draft London Plan proposes a ratio of 3:1.

Borough
Net conv
Net 
non-conv Vacants* Total
London Plan target
% of target
Barking and Dagenham
595
-24
-5
566
1,236
46%
Barnet
2,228
-11
52
2,269
2,349
97%
Bexley
816
0
-88
728
446
163%
Brent
1,364
1,494
99
2,957
1,525
194%
Bromley
914
50
16
980
641
153%
Camden
1,206
199
-28
1,377
889
155%
City of London
7
0
-110
-103
141
-73%
Croydon
2,820
82
-48
2,854
1,435
199%
Ealing
1,170
332
-106
1,396
1,297
108%
Enfield
903
106
168
1,177
798
147%
Greenwich
2,442
7
-137
2,312
2,685
86%
Hackney
1,180
0
121
1,301
1,599
81%
Hammersmith and F.
984
8
52
1,044
1,031
101%
Haringey
737
-31
78
784
1,502
52%
Harrow
655
35
-22
668
593
113%
Havering
602
-12
-65
525
1,170
45%
Hillingdon
850
27
-89
788
559
141%
Hounslow
1,150
0
62
1,212
822
147%
Islington
680
900
-145
1,435
1,264
114%
Kensington and Chelsea
194
-44
169
319
733
44%
Kingston upon Thames
274
40
-87
227
643
35%
Lambeth
1,125
-12
22
1,135
1,559
73%
Lewisham
1,579
611
-127
2,063
1,385
149%
London Legacy DC
222
0
0
222
1,471
15%
Merton
451
14
-93
372
411
91%
Newham
2,347
19
-116
2,250
1,994
113%
Redbridge
780
9
-188
601
1,123
54%
Richmond upon Thames
474
-35
-12
427
315
136%
Southwark
2,421
271
-202
2,490
2,736
91%
Sutton
652
83
96
831
363
229%
Tower Hamlets
4,865
57
108
5,030
3,931
128%
Waltham Forest
1,033
-17
-36
980
862
114%
Wandsworth
2,309
370
88
2,767
1,812
153%
Westminster
1,342
-2
181
1,521
1,068
142%
London
41,371
4,526
-392
45,505 42,388
107%

An increased supply of affordable homes Target: Completion of 17,000 net additional affordable homes per year

2.17	 This KPI measures the completion of affordable units as granted in planning 
permissions recorded on the London Development Database (LDD). It is a net figure for conventional completions of new homes, with unit losses deducted from the total. The tenure of the completed units is as set out in the s106 legal agreement. It does not attempt to measure acquisitions of units by Housing Associations or transfers of stock post completion.

2.18	 Table 2.7 shows that during 2016/17 a net total of 7,347 affordable units were 
completed. This represents a increase of nearly 400 units compared to the previous year's figure of 6,982. 
2.19	 In percentage terms, the share of affordable housing has fallen from 20% to 
18% of net housing supply. 
2.20	 Net affordable housing output can vary considerably from year to year, 
particularly at a local level. Therefore it is more meaningful to measure individual borough delivery against a longer term average. Table 2.6 therefore shows average affordable housing output as a proportion of overall conventional housing provision over a three year period. Between 2014/15 and 2016/17 affordable housing output averaged 21% of total provision.
2.21	 Figure 2.1 shows the three-year average performance of individual boroughs 
relative to the London-wide average of 21%. Over the three years, Waltham Forest has reported the highest share of affordable housing with a average of 47% of their delivery being affordable.
2.22	 The proportion of overall affordable housing is also impacted by the increase 
in units being delivered through permitted development rights, which are not subject to affordable housing policies (see table 3.36). 

Provision Over the Three Years to 2016/17
Total Net Conventional Affordable Completions
Affordable as % of Total Net Conventional Supply
Borough
2014/ 15
2015/ 16
2016/ 17
Total
2014/ 15
2015/ 16
2016/ 17
All Years
Barking and Dagenham
14
325
175
514
3%
41%
29%
27%
Barnet
344
205
470
1,019
24%
12%
21%
19%
Bexley
265
-148
180
297
33%
-136% 22%
17%
Brent
706
52
281
1,039
44%
5%
21%
26%
Bromley
-62
10
47
-5
-14%
1%
5%
-0%
Camden
62
182
141
385
12%
19%
12%
14%
City of London
0
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%
0%
Croydon
638
383
331
1,352
42%
19%
12%
21%
Ealing
75
236
287
598
9%
22%
25%
19%
Enfield
102
52
302
456
25%
8%
33%
23%
Greenwich
298
820
403
1,521
18%
35%
17%
24%
Hackney
232
246
232
710
18%
17%
19%
18%
Hammersmith & Fulham
173
35
109
317
20%
9%
11%
14%
Haringey
361
62
148
571
57%
10%
20%
29%
Harrow
96
-94
3
5
23%
-10%
0%
0%
Havering
394
601
67
1,062
53%
36%
11%
35%
Hillingdon
86
118
59
263
12%
13%
7%
11%
Hounslow
449
172
258
879
41%
22%
22%
29%
Islington
223
222
99
544
25%
21%
15%
21%
Kensington & Chelsea
53
67
23
143
7%
20%
12%
11%
Kingston upon Thames
132
-7
15
140
25%
-2%
5%
13%
Lambeth
358
138
192
688
25%
10%
17%
18%
Lewisham
418
237
303
958
29%
15%
19%
21%
Merton
91
77
74
242
19%
12%
16%
16%
Newham
625
423
365
1,413
31%
29%
14%
24%
Redbridge
-20
98
77
155
-12%
19%
10%
11%
Richmond upon Thames
5
99
41
145
1%
18%
9%
10%
Southwark
109
120
552
781
9%
9%
23%
16%
Sutton
180
9
10
199
38%
2%
2%
13%
Tower Hamlets
723
886
1,262
2,871
31%
36%
26%
30%
Waltham Forest
281
670
307
1,258
40%
69%
30%
47%
Wandsworth
144
519
378
1,041
15%
18%
16%
17%
Westminster
48
180
156
384
7%
20%
12%
13%
London
7,603
6,995
7,347
21,945 25%
20%
18%
21%

## Key Performance Indicator 6 Reducing Health Inequalities

Target: Reduction in the difference in life expectancy between those living in the most and least deprived areas of London (shown separately for men and women)

2.23	 The figures for this KPI target were in the past calculated by the GLA using 
ONS mortality data and ONS mid-year estimates. However, after 2013 ONS stopped publishing the mortality data, meaning life expectancy can no longer be calculated. Alternative data sources are not available. Therefore, this KPI target can currently not be monitored.

## Key Performance Indicator 7 Sustaining Economic Activity

Target: Increase in the proportion of working age London residents in employment 2011–2031

2.24	 Table 2.8 shows that during 2016 London saw its employment rate rise to 
73.7%, up 0.8% points on the previous year. The employment rate for both London and the UK has risen year-on-year following a downturn between 2009 and 2011. This has taken London's employment rate to its highest annual average level at any time since records began for London in 1992. 
2.25	 London has traditionally had an employment rate below the national average, 
however the gap has closed significantly in recent years and now sits at just 0.1% points.
2.26	 The data in table 2.8 includes further revisions made by ONS in 2017. The 
data has been re-weighted in line with the latest ONS estimates, which provides more accurate population information than was previously available.

Employment Rate %
Year
London Residents of Working Age
London 
UK 
Difference 
London Working- Age Residents in Employment
2004
3,433,700
5,039,000
68.1
72.5
-4.4
2005
3,476,500
5,112,400
68.0
72.5
-4.5
2006
3,528,500
5,183,500
68.1
72.4
-4.3
2007
3,608,400
5,262,000
68.6
72.4
-3.8
2008
3,699,400
5,351,500
69.1
72.1
-3.0
2009
3,695,600
5,443,400
67.9
70.6
-2.7
2010
3,719,200
5,524,000
67.3
70.1
-2.8
2011
3,787,900
5,630,500
67.3
69.8
-2.5
2012
3,867,000
5,669,600
68.2
70.5
-2.3
2013
3,978,000
5,722,000
69.5
71.2
-1.7
2014
4,128,300
5,788,300
71.3
72.2
-0.9
2015
4,281,900
5,872,700
72.9
73.4
-0.5
2016
4,410,600
5,982,700
73.7
73.8
-0.1

Source: Annual Population Survey - includes self-employment. 

Ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in the office market Target: Stock of office planning permissions should be at least three times the average rate of starts over the previous three years.

## The Ratio

2.27	 In this edition of AMR, we continue to use data from both EGi London Offices 
and the London Development Database (LDD). According to the EGi data, the ratio of permissions to average three years starts at end-2017 was comfortably ahead of the benchmark target at 5.4:1 (Table 2.9). This is a slight increase on 2016, albeit broadly comparable with each year 2014-2016.
2.28	 The ratio rose dramatically in 2009-2011, largely in response to the Global 
Financial Crisis (when a large number of scheme starts can be assumed to have been delayed); and has since steadily fallen to its current level. In the most recent set of comparable figures for the two databases, for 2016, the ratio of permissions to starts was 4.9:1 according to EGi and 3.6:1 according to LDD.

Table 2.9 Ratio of Planning Permissions to Three Year Average Starts in Central London Year
EGi
LDD
2004
11.9:1
6.4:1
2005
8.1:1
7.4:1
2006
8.3:1
8.7:1
2007
6.3:1
4.7:1
2008
7.5:1
4.1:1
2009
10.0:1
7.0:1
2010
13.0:1
11.6:1
2011
13.5:1
8.0:1
2012
8.3:1
3.9:1
2013
7.1:1
4.5:1
2014
5.9:1
3.2:1
2015
6.0:1
3.8:12
2016
4.9:1
3.6:1 
2017
5.4:1
n/a

Hackney, Hammersmith & Fulham, Islington, Kensington & Chelsea, Lambeth, Southwark, Tower Hamlets and Wandsworth. 2.29	 The LDD ratio also remains above the benchmark target. Having risen sharply 

in the years immediately following the Global Financial Crisis (mirroring the EGi data), the ratio has fallen steadily since to below 4:1. The ratio has remained within a relatively tight band (3.2 to 4.5) for five successive years and at a similar level to its level before the Financial Crisis.
2.30	 Final permissions and starts data from LDD for 2017 are not yet available, 
hence the absence of a ratio for that year. In addition to different handling of starts on some schemes, variation in the ratios can be accounted for by the different definitions used in the datasets.1 It is known that the EGi database provides a more comprehensive coverage than LDD and, in particular, contains a much greater amount of data on the refurbishment market - around 13% of development activity is refurbishment.

## Starts And Permissions

2.31	 Based on EGi data, Figure 2 shows that 2017 saw gross starts of 446,159 sq 
m.2 This figure is close to that of 2014 (488,561 sq m) which was followed by two well-above average years.

1	
EGi data for permissions are based on planning committee decisions which 
are a precursor to discussion on the content of S106 agreements, whereas LDD waits for a decision letter to be issued which does not happen until the legal agreement has been signed. LDD data has a minimum threshold of 1,000 sq m gross, whereas the threshold in EGi data is 500 sq m gross. LDD data excludes refurbishments where the existing building is already in office use, which are included by EGi. In addition EGi data for starts are based on observed construction of new or refurbished space, whereas LDD records whether work is started in a legal sense, so can include demolition works as starts where these, in effect, activate the permission. Over the period 2004-2016 LDD office floorspace permissions average approximately 40% of those covered by EGi. The LDD figure provides a useful measure of the store of permissions available to facilitate the immediate responsiveness of developers to changes in demand, whereas the EGi figure gives a broader measure of activity by developers in the office market (accepting that some of the permissions in that dataset may never come to fruition). 2	
All figures cited are sq m net internal area.

Source: Ramidus Consulting, EGi London Offices 2.32	 The 2017 figure is relatively close to the ten-year average of 506,199 sq m. 

When compared to the very long term, it is lower than the 1985-2017 average of 587,858 sq m. The three-year average for starts over the period 2015-2017 is 706,190 sq m, which ranks as the second-highest (2014-16 = 720,324 sq m) three year average since 2002.
2.33	 There were seven starts on schemes of 20,000 sq m or more. These include 
The Boulevard at King's Cross, N1 (60,910 sq m); 100 Liverpool Street, EC2 (40,360 sq m); 2 Arundel Street, WC2 (37,090 sq m); 135 Bishopsgate, EC2 (29,614); 245 Hammersmith Road, W6 (25,107); 80 Charlotte Street, W1 (22,297) and The Stage in Hearn Street, EC2 (20,848). There were only a further five schemes started of between 10,000 sq m and 20,000 sq m. 
2.34	 Significantly, much of this space is pre-let: the King's Cross scheme is 
Google's new HQ; half of 100 Liverpool Street is under offer to Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Group; Charlotte Street has been pre-let to Boston Consulting Group and Arup, and Hearn Street has been fully pre-let to WeWork.
2.35	 Unimplemented office permissions at year end 2017 totalled 3,833,215 sq m 
according to the EGi data (compared to 3,517,880 sq m at the end of 2016). The 2017 figure compares to a ten-year average of 3,780,000 sq m.

2.36	 As has been the case for several years, large permissions are dominated by 
activity in Docklands: within a total of seven proposals of more than 100,000 sq m, three are in E14. These schemes include Wood Wharf, Preston's Road (267,372 sq m); North Quay, Aspen Way (222,036 sq m) and Riverside South, Westferry (185,283 sq m). All three of these schemes appeared in the 2015 and 2016 versions of this report.
2.37	 The other schemes over 100,000 sq m are largely unchanged: Battersea 
Power Station, SW8 (157,777 sq m); 1 Undershaft, EC3 (105,550 sq m); 40 Leadenhall, EC3 (105,033 sq m) and Pancras Road, N1 (101,948 sq m). These eight schemes together account for almost 30% of the consented space at the end of 2017.

## Office Market Overview

2.38	 The Central London market had a mixed 2016, with take-up somewhat below 
the long-run average, and lower than 2014 or 2015. Most commentators interpreted the lower take-up in terms of occupiers exercising caution around the EU referendum. The subdued market continued in 2017, but became more active as the year unfolded, with the year-end figure exceeding both 2016 and long-term averages at between c130,000 sq m and 140,000 sq m (depending on the source). The latter part of the year was particularly active, with at least seven deals over 10,000 sq m in the final quarter. Significantly, 10% of the annual take-up was accounted for by one company: WeWork.

2.39	 Just over one-third of take-up (37%) was by business services firms; 20% by 
creative businesses and 15% by banking and finance. The City and West End saw c510,000 sq m and c445,000 sq m of take-up, respectively; Midtown and South bank saw 130,000 sq m and c100,000 sq m; while Docklands saw just 37,000 sq m.3
2.40	 Given the healthy take-up, it is little surprise that availability fell during the 
latter part of 2017. In Q4 2017, Central London availability fell to 1.27m sq m; down from 1.34m sq m in Q4 2016, and below the ten-year average of 1.49m sq m. The overall vacancy rate stood at 4.7% at the end of 2017; which ranged from 2.8% in the Southbank, to 3.7% in the West End, to 5.8% in the City and to 8.0% in Docklands. Despite the uptick in activity in the final quarter, the overall year-end vacancy rate of 4.7% compared with 4.1% at the same time in 2016. The rise in vacancy was almost entirely due to second 

## 3 Cbre (2018) Central London Office Marketview Q4 2017

hand space coming onto the market. Availability of new space fell across all sub-markets during 2017, by 25% overall.

2.41	 There is 530,000 sq m of new development and refurbishment in the Central 
London pipeline due to complete before the end of 2018. The pipeline rises significantly in 2019 and 2020 before falling back in 2021 and 2022. If demand is maintained at recent levels, the market is potentially moving into a supplyconstrained phase.
2.42	 Over half of the space in the 2018 completion pipeline is pre-let or under offer. 
The fifteen largest pre-lets of 2017 are shown in Figure 3. It can be seen that four of the top ten were by WeWork; management consultants Boston Consulting and McKinsey both re-committed to London, and that German bank Deutsche was the largest pre-let.
2.43	 There are three important trends worth highlighting in this overview.

2.44	 Growth of technology sector London is emerging as Europe's tech capital. The 
tech sector continued its growth in the London occupational market during 2017; accounting for one-fifth of all take-up.
2.45	 According to London & Partners4, venture capital investment into the UK's 
tech sector reached an all-time high in 2017, attracting £2.99bn; almost 
double the total amount invested in 2016 (£1.63bn). London's tech firms raised a record £2.45bn (80% of the 2017 national total). The data also show that the UK and London remain the favourite destination in Europe for tech investors. UK firms attracted almost four times more funding in 2017 than Germany (£694m) and more than France, Ireland and Sweden combined. London tech firms also raised significantly more venture capital investment than any other European city, including Amsterdam, Berlin and Paris.

2.46	 It is critical for London to consolidate its role as the 'Tech capital of Europe'. 
Even without uncertainties from Brexit, financial services growth has been structurally weak for a number of years, and tech industries have potential to drive growth.
2.47	 The flexible space market continues to develop and expand. Over the course 
of 2014, 2015 and 2016, take-up by the sector ranged between 8% and 10% of the total. In 2017 this jumped to 20% (or c215,00 sq m). This jump in takeup was underpinned by WeWork, which leased 158,000 sq m of space and is now London's largest private sector occupier.
2.48	 While there will, no doubt be some consolidation in the sector, it seems that 
flexible space is now a permanent and established property sub-sector. Currently, the sector accounts for approaching 700,000 sq m across London, or around 2.5% of total stock. This could easily double in the medium-term.
2.49	 Flexible space providers have, historically, catered mainly for small and very 
small occupiers. However, they are increasingly competing in the traditional leasehold market, particularly for units of less than c1,000 sq m. New lease accounting rules, which determine that leaseholds must be held on balance sheets, will encourage this trend. This will push the 4% share of stock, cited above, significantly higher.
2.50	 The loss of office stock to residential conversion under Permitted 
Development Rights (PDR) continued into 2017. According to data in the London Development Database from 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2017, across London over 676,000 sq m of office space had been lost, and that unimplemented prior approvals (excluding those which have lapsed) amounted to 1.0 million sq m; giving a total potential loss of nearly 1.7 million sq m. The overall completion rate5 in terms of office floorspace lost in prior approvals has also increased, from around 20% at the end of March 2016 to 40% at the end of March 2017.

2.51	 Concern that PDR was leading to the loss of usable, lower specification, 
lower cost stock, typically occupied by smaller businesses, was raised in the previous two AMRs. Particularly in those central area fringe locations lying just beyond the CAZ, office stock is under intense pressure for conversion to residential use. Alongside evidence that occupied buildings are being converted, and that supply constraints are a potential issue, our concern over the negative impact of PDR remains.
2.52	 Selected areas in London are currently exempted from office-to-residential 
PDR in recognition of their role as nationally significant office locations, including the Central Activities Zone (CAZ), Northern Isle of Dogs, Tech City, The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea and the Royal Docks Enterprise Zones. These exemptions are due to expire in May 2019. It is critical that the contributions to the London and national economy of these nationally significant agglomerations of office functions are safeguarded. It is imperative therefore that the relevant boroughs introduce Article 4 Directions to remove office-to-residential PDR after the exemptions expire. The Mayor has issued strategic evidence to support these Directions.6

5	
Measured here as office floorspace lost in prior approval completions 
since 1 May 2013 as a percentage of office floorspace lost in all prior approvals (completions and the planning pipeline). 6	
Mayor of London (2018) Strategic Evidence to Support London Borough 
Ensure that there is sufficient employment land available Target: Release of industrial land to be in line with benchmarks in the Industrial Capacity SPG

2.53	 Table 2.10 shows an estimated total of 71.7 hectares of industrial land release 
recorded in planning approvals in 2016/17. Over 38 per cent of the area approved for transfer to other uses was in East London and a further 26 per cent in South London. Tower Hamlets alone accounted for almost a fifth of the land area transferred in all approvals. The largest individual site transfers of industrial land include: •	Phases 1 & 2 Former Felnex Trading Estate, Hackbridge in Sutton (7.7 
hectares)
•	Former Westferry Printworks, 235 Westferry Road in Tower Hamlets (6.4 
hectares)
•	The Printworks (Former Harmsworth Quays Printworks), Surrey Quays Road 
in Southwark (5.3 hectares)
•	Land at Lionel Road, South Brentford in Hounslow (3.4 hectares) •	Hercules Wharf, Castle Wharf and Union Wharf, Orchard Place in Tower 
Hamlets (2.6 hectares).
2.54	 Approximately 97 per cent of the approvals involved transfers of less than one 
hectare of industrial land.
2.55	 The SPG benchmark was exceeded in all London's sub-regions, by the 
greatest proportion in Central and South London (more than four times the benchmark in both sub regions).
2.56	 However, the amount of industrial land released in 2016/17 planning 
approvals was still lower than the five year average releases across London over the period 2001-2015/16. Please note that the figures in table 2.10 include planning approvals that involve the loss of industrial or warehousing uses and do not include the transfer of other types of uses to industrial related ones so these figures could be overstating the loss of employment land.

Sub-region
Annual average release
Release in planning approvals
London Plan/ SPG annual benchmark 2011-2031
2001- 2006
2006- 2011
2011/12- 2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Central
6
5
8
13.5
4.1
10.3
2.3
East
57
54
30
29.4
25.7
27.5
19.4
North
2
2
4
5.1
1.2
6.1
3.4
South
11
4
12
12.3
6.3
18.4
4.4
West
10
18
23
36.3
3.6
9.4
7.2
London
86
83
78
96.6
40.9
71.7
36.7

Source: LDD, London Plan (March 2016) and SPG Land for Industry and Transport. 

## Key Performance Indicator 10 Employment In Outer London

Target: Growth in total Employment in Outer London

2.57	 Table 2.11 shows the total number of jobs, including self-employed, from 2004 
to 2016, in London. The proportion of jobs in the Outer London boroughs has remained at 38% over the last two years. Since 2011 there has been a strong recovery, with jobs in outer London increasing by 244,000 (+12.7%). However, this represents a weaker rise than in inner London (18.3%) and London overall (16.1%). Please note that the figures for previous years have been updated after the ONS upwardly revised its London Workforce Jobs series to incorporate employment in a broader set of businesses7.

2.58	 In 17 of the 19 Outer London boroughs the number of jobs has grown since 
2004. However, there is significant variation between individual boroughs and the growth in jobs has not been as large as in London overall.

Table 2.11 Number (000s) and Percentage of Jobs in Outer London, 2004-2016 Year
Outer London
London
% in Outer London
2004
1927
4578
42%
2005
1942
4682
41%
2006
1969
4732
42%
2007
1955
4788
41%
2008
1993
4928
40%
2009
1924
4823
40%
2010
1931
4815
40%
2011
1918
4895
39%
2012
2000
5092
39%
2013
2044
5242
39%
2014
2112
5467
39%
2015
2129
5581
38%
2016
2162
5683
38%

Source: GLA London Jobs series 2017

## Key Performance Indicator 11 Increased Employment Opportunities For Those Suffering From Disadvantage In The Employment Market

Target: Reduce the employment rate gap between Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups and the white population and reduce the gap between lone parents on income support in London vs the average for England & Wales 2.59	 Table 2.12 shows that employment rates for both white and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups continue to increase. The gap between employment rates for white vs BAME Londoners has broadly followed a downward trend. Over the last ten years the gap has reduced by 3.5% points and is now at 12.4%. This is the lowest gap on record and 0.8% below the previous year's gap. The data in Table 2.14 includes further revisions made by ONS in 2017. The data has been re-weighted in line with the latest ONS estimates, which provides more accurate population information than was previously available.

2.60	 Table 2.13 shows that since 2014 lone parents in London have been less 
likely to be claiming income support than the national average. In 2017 lone parents in London were 1% point less likely to be claiming income support than the national average, compared to 2% points less likely in 2016. In contrast, lone parents were 9 percentage points more likely to be claiming income support than the national average in 2006.
2.61	 Please note that table 2.13 is not consistent with the respective table 
in last year's AMR. This is due to an error in reporting which has since been amended. It should also be noted that since the introduction of the Employment Support allowance (ESA) in 2008, lone parents with health issues who were previously claiming income support, now claim ESA. This has to be considered when comparing different years for the 'Lone Parents on Income Support' series. However, it does not affect the comparison of data between London and England and Wales in one particular year.

Source: Table 2.12 Annual Population Survey Note that due to changes in the ethnicity questions on the Annual Population Survey during 2011 these estimates cannot be reliably viewed as a time series. They can, however, be used to estimate the relative levels of economic activity of different ethnic groups. denominators are number of lone parents with dependent children taken from ONS 

Year
In Employment
Rate % In Employment
Rate % In Employment
Rate %
All Persons
White Groups
BAME Groups
Employment rate gap White/ BAME
2004
3,433,700
68.1
2,518,200 73.4
907,600
56.8
16.6
2005
3,476,500
68.0
2,502,400 73.4
968,600
57.1
16.3
2006
3,528,500
68.1
2,489,900 73.6
1,031,200
57.7
15.9
2007
3,608,400
68.6
2,495,600 73.7
1,108,800
59.4
14.3
2008
3,699,400
69.1
2,554,500 74.4
1,140,700
59.6
14.8
2009
3,695,600
67.9
2,566,600 73.6
1,122,500
57.7
15.9
2010
3,719,200
67.3
2,507,600 72.3
1,204,100
58.9
13.4
2011
3,787,900
67.3
2,512,900 73.0
1,268,600
58.2
14.8
2012
3,867,000
68.2
2,554,800 73.7
1,308,800
59.6
14.1
2013
3,978,000
69.5
2,628,300 75.0
1,346,100
60.8
14.2
2014
4,128,300
71.3
2,712,400 76.8
1,408,000
62.7
14.1
2015
4,281,900
72.9
2,740,100 78.2
1,532,500
65.0
13.2
2016
4,410,600
73.7
2,816,600 78.7
1,588,100
66.3
12.4
| London         | England and Wales   |
|----------------|---------------------|
| Annual         |                     |
| Report         |                     |
| Difference     |                     |
| Lone Parent    |                     |
| families on IS |                     |
| as % of        |                     |
| lone parent    |                     |
| families#      |                     |
| as % of        |                     |
| Lone Parent    |                     |
| families#      |                     |
| Lone           |                     |
| Parent         |                     |
| Families       |                     |
| on IS          |                     |
| 2006           | 162,770             |
| 2007           | 160,450             |
| 2008           | 152,520             |
| 2009           | 141,720             |
| 2010           | 129,100             |
| 2011           | 109,200             |
| 2012           | 102,590             |
| 2013           | 83,050              |
| 2014           | 73,300              |
| 2015           | 66,440              |
| 2016           | 62,450              |
| 2017           | 56,150              |

Improving the provision of social infrastructure and related services Target: Reduce the average class sizes in primary schools 2.62	 Between 2009 and 2017 the average class size8 across London increased slightly by 2.1 pupils. Over this period 23 London boroughs recorded an increase in the average number of pupils per class and 10 recorded a decrease. After remaining stable for 3 years at 27.8 the London average has continued to drop over the last two years to 27.5 pupils per class. However it is unclear whether this decrease will continue and class sizes will continued to be monitored closely. An accurate figure for the City of London has not been available for the last couple of years. Therefore the following analysis focuses on the other 32 London Boroughs.

2.63	 The City of London figures for the past couple of years have highlighted 
problems with the data collection method utilised by the Department of Education (DfE). The collection of this data occurs at a time specified by the DfE. It can therefore happen whilst the majority of students are being taught in multiple teacher classes e.g. gym class 

2.64	 The main drivers of changing class sizes in London is demographic including 
migration out of London to other parts of the UK as well as challenges in recruiting and retaining teachers. Updated Pupil Demand projections have been published for the decade ahead to 2017/189.The building of new schools is likely to need to continue as the population continues to grow. Between January 2016 and January 2017, there was a net increase of 8 primary schools in London10. 

Borough
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2009- 2017
Barking & D.
27.2
27.5
27.9
27.9
28.3
28.0
28.3
28.7
28.2
1.0
Barnet
27.6
27.9
28.1
28
28.2
28.4
28.5
28.2
28.2
0.6
Bexley
27.8
28
28.2
28.3
28.5
28.4
28.5
28.5
28.7
0.9
Brent
27.8
28.1
28.5
28.6
28.7
28.9
28.4
28.4
28.3
0.5
Bromley
27.7
27.8
28.1
28.3
28.4
28.3
28.4
28.2
28.1
0.4
Camden
26.6
27.1
27.1
27.5
27.5
27.6
27.7
27.9
27.5
0.9
City
24.7
25.9
25.9
24.7
25.9
25.9
24.4
-
-
-
Croydon
27.7
27.9
28.1
28.2
28.2
28.2
28.0
28.0
27.4
-0.3
Ealing
27.2
27.7
27.8
28
28.3
28.0
28.2
27.9
27.7
0.5
Enfield
28.6
28.2
28.7
28.8
28.8
28.7
28.4
28.4
27.9
-0.7
Greenwich
26.2
26.5
26.9
27
27.1
27.4
27.9
27.7
27.7
1.5
Hackney
25.8
26.1
26.3
26.3
26.2
26.8
26.9
26.8
26.2
0.4
Hammersmith & F.
26.2
26.4
26.1
26.8
26.1
26.1
26.0
25.6
25.9
-0.3
Haringey
27.5
27.6
28
27.9
28.2
28.0
28.1
28.2
27.8
0.3
Harrow
26.9
26.7
28
28.5
28.8
29.8
29.4
29.0
28.9
2.0
Havering
27.4
27.8
28
28.2
28.6
28.4
28.0
28.1
28.1
0.7
Hillingdon
27.2
27.4
27.4
27.5
27.9
28.0
28.1
28.1
28.1
0.9
Hounslow
27.4
27.8
28.2
28.4
28.4
28.1
28.1
28.2
28.2
0.8
Islington
25.5
25.3
26.2
26.4
26.3
26.6
26.7
27.0
26.8
1.3
Kensington & C.
25.7
26.2
26.8
27
26.7
26.7
26.7
26.3
25.4
-0.3
Kingston
27.1
27.7
27.6
27.5
27.7
27.6
27.7
27.7
27.7
0.6
Lambeth
25.6
25.7
26
26.3
26.6
26.3
26.1
26.2
26.1
0.5
Lewisham
26.3
26.3
26.8
26.9
27.2
27.4
27.2
27.0
26.9
0.6
Merton
27
27.1
27.5
27.9
27.7
27.8
27.1
27.1
26.8
-0.2
Newham
27
27.4
27.8
28.1
27.9
26.6
27.4
29.6
27.5
0.5
Redbridge
29.1
29
29.5
29.6
29.1
29.3
29.2
28.3
29.3
2.3
Richmond
26.9
27.4
28
27.9
28.2
28.5
28.2
25.9
28.2
-0.9
Southwark
24.6
24.8
25.3
25.8
26.3
26.4
26.1
28.7
25.3
-1.6
Sutton
27.7
27.9
28.2
28.5
28.7
28.8
28.8
27.0
28.3
3.7
Tower Hamlets
26.3
26.9
27.3
27.7
27.6
27.7
27.5
27.3
26.9
-0.8
Waltham Forest
28.1
28.5
28
28.5
28.2
28.4
27.8
25.3
27.3
1.0
Wandsworth
25.3
25.9
25.6
26.3
25.9
25.8
26.0
25.0
25.7
-2.4
Westminster
25.4
26.3
26.7
26.6
26.0
25.6
25.3
27.7
25.0
-0.3
London
27
27.2
27.6
27.7
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.7
27.5
2.1

Source: Department for Education https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ schools-pupils-and-their-characteristics-january-2017

Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys Target: Use of public transport per head grows faster than use of the private car per head

2.65	 Since 2001, use of public transport per head has grown by over 32%, 
although there was a decrease of 4% in the latest year. Private transport use per head has decreased by almost 23% since 2001, although there was a slight increase of 0.4% in the latest year. 
2.66	 The indices in Table 2.15 are derived from the time series of journey stages 
per head compiled for the Travel in London Report 10 (TfL City Planning December 2017). This includes all travel to, from or within Greater London, including travel by commuters and visitors. 
2.67	 Total daily journey stages in 2016 were 31.7 million, a slight increase of 0.2% 
on 2015, and 6.2 million higher than in 2001.

|   Year |   Public transport index |   Private transport index |
|--------|--------------------------|---------------------------|
|   2001 |                    100   |                     100   |
|   2002 |                    103.1 |                      99.5 |
|   2003 |                    108   |                      97   |
|   2004 |                    113.8 |                      95.1 |
|   2005 |                    112   |                      92.9 |
|   2006 |                    114.7 |                      92.1 |
|   2007 |                    124.3 |                      89   |
|   2008 |                    128.1 |                      86.7 |
|   2009 |                    127.5 |                      86.1 |
|   2010 |                    127.7 |                      83.6 |
|   2011 |                    130.7 |                      81.7 |
|   2012 |                    132.7 |                      80.5 |
|   2013 |                    134.2 |                      78.8 |
|   2014 |                    136.7 |                      78.5 |
|   2015 |                    136.7 |                      76.7 |
|   2016 |                    132.4 |                      77.1 |

Source: Transport for London (TfL) City Planning, Strategic Analysis

Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys Target: Zero car traffic growth for London as a whole

2.68	 Table 2.16 shows that road traffic volumes across London are down by 8% on 
2001 levels (16% Inner London and 4% Outer London). In the last year traffic volumes for London as a whole have increased by 1.4%, with increases in both Inner (0.8%) and Outer London (1.8%).

Year
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
All roads: Greater London
32.26
32.14 31.95
31.60 31.38 31.49 31.16 30.27 30.07 29.70 29.11 28.90 28.82 29.33
29.23
29.69
8.98
8.90
8.84
8.66
8.51
8.52
8.58
8.29
8.19
8.05
7.82
7.57
7.42
7.52
7.50
7.57
Inner London (excl. City and Westminster) Outer London
22.04
22.03 21.93
21.73 21.66 21.76 21.43 20.90 20.83 20.63 20.28 20.35 20.43 20.81
20.72
21.11
All roads index (2001=100) Greater London 
100.0
99.6
99.0
98.0
97.3
97.6
96.6
93.8
93.2
92.1
90.2
89.6
89.3
90.9
90.6
92.0
100.0
99.1
98.4
96.4
94.8
94.9
95.5
92.3
91.2
89.6
87.1
84.3
82.6
83.7
83.5
84.3
Inner London (excl. City and Westminster) Outer London
100.0
99.9
99.5
98.6
98.3
98.7
97.2
94.8
94.5
93.6
92.0
92.3
92.7
94.4
94.0
95.8

Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys Target: Increase the share of all trips by bicycle from 2 % in 2009 to 5 % by 2026

2.69	 Table 2.17 shows that in 2016 there were 730,000 cycle journey stages in 
London on a average day, which is nearly a 9 % increase on 2015. Since 2009 there has been a 43 % increase in cycle stages equivalent to a 0.5 % increase in the share of all trips by bicycle. 

Year
Daily Cycle stages (millions)
Cycle mode share (percentage)
2001
0.32
1.2
2002
0.32
1.2
2003
0.37
1.4
2004
0.38
1.4
2005
0.42
1.6
2006
0.47
1.7
2007
0.47
1.6
2008
0.49
1.7
2009
0.51
1.8
2010
0.54
1.9
2011
0.57
1.9
2012
0.58
1.9
2013
0.59
1.9
2014
0.65
2.1
2015
0.67
2.1
2016
0.73
2.3

Source: TfL City Planning, Travel in London Report 10, tables 2.4 and 3.3. A cycle trip is defined as a one-way movement to achieve a specific purpose that is conducted entirely by bike. A cycle journey stage includes these trips, but also shorter cycle legs undertaken as part of a longer trip using another mode - for example, cycling to a station to catch a train. Cycle journey stages therefore give a best indication of total cycling activity.

Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys Target: A 50% increase in passengers and freight transported on the Blue Ribbon Network from 2011-2021

2.70	 Table 2.18 includes figures for passenger journeys on all river boat services 
on the Thames - River Bus, River Tours, Charter Services and also Woolwich Ferry passengers. Woolwich Ferry passenger numbers were only included in the count from 2006/2007. This partly explains the large 122% increase on 2005/2006 figures. From 2013/14 onwards a new passenger counting system linked to the Automatic Identification System (AIS) on-board vessels has been used to give a clearer reflection of the total number of passenger journeys on the Thames. This partly explains the 34% increase from 2012/13 figures. 

2.71	 Despite the baseline changes it is apparent that the number of passengers 
on the Thames increased until 2011 and after a small decline in 2011/12 and 2012/13, numbers have risen again, to over 10.3 million in 2015/16. 
2.72	 Key projects which have contributed to this increase include: 
•	The roll-out of Oyster card (September 2015) and Contactless (May 2016) 
payment readers at all River Bus piers, enabling pay as you go users to use River Bus services without first queuing for a ticket
•	New piers at Plantation Wharf (Nov 2015) and Battersea Power Station (Nov 
2017), along with two pier extensions at Bankside and Westminster (2016) have improved connectivity and the customer experience
•	A river marketing campaign demonstrating the link between the river and key 
tourist attractions and business hubs along the Thames
•	Improvements to signage and information provision on piers, including 
countdown screens and Legible London wayfinding maps and signs
2.73	 Table 2.19 shows the amount of cargo carried by river since 2001. A 
significant proportion of cargo transported by River in the capital is aggregates for the construction industry. Following an increase of 7% in 2016 there has been a further increase of 9% in 2017 to 12,385,000 tonnes, the highest total recorded.

2.74	 The data in table 2.19 is a combination of interport trade11 such as sea 
dredged aggregates, petroleum products or cane sugar; and intraport trade12. Interport volumes decreased very slightly in 2017, although the volume of aggregates handled increased to 5.7 million tonnes. Intraport volumes increased by over one million tonnes with Construction, Excavation and Demolition Waste (CE&DW) increasing by almost 200% from the previous year, with substantial volumes generated by both the Northern Line Extension and Thames Tideway Tunnel projects in addition to a number of riparian developments.
2.75	 The Port of London Authority launched their 2035 Vision for the Tidal 
Thames in May 201613 setting out goals and priority actions including freight and passenger transport on the Thames. The Vision sets out clear targets including doubling the number of passengers travelling by river to 20 million per year and the movement of over 4 million tonnes of freight between wharves (excluding volumes associated with major infrastructure projects). The GLA and TfL will work closely with the PLA to identify opportunities to continue to grow passenger and freight movement on the Thames.

11	
 Cargo handled at terminal in Greater London that either enters or leaves the 
Port of London across the Seaward Limits 12	
 Cargo handled at terminals in Greater London that has its origin or 
destination at terminals within the Port of London or within the Seaward Limits

Table 2.18 Passengers on the River Thames Year
No of passengers
% change
April 2000 - March 2001
1,573,830
- 
April 2001 - March 2002
1,739,236
10.5
April 2002 - March 2003
2,030,300
16.7
April 2003 - March 2004
2,113,800
4.1
April 2004 - March 2005
2,343,276
10.9
April 2005 - March 2006
2,374,400
1.3
April 2006 - March 2007
5,260,157
121.5
April 2007 - March 2008
5,337,368
1.5
April 2008 - March 2009
6,179,889
15.8
April 2009 - March 2010
6,298,933
1.9
April 2010 - March 2011
6,621,116
5.1
April 2011 - March 2012
6,602,707
-0.3
April 2012 - March 2013
6,277,244
-4.9
April 2013 - March 2014
8,411,200
34.0
April 2014 - March 2015
10,022,668
19.2
April 2015 - March 2016
10,300,864
2.8
April 2016 - March 2017
10,620,123
3.1

Source: TfL London Rivers Services

|   Year | Tonnes of cargo    | % change   |
|--------|--------------------|------------|
|   2001 | 10,757,000         | -          |
|   2002 | 9,806,000          | 9%         |
|   2003 | 9,236,000          | 6%         |
|   2004 | 8,743,000          | -5%        |
|   2005 | 9,288,000          | 6%         |
|   2006 | 9,337,000          | 0.50%      |
|   2007 | 8,642,000          | -7%        |
|   2008 | 9,312,000          | 8%         |
|   2009 | 8,146,000          | -13%       |
|   2010 | 7,754,000          | -5%        |
|   2011 | 9,022,000          | 16%        |
|   2012 | 8,715,000          | -3%        |
|   2013 | 11,087,000         | 27%        |
|   2014 | 11,969,000         | 8%         |
|   2015 | 10,633,000         | -11%       |
|   2016 | 11,376,000         | 7%         |
|   2017 | 12,385,000         | 9%         |

Source: Port of London Authority

Increase in the number of jobs located in areas of high PTAL values

Target: Maintain at least 50% of B1 development in PTAL zones 5-6 2.76	 This indicator aims to show that high-density employment generators such 
as offices are mainly located in areas with a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 5 or 6 - 6 being the highest, 0 the lowest. The floorspaces are gross, i.e. associated losses are not subtracted. The data is taken from the LDD which has a threshold for data submission of 1,000m2 for B1 uses, so schemes proposing less than this are not recorded.
2.77	 67% of all B1 Business floorspace approved during 2016/17 is located in 
areas with a Public Transport Access Level of 5/6, well above the benchmark target of 50% and 2% below the previous year's figure. When just offices are considered, the figure rises to 74%, up 1% on the previous year.
2.78	 The majority (62%) of the office floorspace approved in 2016/17 is in the CAZ. 
All of this is in areas of PTAL 5/6. A further 25% of office floorspace is located in the rest of Inner London (outside CAZ). Only 12% of the approved office floorspace is in the Outer London boroughs.
2.79	 As noted above, the figures are based on gross approvals of 1,000m2 or 
more. When losses to change of use or demolition are taken into account, approvals during 2016/17 would result in net gains of both all B1 (225,641m2) and B1a office (273,839m2) floorspace across London. The spatial distribution of approvals is significant, with growth in Inner London masking a decline in the amount of B1, and office floorspace, in the Outer London boroughs.

| All B1            | Offices (B1a)    |
|-------------------|------------------|
| PTAL Level        |                  |
| Floorspace (M2) % | Floorspace (M2)  |
| 5 or 6            | 1,203,077        |
| 4 or less         | 580,723          |
| 1,783,800         | 1,618,020        |
| floorspace        |                  |

## Key Performance Indicator 18 Protection Of Biodiversity Habitat

Target: No net loss of Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs)

2.80	 This performance indicator is based on the changes in SINCs as a result of 
Planning permissions granted during 2015/16 and submitted to the London Development Database. Designation and de-designation of SINCs is not done through the planning permission process. What is recorded is that approval has been given for a building or works that will affect the character of the site. The decision as to whether the completed development warrants the de-designation of the area is a separate one. Whilst mitigation/compensation of impacts on the nature conservation interests of a designated site may be specified as part of the permission, this is unlikely to immediately warrant this land being designated resulting in a loss of designated status being recorded: •	Statutory Site of Special Scientific Interest, •	Site of Metropolitan Importance, •	Site of Borough Grade I Importance •	Site of Borough Grade II Importance •	Site of Local Importance
2.81	 Open Space protection designations such as Green Belt, MOL and Local 
Open Space are addressed in KPI 3.
2.82	 Table 2.21 shows that a total of seven approvals were recorded during 
2016/17 on SINCs. The total area covered is 2.977 hectares.
2.83	 Zero permissions were granted on Sites of Metropolitan Importance, 
compared to three the year before amounting to over 4.6 ha. Three permissions were granted on Sites of Borough Grade 1 Importance, two on Sites of Borough Grade 2 Importance and two on Sites of Local Importance. The total potential loss amounts to 2.977 ha which is over six hectares less than in 2015/16. 
2.84	 The approval with the biggest potential loss of SINC in 2016/17 is 14/4931 
in Brent (2.323ha of Site of Borough Grade 1 Importance). The permission relates to the natural/ semi-natural scrub land surrounding Wembley Stadium Station and the development is mentioned in KPI 3. 

Borough
Borough Reference
Nature Conservation Type
Area of Open Space (Ha)
Brent
14/4931
Site of Borough Grade 1 Importance
-2.323
Brent
16/0674
Site of Borough Grade 1 Importance
-0.053
Ealing
161730FUL
Site of Borough Grade 2 Importance
-0.116
Ealing
PP/2015/6021
Site of Borough Grade 2 Importance
-0.099
Enfield
15/04983/FUL
Site of Local Importance
-0.061
Hounslow
01359/F/P7
Site of Local Importance
-0.325 -2.977

Increase in municipal waste recycled or composted and elimination of waste to landfill by 2031 Target: At least 45% of waste recycled/ composted by 2015 and 0% of biodegradable or recyclable waste to landfill by 2026

2.85	 Table 2.22 shows the total amount of local authority collected waste has 
declined by 730,000 tonnes since 2002. 12.5% of London's waste was disposed to landfill in 2016/17. 
2.86	 Table 2.22 also shows London's recycling rate for local authority collected 
waste increasing steadily since 2002/03 (9%), reaching 30% in 2011/12, and stabilising at that level over the past five years but missing the 2015 target. However, with a 0.5% increase compared to the previous year the recycling rate is moving in the right direction. There is also still some way to go towards reaching the European Union target of 50% by 2020. 
2.87	 London has a lower household recycling rate than the UK average (44%) and 
faces a number of challenges including; a relatively high proportion of flats with limited storage space and access for recycling; varied and potentially confusing recycling service provision across borough boundaries; and production of less garden waste for composting. However, London compares more favourably with other areas of the country in terms of recycling 'dry material' (e.g. plastics, paper, tins, cans, glass). 
2.88	 The majority of waste previously going to landfill is being diverted to 
incineration with energy recovery, which is now at 53%. This is an almost 8% decrease in landfill compared to the previous year and 59% less than in 2002/03.
2.89	 Where this KPI mentions municipal waste we are simply referring to Local 
Authority Collected Waste.

|             |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       | Method   | 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17   |
|-------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Landfill    | 3,163 | 3,021 | 2,856 | 2,692 | 2,404 | 2,209 | 1,946 | 1,882 | 1,696 | 1,116 | 911   | 889   | 754   | 751      | 463                                                                                                                       |
| (%)         | 71.0% | 70.0% | 65.4% | 63.7% | 56.8% | 53.2% | 49.0% | 48.7% | 44.7% | 30.6% | 25.5% | 24.4% | 21%   | 20.3%    | 12.50%                                                                                                                    |
| 872         | 826   | 869   | 767   | 929   | 919   | 912   | 803   | 896   | 1,303 | 1,462 | 1,525 | 1680  | 1,708 | 1,966    | Incineration                                                                                                              |
| with EfW    |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |          |                                                                                                                           |
| (%)         | 20.0% | 19.0% | 19.9% | 18.2% | 21.9% | 22.1% | 22.9% | 20.8% | 23.6% | 35.7% | 40.9% | 41.9% | 46%   | 46.1%    | 52.90%                                                                                                                    |
| 1           | 1     | 1     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 1     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 20    | 26       | Incineration                                                                                                              |
| without EfW |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |          |                                                                                                                           |
| (%)         | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0%    | 0.5%     | 0.70%                                                                                                                     |
| 410         | 494   | 643   | 763   | 844   | 925   | 994   | 1,060 | 1,076 | 1,105 | 1,088 | 1,110 | 1,107 | 1,096 | 1,117    | Recycled/                                                                                                                 |
| composted   |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |          |                                                                                                                           |
| (%)         | 9.0%  | 11.0% | 14.7% | 18.1% | 19.9% | 22.3% | 25.0% | 27.4% | 28.3% | 30.3% | 30.4% | 30.5% | 30.2% | 29.6%    | 30.10%                                                                                                                    |
| Other#      | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 59    | 101   | 123   | 117   | 130   | 124   | 115   | 116   | 122   | 131      | 145                                                                                                                       |
| (%)         | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  | 1.4%  | 2.4%  | 3.1%  | 3.0%  | 3.4%  | 3.4%  | 3.2%  | 3.2%  | 3.3%  | 3.5%     | 3.90%                                                                                                                     |
| Total       | 4,446 | 4,342 | 4,370 | 4,223 | 4,235 | 4,154 | 3,975 | 3,862 | 3,797 | 3,648 | 3,576 | 3,640 | 3,662 | 3,705    | 3,716                                                                                                                     |

# Other includes material sent for other treatment processes including mechanical sorting, biological or specialist treatment. 

## Key Performance Indicator 20 Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions Through New Development

Target: Annual average % carbon dioxide emissions savings for strategic development proposals progressing towards zero carbon in residential developments by 2016 and all developments by 2019

2.90	 Policy 5.2 of the London Plan sets CO2 emission reduction targets for new 
buildings. To meet the target, applicants are required to use the energy hierarchy and set out the carbon reductions achieved at each of the following stages: •	Be lean: use less energy •	Be clean: supply energy efficiently •	Be green: use renewable energy
2.91	 As well as supporting investment in energy efficiency, the development of heat 
networks and the deployment of renewable technologies, the policies may also enable additional benefits for building occupants through provision of affordable energy and increased security of energy supply, while minimising the impact on the existing energy network.
2.92	 The CO2 reduction targets are expressed as minimum improvements over 
the carbon targets14 set for buildings in national Building Regulations, which serves as a baseline (see table 2.26). When revised Building Regulations came into effect on 6 April 2014, the London Plan CO2 target was recalibrated to take into account the changes to the baseline. A percentage target of 35 per cent beyond the new national standards across both residential and nondomestic buildings was then applied by the Mayor.
2.93	 From 1 October 2016, the target for new major residential developments was 
raised to zero carbon and from 2019 the zero carbon target will also apply to non-residential development. While the priority remains for developments to reach carbon reduction targets on-site, shortfalls should be met through a cash-in-lieu contribution to the relevant borough into a carbon offset fund, or through an off-site carbon reduction project agreed between the borough and the developer. Although the zero carbon homes policy was introduced for Stage I applications received after 1 October 2016, no such developments 
14	
Target Emission Rates outlined in Part L of Building Regulations.
reached Stage II in 2016 and so there is no data to report on zero carbon homes for calendar year 2016.

the GLA at Stage II from 1 January - 31 December 2016) Target
Applicable from
Applicable until
Number of developments in 2016
2010
30/09/2013
0
25 per cent beyond Part L 2010
1/10/2013
5/07/2014
1
40 per cent beyond Part L 2010
6/04/2014
Domestic: 30/9/2016
141
35 per cent beyond Part L 2013* 
Non-domestic: 2019
1/10/2016
Ongoing
0
Domestic zero carbon target

* The 35 percent beyond Part L 2013 was devised to be equivalent to the existing 40 percent beyond Part L 2010 target. A transition period applied between 6/04/2014 and 5/07/2014 when applicants were able to present their CO2 reductions relative to either a 2010 or 2013 baseline.

2.94	 The 2016 Energy Monitoring Report15 presents the results for calendar year 
2016 against the CO2 targets for the 142 major development applications referred to the Mayor for approval. All of these applications were assessed against the most recent national building regulations (specifically Part L 2013 of Building Regulations), except for one which was submitted under previous building regulations but was not approved until 2016. 
2.95	 The overall reduction in CO2 emissions from these applications exceeded the 
target, with a 35.7 per cent improvement on Part L 2013 Building Regulations reported. This equates to a cumulative regulated CO2 emission reduction of over 48,000 tonnes per annum, which is broadly equivalent to the saving achieved from retrofitting loft insulation in approximately 80,000 existing houses. In addition:

•	Overall, developers committed to greater carbon reductions from energy 
efficiency alone, exceeding Building Regulations by 7.4 per cent. This is 
15	
https://www.london.gov.uk/node/42419
driving investment in energy efficiency. 

•	It is estimated that London Plan energy policies resulted in £160 million 
Increase in energy generated from renewable sources.

of investment in low carbon and renewable energy generation and infrastructure in 2016. 
Target: Production of 8550 GWh of energy from renewable sources by 2026 

•	51,736 dwellings (95 per cent of the total dwellings receiving approval) 
2.96	 This renewable energy generation target has been developed using data in 
committed to a heat network connection. This is critical for facilitating larger, area wide heat networks. 
•	80 per cent of applications proposed renewable technologies (predominantly 
the previous Mayor's Decentralised Energy Capacity Studies which marked out the role renewables could play in our future energy mix by 2026. The renewable energy generation figure includes the potential energy production from various electricity and heat supply technologies, including: photovoltaics, wind, hydro, biomass and energy from waste; as well as solar thermal, ground and air and water source heat pumps. 
solar PV and heat pumps) to reach the carbon reduction target. The number of applicants pursuing solutions with these technologies over the past few years appears to be broadly stable, reflecting the acceptance of these technologies. 
2.97	 The most authoritative datasets for energy generated in London from 
•	Many applicants demonstrated it is possible to exceed the on-site 35% 
carbon reduction comfortably, with the majority of applications achieving a 35-45% carbon reduction.
•	Offsetting remains necessary and will continue to play a role in planning 
applications going forwards following the introduction of the zero carbon homes policy.
renewable energy sources are provided by the Department of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS, formerly Department for Energy and Climate Change). Table 2.24 shows the generation of electricity from renewables in London for 2011-2016. Generation has increased to 1048 GWh from 765 GWh in 2011, but is well below the 2026 target. This increase is primarily due to improved/corrected geo-referencing for landfill and sewage gas sites, with several large sites reallocated from a neighbouring region (East or South East) to London. These sites are: Beckton and Riverside (Sewage), and Beddington, South Ockendon and Rainham (Landfill Gas). In addition, through the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) - the following renewable heat installations have been achieved by December 2017: •	38 MW of capacity installed through the non-domestic RHI (an increase of 
41% from December 2016); 
•	A total of 506 domestic accredited installations from domestic RHI (an 
increase of 19% from December 2016).

Year
Landfill Gas
Sewage Gas
Photovoltaics
Total
Capacity (MW)/ Generation (GWh)
Wind and Wave
Other Bioenergy
2011# Total (MW)
4
26
36
166
25
256
Total (GWh)
8
155
82
513
7
765
2012# Total (MW)
4
26
39
167
43
280
Total (GWh)
11
165
78
594
35
882
2013# Total (MW)
4
26
39
169
54
292
Total (GWh)
12
178
84
588
41
902

2014# Total (MW)
11
26
54
173
68
331
Total (GWh)
15
179
78
559
57
888
2015# Total (MW)
11
26
54
192
86
368
Total (GWh)
20
169
88
648
71
996
2016
Total (MW)
11
26
59
193
91
380
Total (GWh)
15
165
141
647
80
1048

# Updated with amended data released in September 2017 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/regional-renewable-statistics Source: Regional Statistics 2003-2016: Installed Capacity, Department of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy, and Regional Statistics 2003-2013: Generation, Department of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy

Increase in Urban Greening Target: Increase total area of green roofs in the CAZ 2.98	 In 2014 the GLA, working with the Green Roof Consultancy, used 2013 aerial 
imagery to map all visible green roofs in the CAZ. A total of 678 green roofs covering an area of over 175,000m2 (17.5 ha) were identified. An update based on 2015 aerial imagery identified additional coverage of 47,000m2 (4.7 ha) taking the total coverage in the CAZ to 22 ha, an increase of 27%.
2.99	 The map and further information are available here: https://www.london.gov.
uk/what-we-do/environment/parks-green-spaces-and-biodiversity/green-roofmap.
2.100	Further improvements in the resolution of aerial imagery, and the ability 
to analyse it, may allow the monitoring of green roofs across the whole of London in the future. Consequently, the scope of this KPI will be reviewed following the publication of the new London Plan.

## Key Performance Indicator 23 Improve London'S Blue Ribbon Network

Target: Restore 15km of rivers and streams* 2009 - 2015 and an additional 10km by 2020 (*defined as main river by the Environment Agency - includes larger streams and rivers but can also include smaller watercourses of local significance)

2.101	Restoration is defined as a measure that results in a significant increase 
in diversity of hydromorphological features and or improved floodplain connectivity and the restoration of river function through essential physical or biological processes, including flooding, sediment transport and the facilitation of species movement. 
2.102	The London River Restoration Group, recommended that projects have post 
project appraisals. For the Steering Group to enable a project to be assessed in terms of restoration, the following investigations can be made; •	River Habitat Survey (undertaking pre- and post-project surveys are good 
practice). 
•	Urban River Survey (undertaking pre- and post-project surveys are good 
practice). 
•	Pre- and post-fixed point photography. 
2.103	The time of restoration of a habitat is defined as the point at which the 
necessary construction works have been carried out on the ground to the extent that the habitat is likely to develop without further construction work. For schemes that are phased over several years, an estimate of the length gained is made for each year ensuring that there is no double counting. In order to verify that habitats have been created and conditions secured, scheme details need to be submitted to the London River Restoration Group, which is a sub-group of the Catchment Partnership in London. 
2.104	Table 2.25 shows consistent restoration of 1.5 km p/a and above each year 
since 2007, except for the year 2014. Overall, the target of 15 km of river restoration between 2008 (base year as per London Biodiversity Action Plan habitat target) and 2015 has been achieved and exceeded by 742m and in 2016 over 3km were restored. This represents significant progress of 30% against the additional 10km target to 2020. 
2.105	Significant restoration schemes at Hogsmill, and the Edgware Brook just 
under 2km of restoration. The All London Green Grid and River Basin Management Plan should also facilitate further achievements. It should be noted that the London Biodiversity Action Plan includes, alongside this KPI, a target for maintenance and enhancement reflected in London Plan Policy 7.19 (Table 7.3).

| Year                   | Restoration (metres)   |
|------------------------|------------------------|
| Cumulative Restoration |                        |
| (metres)               |                        |
| Cumulative Change      |                        |
| Since 2008 Baseline    |                        |
| 2000                   | 680                    |
| 2001                   | 150                    |
| 2002                   | 600                    |
| 2003                   | 2,300                  |
| 2004                   | 500                    |
| 2005                   | 0                      |
| 2006                   | 100                    |
| 2007                   | 5,100                  |
| 2008                   | 2,000                  |
| 2009                   | 1,500                  |
| 2010                   | 1,808                  |
| 2011                   | 3,519                  |
| 2012                   | 3,000                  |
| 2013                   | 2,395                  |
| 2014                   | 330                    |
| 2015                   | 2,490                  |
| 2016                   | 3,010                  |
| 2017                   | 2,645                  |

Source: Rivers and Streams Habitat Action Plan Steering Group and the London Catchment Partnership

## Key Performance Indicator 24 Protecting And Improving London'S Heritage And Public Realm

Target: Reduction in the proportion of designated heritage assets at risk as a % of the total number of designated heritage assets in London

2.106	Table 2.26 shows that the number of designated heritage assets in London 
has increased from last year. There are 61 new listed buildings and three more scheduled monuments. The number of registered parks and gardens, World Heritage Sites in London have remained constant while there has been a drop in conservation areas. The percentage of designated assets at risk remains the same with the exception of conservation areas which has increased by 1%. None of London's World Heritage Sites or registered battlefields are at risk. 
2.107	For details on individual designated assets, please visit Historic England 
also provides a summary document with the number and condition of all designated assets and has produced a Heritage at Risk 2017 summary for London.

Table 2.26 Number and condition of designated heritage assets
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Asset
No. 
% at Risk
no. 
% at Risk
No. 
% at Risk
No. 
% at Risk
No. 
% at Risk
No.
% at Risk
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
World Heritage Sites*
18,854 2.8
18,872 2.7
18,896 3
18,936 2.59
19,020 3
19,081 3
Listed Buildings
949
6.8
1,009
6.3
1,017
6.3**
1,021
6**
1,026
7
1,025
8
Conservation Areas
154
22.7
155
20.6
156
19.9
158
19.6
162
17
165
17
Scheduled Monuments
150
8
150
7.3
150
7.3
150
6
151
7
151
7
Registered Parks and Gardens
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
Registered Battlefield

*designated by UNESCO; ** 977 of the 1025 Conservation Areas in London have been surveyed through the Conservation Areas at Risk survey. 79 or 8% of those conservation areas surveyed are considered to be at risk. Source: Historic England

## Chapter 3 - Additional Performance Measures And Statistics Housing And Design Housing Provision Annual Monitor 2016/17 Introduction

3.108	This report provides further detail on housing provision in London, adding to 
that provided in the tables in the main body of the Annual Monitoring Report. It is based on data provided by London's planning authorities to the London Development Database (LDD). The LDD was established by the GLA in 2004 with the support of government and the London boroughs and is widely regarded as the most authoritative source of information on housing provision in London.
3.109	This section deals with housing provision as defined for the purpose of 
monitoring the London Plan. The focus is on the 'conventional supply' of housing, that is the supply of new homes from new build, conversions of existing residential buildings or changes of use. This definition only includes dwellings that are fully self-contained; meaning they have kitchen and bathroom facilities behind their own lockable front door. Other forms of living accommodation that do not meet the definition of 'self-contained' make up the 'non-conventional' supply. This includes rooms in student halls, large houses in multiple occupation (HMOs), rooms in hostels and bedrooms in care homes. The non-conventional supply also contributes to the housing targets in Annex 4 of the London Plan, as do vacant properties returning to use. Where these are being referred to, it will be explicitly stated in the text.

3.110	All figures are usually 'net' (losses of existing units are subtracted from the 
gains) unless otherwise stated. The main exceptions are figures showing numbers of bedrooms, residential densities and compliance with accessibility standards, which are all calculated on gross figures (losses are not subtracted from the total).
3.111	The reporting year used by LDD begins on 1st April and runs to 31st March 
the following year, which is often referred to as the Financial Year (FY) in LDD data reports. FY2016 therefore runs from 01/04/2016 to 31/03/2017. To make it clearer we have used the form 2016/17 rather than FY2016 in this report.

3.112	Tenure types are generally taken from the s106 legal agreement associated 
with a permission, but they may be updated to reflect the final tenure split when the scheme is implemented, for example if a site or all of the residential units are acquired by a housing association for affordable housing prior to completion. Tenure changes after completion are not recorded on LDD.

3.113	A separate definition of affordable housing delivery is used by central 
government and the Mayor for the purposes of monitoring his affordable homes programme. This counts the gross number of affordable homes delivered through conventional supply or acquisitions of existing properties, and includes changes in tenure that are not linked to the planning system so are not captured by LDD. Completion in relation to this definition is triggered by payment of a grant. The Affordable Housing Monitor covers affordable housing delivery according to the London Housing Strategy definition.
3.114	The statistics are based on the details of planning applications approved by 
London's 35 planning authorities. This includes the 32 London Boroughs, the City of London, the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC). LDD records all planning consents that propose a loss or a gain of residential units. This includes Full and Outline planning permissions, but also variations to these, whether through details / reserved matters consents, s73 Minor Material Amendments or formal Variations to s106 agreements are also recorded.
3.115	Changes of use to residential through Section 3 of the General Permitted 
Development Order (GPDO) are also recorded, whether or not prior approval is required. Where prior approval is required (as is the case for Class O office to residential changes), the relevant class from the GPDO is recorded. Other classes (e.g. Class G ancillary retail to residential) may be recorded as s192 Certificates of Proposed Lawful Development rather than by the class in the GPDO. Note that the streamlined prior approvals process means that applicants do not need to submit full details of the proposed scheme so it is not always possible for the local authority to fill in all of the details normally recorded on LDD. These gaps in the data can lead to totals not matching across tables in this report. S191 Certificates of Existing Lawful Use are included where the change in units identified by the consent has not previously been identified in the Local Authority's housing stock figures. Temporary permissions are not included in these figures.

3.116	The time series data has been updated for this AMR and uses the definitions 
outlined in the preceding paragraphs.
3.117	Data in all tables is shown by London Borough, rather than by planning 
authority. The only exception is Table 3.6 - Total net completions against London Plan benchmark 2016/17 which includes LLDC as it has its own housing target in the London Plan. The Borough has been used in the remaining tables to allow consistency with previous AMRs.
3.118	While some individual schemes are referenced in this report, it is only 
intended to give a brief overview to the London situation. More detailed information at a local level can be found in borough AMRs.
3.119	Although the data in the LDD is supplied by the boroughs, the information 
presented here may be different from that found in the borough AMRs. This can be due to the timing of when the data is extracted as LDD is a live system that is continually updated and adjusted to reflect the best information available. There are also occasional differences in the way data is recorded, for example the way completions are allocated to particular years. The LDD ensures that the data is collected using the same methodology across London without affecting the ability of boroughs to reflect local circumstances in their own AMRs.
Table 3.1 Key Statistics and Findings There were 41,371 net conventional housing completions in London in 2016/17, an increase of over 17% on completions in 2015/16 and the highest annual figure since the start of the LDD in 2004. In addition, 4,526 non-self-contained units were completed, a 2% increase on the previous year. The number of long term vacant dwellings in London increased by 392. This total of 45,505 completions is 107% of the 42,388 benchmark for the annual provision of new housing in the London Plan 2015 and an 12% increase on completions in 2015/16. This was also the highest annual total since the start of the LDD in 2004. New build accounted for 74% of net conventional supply in 2016/17, conversions 3% and changes of use 23%. This latter figure is up from 19% in the previous year and 13% in 2014/15. Just 18% of completions in 2016/17 are affordable. Over the last three years net conventional affordable housing completions through planning permissions amounted to 21,928 homes. This represents 21% of total completions.

Across all tenures, 41% of homes completed during 2016/17 were one bedroom or studio units, 39% had two bedrooms and the remaining 20% had three bedrooms or more. In 2014/15, 24% of homes completed had 3 bedrooms or more. In numeric terms, however, the 9,058 homes with 3 bedrooms or more completed in 2016/17 is the highest since LDD began monitoring in 2004/05. 27% of gross affordable homes completed in 2016/17 had three or more bedrooms, up slightly from 26% the previous year. Net conventional housing approvals during 2016/17 are 69,681. This is down on the revised total of 77,079 approvals in 2015/16. 18% of net units approved are affordable. This compares to 14% in 2015/16. The average density of new housing approvals in 2016/17 was 153 dwellings per hectare (dph), and the average density of completions was 140 dph. LDD records 66,938 net conventional starts and 757 net non-self-contained starts. (See paragraph 3.45 for the definition of a start). This is a big drop in non-selfcontained starts compared to the previous year, where the updated figure is now 6,860. 18% of net units in schemes started during 2016/17 are affordable housing. This is the same as the revised figure for 2015/16. The conventional housing pipeline in London remains healthy. As of 31 March 2017, the net conventional housing pipeline consisted of 282,271 homes. Of these, 58% are in schemes that are recorded as 'under construction', slightly up from 53% the previous year. The pipeline of non-self-contained accommodation is 12,345 units, down for the fifth year in a row. Of the units in the current pipeline, 69% are in schemes that are under construction.

## Completions

3.120	Table 3.2 and Figure 3.3 show the latest data on completions by year. Total 
completions for 2016/17 are 45,505.
3.121	Total housing provision as monitored in the London Plan consists of three 
elements: conventional housing supply, non-self-contained accommodation, and long-term empty homes returning to use, often referred to as 'Vacants'. KPI 4 in chapter 2 and table 3.6 show housing provision at borough level compared to the housing targets in Annex 4 of the 2016 London Plan. Table 3.7 shows the delivery by borough compared to the housing targets over the last three years. This is the second AMR to be monitored against the 42,388 target. Table 3.7 therefore compares delivery to the sum of one year of the 
2011 target and two years at the current target.

3.122	During 2016/17, LDD recorded 45,752 completions and 4,381 unit losses 
giving a total for net conventional housing completions of 41,371. This continues an upward trend each year since 2010/11 when conventional completions fell below 20,000.
3.123	The net total non-self-contained completions for 2016/17 are 4,526, just a 
slight increase on the previous year which has been revised slightly since AMR 13 to 4,448. The non-self-contained element of the benchmark is comprised of bedrooms in student halls of residence, hostels, large houses in multiple occupation and care homes. The latter was introduced in the 2015 plan, and brings our definition in line with that used for Communal Accommodation category in the annual Housing Flows Reconciliation return to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. However, for the purposes of monitoring the London Plan the number of separate bedrooms is counted, whereas the Housing Flows Reconciliation records the number of Council Tax rateable units, which will generally be a lower figure.
3.124	The number of 'vacants', as measure by the Council Tax Base and reported 
by MHCLG, increased from 19,845 to 20,237 between 2016 and 2017, a net decrease in the housing supply figures of 392 homes.
3.125	When combined, the total supply is 45,505. This is 4,907 above the revised 
total of 40,598 for 2015/16. The previous highest completions total was 34,035 achieved in 2014/15.
3.126	As ever, completions are not spread evenly across the London boroughs. The 
borough with the largest number of conventional completions in both gross and net terms is Tower Hamlets. Their 4,865 net completions make up over 11% of the total. The next highest total, 2,820, is in Croydon. Wandsworth, who had the most completions in 2015/16, delivered 2,309 homes. This is the sixth highest in this busy year for completions in which seven boroughs saw over 2,000 net completions and a further nine provided over 1,000. At the other end of the scale, a total of 7 new homes were completed in the City and Kensington and Chelsea recorded 194.

3.127	LDD records all losses in the final year of scheme completion, while gains 
can be spread over several years. This can lead to high gross but low net completions where large-scale residential redevelopment is taking place. This is not a significant issue for many boroughs in 2016/17. One example 
from this year is that there is a net loss of 39 units from the redevelopment at Myatts Field North, however this scheme has delivered a total net gain of 503 units since the first completions on the site in 2013/14. The absence of many other examples of this in 2016/17 may indicate that there are some significant unit losses which will show up in the coming years.

3.128	There are three development types for conventional housing supply recorded 
in the LDD; new build (including extensions that create new residential units), conversions (changes to the number of units in properties already in residential use) and changes of use (for example gains from industrial or commercial uses and losses to non-C3 uses). Table 3.11 shows gross and net conventional supply by type for each borough. Across London, new build provides the most units accounting for 73% of net completions, however this is below the 77% recorded in 2015/16. This is because the contribution of changes of use continues to rise, up to 23%. Conversions now make up less than 4% of net supply. 
3.129	The increase in the importance of changes of use reflects the impact of the 
new classes of permitted development. Completions by permission type are shown in table 3.17. Since 2015/16 all types of consent that permit a change in the number of units have recorded on LDD. This includes prior approvals (such as office, retail and storage & distribution to residential), Certificates of Proposed Lawful Development granted under s192 of the Town and Country Planning Act and amendments to existing consents or legal agreements where they permit a change that affects the numbers in LDD. Due to their numerical significance, office to residential prior approvals (Class O, formerly J) are shown while all other prior approvals are grouped together with s192 Certificates of proposed lawful development under the heading of 'Other prior approvals'. Amendments, including variations to legal agreements, are also grouped together. Full permissions account for 61% of all completions, while Outline consents (for which no further details / reserved matters are needed on LDD) account for 6% and Details / Reserve Matters make up 8%. Prior approvals of various types make up over 16% of all completions, but of 6,828 net completions, 6,639 are from office to residential prior approvals.
3.130	The impact of office to residential prior approvals continues to be most 
significant in Outer London where they make up over 25% of completions, compared to 10% in Inner London (excluding the Central Activities Zone where there is an exemption from this type of prior approval). As a consequence, new build units make up approximately 63% and changes of 
use 31% of completions in Outer London compared to 81% and 16% in Inner London.

3.131	The impact of residential conversions is insignificant in many boroughs, 
but there is some variation across London. While they contributed 15% of completions in Ealing, and 14% in Hammersmith and Fulham and The City of London, they contributed a net loss in Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea and Richmond upon Thames, all for the third year in a row. This is because the gain from converting houses into flats was outweighed by the loss from converting flats into houses.
3.132	Total net affordable housing supply in 2016/17 was 7,347, representing 18% 
of total completions. This is lower in percentage terms than the 20% achieved in 2015/16, but higher in absolute terms than the revised total of 6,995. When looking only at major planning permissions where affordable housing policies apply (10 units or more, excluding permitted development / prior approvals), a net total of 7.097 affordable completions equates to 25% of total net completions.
3.133	The three-year average on all completions is down to 21%, from 24% in the 
previous three-year cycle. Table 3.14 shows total net conventional affordable supply by borough over the last three years, both in numeric terms and as a proportion of total supply. In 2016/17 the borough in which affordable housing formed the highest proportion of net housing supply was Enfield at 33%. The next highest is Waltham Forest at 30%, which had the highest threeyear average at 47% They are the only borough with a three-year average of over 40%, and Havering (35%) and Tower Hamlets (30%) are the only others with 30% or more. In contrast, Bromley, Harrow and The City of London all recorded a net 0% over the three-year cycle. In the case of the first two, this is due to a net loss of affordable housing in a previous year. There were no net losses recorded in 2016/17. It is important to remember that losses on a permission are all recorded in the same year while gains can be spread over different years. This can have a significant impact on the annual figures for any individual borough, but the low three-year average across London is a matter which the current Mayor has made a clear commitment to address. However, it will take several years before most of the referable planning permissions granted under the current administration make it through to completion.

3.134	Over the three-year period from 2014/15 to 2016/17, net conventional 
affordable housing supply amounted to 21,945 homes, with social rented units accounting for 30% of these, intermediate products 40% and Affordable Rent units 29%. This continues the trend from social rent to Affordable Rent seen in the last AMR. Note though that some Affordable Rent units are ultimately provided at a level equivalent to social rent, so the terms are sometimes used interchangeably by boroughs.

3.135	Table 3.8 shows the split of total gross conventional completions in 2016/17 
across London as a whole by tenure and number of bedrooms. The figures are presented in gross terms as the number of bedrooms for homes lost or replaced is sometimes difficult to obtain and there are sufficient gaps in the data to prevent the calculation of meaningful net figures. One-bed (including studios and bedsits) and two-bed properties make up the majority of supply, accounting for 41% and 38% of the total respectively. The remaining 20% have 3 bedrooms or more (the measure used as a proxy for family housing). However, the profile of supply varies with tenure. Homes with 3 bedrooms or more make up 34% of social rented supply, 33% of Affordable Rent homes, 18% of market homes and 15% of intermediate homes. This profile is very similar to that seen in 2015/16, although there has been a slight increase in the proportion of 1 bed units in market and social rented homes.

3.136	Table 3.9 shows the gross conventional supply of housing by borough and 
number of bedrooms while Table 3.10 shows the same for affordable housing only. Across London, 9,056 homes with three bedrooms or more were completed, compared to 7,823 the previous year. The boroughs providing the highest percentage of 3 or more bed housing are Havering (314 is 46% of completions), Bexley (327, 39%), Kensington and Chelsea (154, 39%) and Barking and Dagenham (221, 37%). When we look just at affordable housing with 3 or more bedrooms, 2,240 homes represent 27% of total affordable completions. The boroughs that provided the highest percentage were Kensington and Chelsea (22, 43%) Barking and Dagenham (75, 43%), Islington (46, 41%) and Enfield (121, 40%). This amounts to 264 units in total. More significant in terms of numbers are the 512 homes with 3 bedrooms or more that make up 36% of the supply of affordable housing in Tower Hamlets.
3.137	The average density of new housing completions in London (shown in 
Table 3.16) was 140 dwellings per hectare (dph), compared to an average of approximately 127dph for the years from 2008/09 to 2015/16. As would be expected, the lowest densities are found in the outer London boroughs. Havering (51dph), Bromley (55dph), Hillingdon (68dph), Bexley and Enfield 
(both 71dph) all recorded densities of below 75dph. The highest density, both in 2016/17 and across the time-series is in The City of London where densities average over 500dph, but usually on a relatively small number of completions. Tower Hamlets completed 5,124 homes with an average density of 372dph. Islington completed 755 homes with an average density of 357dph and Southwark 2,529 homes with an average density of 320dph. 

3.138	Densities are calculated by dividing the gross total residential units by the sum 
of the residential site areas. This means that the value entered for the site area on an individual permission can have a significant impact on the density for the whole borough, and even for London as a whole if the area entered is high enough. Site areas can be difficult to calculate, particularly on mixed use schemes and those being delivered in phases, and are often recalculated as more information becomes available, such as when details of later phases are approved. This means that the density of approvals is particularly volatile, but completions are also subject to change.

3.139	The total of 4,526 non-self-contained units completed during FY2016 
continues the recent trend for strong delivery of student accommodation. In total 5,500 student rooms were completed and 1,100 replaced, giving a net total of 4,391. These were spread across nine boroughs. Brent provided the most, 1,501 rooms in two permissions (14/0363 and 14/3624) forming part of the comprehensive redevelopment of the area around the Wembley stadium. In total 1,843 student rooms were provided in outer London and 2,548 in inner London (including the Central Activities Zone).
3.140	In contrast to the large gains in student rooms, there has been a decrease of 
57 rooms from hostels and large HMOs. This can at least in part be attributed to a move towards more self-contained provision and improvements to the existing housing stock leading to low-quality non-self-contained units being replaced by new self-contained flats. There was a net increase of 192 beds in care homes, although there was a net loss of 128 in Inner London and a gain of 320 in outer London.
3.141	The number of long term vacant properties is derived from the Council Tax 
Base and is published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in Housing Live Table 615. The data included in this report is broken down by borough (meaning there is no separate total for the London Legacy Development Corporation) and it covers the period from 4th October 2016 to 2nd October 2017, so does not exactly match the time-period used for 
the rest of the data. However. it remains the best source of net data available. Long-term empty homes are defined as those dwellings which had been unoccupied and substantially unfurnished for over six months. Since April 2012 there has been local discretion over the level of discount that vacant properties receive, and since April 2013 local authorities have also been able to charge a premium of up to 50% on properties vacant for more than two years. It is not known what impact this has had on the recording of vacant properties.

3.142	The number of long-term vacant properties (vacants) increased from 19,845 in 
October 2016 to 20,237 in October 2017, meaning a net decrease of 392 units to housing supply. Southwark recorded an increase of 202 vacant homes and Redbridge 188. In total 19 boroughs recorded an increase in long-term vacant properties. There were decreases in 14 boroughs, including Westminster (down 181 to 292), Kensington and Chelsea (169) and Enfield (168).

## Approvals

3.143	During 2016/17, net conventional housing approvals were 69,681 and nonself-contained approvals were 3,376.
3.144	Annual approvals include all units in planning permissions that are granted 
during the year unless they are superseded by a revision to the scheme within the same year. Many of the permissions granted will be renewals of existing permissions, revisions to previously approved schemes or provide details of the phasing of outline permissions. For this reason, approvals cannot simply be added together to give a cumulative total, however they are comparable year on year. Table 3.3 shows the trend in net approvals at London level since 2004/05, while Table 3.18 breaks down 2016/17 approvals by tenure16, Table 3.19 shows by tenure17 for major planning permission only and Table 3.20 shows approvals by bedrooms. Table 3.21 shows non-self-contained approvals by type.
3.145	Net conventional housing approvals during 2016/17 currently stand at 69,681. 
This is down for the second year in a row, but still above the long-term average of approximately 64,000.

3.146	Approvals in outer London make up nearly 51% of all approvals in 2016/17, 
which is well above the long-term average of just under 40%. This is only the second year since LDD began monitoring in 2004/05 that conventional approvals in outer London have outnumbered those in inner London, the previous occasion was 2010/11 when 54% of unit approvals were in outer London. This proved to be an exception as outer London only accounted for 30% the following year. 10% of approvals were in the Central Activities Zone and 38% were in the rest of inner London. There have been some quite large variations in these proportions in previous years, so it is too early to say if this is in any way indicative of a future trend.
3.147	The borough to approve the highest number of units is Tower Hamlets, who 
granted permission for 8,299. Of these, approximately 72% are in the Isle of Dogs area, and 96% were within an identified Opportunity Area. Tower Hamlets also provided the most conventional completions this year.
16	
Figures do not include cash in lieu contributions for affordable housing 
secured as part of the approval 17	
ibid
3.148	The largest residential approval was at Silvertown Quays in Newham where 
3,000 homes were granted permission (14/01605). Other large schemes to have been granted permission are 1,513 units at Millharbour Village in Tower Hamlets (PA/14/03195) and 1,007 units at the Greenwich Peninsula (16/0186). Silvertown Quays and Millharbour Village are on sites previously in non-residential use and are new consents, while the units at Greenwich Peninsula supersede units already approved in the masterplan for the area.
3.149	In terms of tenure, 82% of homes approved in 2016/17 units are for market 
sale or rent, 7% intermediate, 6% Affordable Rent and 4% social rented. This total of 18% affordable is a slight increase on the 14% seen in the previous two years. When looking only at major planning permissions to which affordable housing policies apply (Table 3.19), 23% are affordable. It should be noted that the tenure of the units may change. For example, the tenure may not have been defined on some outline permissions, so the number of affordable units may increase as details of the later phases are submitted. The tenure of approved units can also change at any time before completion, for example as the result of negotiations between developers and planning authorities or by subsequent transfer of units to a housing association.

3.150	20% of units approved in 2016/17 have 3 or more bedrooms, the threshold to 
qualify as family housing. 42% are 1 bed units (including studios) and 38% 2 bed units. Hammersmith and Fulham approved the highest proportion of units with 3 or more bedrooms, 318 units equating to 41% of gross approvals. The borough to approve the most 3 or more bed homes was Newham where 2,271 equated to 35% of total net approvals. Harrow approved just 144 3 or more bed units, 10% of their total gross approvals.
3.151	The average density of new housing approvals, shown in Table 3.22, is 
153 dph, a decrease on last year's 158 dph. As ever there is wide variation between boroughs. For the fourth year in a row, the highest density is in Tower Hamlets (372 dph). The next highest is in the City of London (315 dph) followed by Newham (297 dph). The lowest densities are found in Bromley (51 dph) and Enfield (60 dph).

3.152	A net total of 3,376 non-self-contained rooms were approved during 2016/17. 
This is made up of a net gain of 2,744 student bedrooms, 133 care home bedrooms and 499 hostel / HMO bedrooms. This is an increase on the 2,467 approved in 2015/16 (this total has increased substantially since the last AMR when just 867 non-self-contained units were recorded), but still below 
the long-term average and less than non-self-contained completions for the second year in a row.

## Starts

3.153	Total net conventional starts in 2016/17 were 66,936, while non-self-
contained starts were 757. In the LDD a 'start' is the point at which a planning permission can no longer lapse due to the acknowledgement of a legal start on site. This can be triggered by demolition of existing buildings or preparatory works on site, and does not mean the start of physical construction work on an individual building. It may be several years between a scheme start and the completion of the final units, particularly on large schemes. Annual starts include all units in planning permissions that are started during the year unless they are superseded by a revision to the scheme within the same year. Many of the permissions started will be for revisions to previously approved schemes or provide details of the phasing of outline permissions that have already been started in previous years. As with approvals, starts from different years can't simply be added together to give a cumulative total. They are however comparable year on year.

3.154	The total of 66,936 net conventional starts is slightly higher than the revised 
figure for 2015/16 of 65,075 and still much higher than has been recorded in recent years. However they are boosted substantially by the starting of the revised Greenwich Peninsula masterplan (15/0716) which proposes 12,898 units. These will be delivered in various phases, many of which will probably require additional consents before they can be implemented. The next largest start is for 2,971 homes at the New Covent Garden Market site in Wandsworth (2014/2810).
3.155	Table 3.26 shows net conventional starts by permission type. 52% of starts 
are in Full permissions, while the recorded start at Greenwich Peninsula contributes to Outline permissions making up 23% of starts. Details and Reserved Matters make up 7% and amendments to schemes a further 12%, while prior approvals make up about 5%.
3.156	Table 3.24 shows net conventional housing 'starts' by tenure. 82% of net 
starts are for market units, 8% intermediate units, 7% affordable rented and 3% for social rent. The total of 18% affordable units is a slight increase on the 15% in 2015/16. When looking at net starts in major planning permissions to which affordable housing policies apply (Table 3.25), 20% are affordable.
3.157	As in previous years the majority of the units recorded as started have 1 
and 2 bedrooms, with 42% being one bedroom or studio units, 39% having 2 bedrooms and 19% having 3 bedrooms or more.
3.158	The schemes that were started in 206/17 contain a net total of 757 non-selfcontained units. However, the gains are all in student bedrooms. The net starts of 1,444 student rooms compares to starts of schemes containing a net loss of 512 SG bedrooms and 175 bedrooms in care homes. A similar pattern has been observed in approvals and completions in recent years.
3.159	It is important to note that boroughs are still reporting difficulties in identifying 
starts on site and that some starts only get picked up when work is well underway, or occasionally only on scheme completion (particularly in the case of conversions or changes of use where there may be little or no external evidence of the work and on the non-self-contained supply). However, it is hoped that linking Community Infrastructure Levy payments to starts on sites has help to improve the recording of starts, reducing the risk of starts going undetected until late in the development process.

## The Pipeline Of New Homes

3.160	The total net conventional pipeline as at 31st March 2017 was 282,271 
homes, and the non-self-contained pipeline was 13,843 rooms.
3.161	The 'pipeline' of housing supply comprises homes which have been granted 
planning permission but are not yet completed. It is broken down into homes that are 'not started' and those that are 'under construction'. It is important to bear in mind the definition of a start above. The 'under construction' pipeline shows the capacity in schemes on which work has technically started, but should not be used to infer that work has begun on all the dwellings in those schemes. The annual flow of planning approvals for new homes adds to the pipeline, while units are removed when they are either completed, superseded by a new scheme or pass their lapse date without a start being made.
3.162	Table 3.4 shows the net pipeline as at the end of each financial year (31st 
March) at London level since 2004/05. The number of units in the pipeline continues to rise, now to over 282,000 units, meaning there is capacity within the planning system to deliver more than 6 years of supply at the target level in the London Plan 2016.
3.163	Table 3.29 shows the planning pipeline for conventional residential units 
as of 31 March 2017. At the end of the year there were 117,271 units (net) in schemes which have been granted planning permission but on which construction had not started and 165,000 units (net) in schemes under construction. This means that the proportion of units in schemes that are started is up to 58%. The borough with the most units in the pipeline is Tower Hamlets (28,666) followed by Greenwich (27,864), Newham (23,992) and Barnet (21,320).

3.164	The tenure of the units in the pipeline can be seen in table 3.31. The 
proportion of affordable units across London is now down to 15%. This low level of affordable units in the pipeline is likely to take several years to address, and could mean that the percentage in completions will remain relatively low for the next few years. The borough with the highest proportion of affordable units in the pipeline is Barking and Dagenham, where 4,573 affordable units make up 34% of the pipeline. In terms of units, Tower Hamlets have 5,270 units which is 18% of their total residential pipeline. When looking at the net pipeline in major planning permissions to which affordable housing policies apply (Table 3.), 17% are affordable.
3.165	Table 3.30 shows the proportion of the pipeline by permission type. This 
shows that 49% of units are in full permissions, 9% in Details / Reserved matters, 5% in amendments and 5% in the various types of prior approval. This leaves 32% in Outline permissions, most of which will need further approvals in the form of Details and Reserved Matters before they can be implemented. This is partly down to hybrid applications (part full / part outline) being included in the Outline category.
3.166	Table 3.28 shows the gross conventional pipeline by number of bedrooms. 
21% of units for which the information is available will provide 3 bedrooms or more, while 40% are two bed units.
3.167	The net pipeline of non-self-contained units is 13,843. Of these, 75% are 
in schemes that are under construction. There are currently 3,451 rooms in permissions that are not started, which is an increase on the previous year where 2,374 rooms were in schemes that were not started, 16% of the pipeline.

## Gypsy And Traveller Sites

3.168	No permissions for new pitches for gypsies and travellers were recorded 
in 2016/17 in London. The planning pipeline contains permissions for 12 additional pitches. 11 of these are in Hounslow.
3.169	Note that traveller pitches are now monitored as part of the overall residential 
supply. In addition to being recorded here, they contribute to the residential totals elsewhere in this report.

Table 3.2 Net Housing Supply in London
2004/5
2005/6
2006/7
2007/8
2008/9
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Average
Conventional
24,680
25,549
26,647
27,736
29,527
25,093
19,909
23,515
23,961
26,728
30,179
35,080
41,371
27,754
Non-Conventional
5,314
792
3,028
1,407
2,764
1,561
2,021
1,290
2,932
4,416
3,976
4,448
4,526
2,960
Vacants back in use* 2,519
-61
3,608
287
-398
2,223
4,882
5,670
2,018
1,057
-120
1,070
-392
1,720
Total
32,513
26,280
33,283
29,430
31,893
28,877
26,812
30,475
28,911
31,905
34,035
40,598
45,505
32,347

* All long term vacants returning to use from the GOV.UK Housing Live Table 615.

Table 3.3 Net Conventional Housing Approvals
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Average
CAZ
4,877
4,281
7,611
4,813
4,208
2,739
4,309
15,698
10,783
8,651
18,480
7,087
7,203
7,749
Inner
26,709
23,647
26,722
40,705
24,092
28,269
22,108
45,026
21,735
32,743
45,314
39,856
27,028
31,073
Outer
23,881
25,387
23,610
35,000
19,273
15,029
31,945
26,033
13,110
26,749
26,117
30,134
35,450
25,517
London
55,467
53,315
57,943
80,518
47,573
46,037
58,362
86,757
45,628
68,143
89,911
77,077
69,681
64,339
Table 3.4 Net Conventional Housing Pipeline in London as at End of Financial Year
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Average
CAZ
9,468
9,923
13,180
15,225
16,209
15,416
14,589
24,131
29,488
33,445
39,158
39,541
36,692
22,805
Inner
58,648
63,589
73,303
87,836
87,433
91,942
83,791
100,541
106,378
121,240
132,626
137,955
136,872
98,627
Outer
43,563
52,862
57,936
71,067
70,199
67,192
79,795
86,547
82,952
87,920
93,438
100,876
108,707
77,158
London
111,679
126,374
144,419
174,128
173,841
174,550
178,175
211,219
218,818
242,605
265,222
278,372
282,271
198,590
Table 3.5 Net Conventional Housing Completions
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Average
CAZ
2,311
2,567
2,391
1,526
1,930
1,911
2,317
1,629
1,564
2,131
2,568
3,638
4,337
2,371
Inner
10,672
11,819
11,852
12,345
14,464
13,769
9,640
11,284
11,614
12,612
13,737
14,926
18,566
12,869
Outer
11,697
11,165
12,402
13,868
13,133
9,416
7,835
10,864
11,470
11,985
13,874
16,516
18,468
12,515
London
24,680
25,551
26,645
27,739
29,527
25,096
19,792
23,777
24,648
26,728
30,179
35,080
41,371
27,755
Borough
Net conv
Net non-conv
Vacants*
Total
London Plan target
% of target
Barking and Dagenham
595
-24
-5
566
1,236
46%
Barnet
2,228
-11
52
2,269
2,349
97%
Bexley
816
0
-88
728
446
163%
Brent
1,364
1,494
99
2,957
1,525
194%
Bromley
914
50
16
980
641
153%
Camden
1,206
199
-28
1,377
889
155%
City of London
7
0
-110
-103
141
-73%
Croydon
2,820
82
-48
2,854
1,435
199%
Ealing
1,170
332
-106
1,396
1,297
108%
Enfield
903
106
168
1,177
798
147%
Greenwich
2,442
7
-137
2,312
2,685
86%
Hackney
1,180
0
121
1,301
1,599
81%
Hammersmith and Fulham
984
8
52
1,044
1,031
101%
Haringey
737
-31
78
784
1,502
52%
Harrow
655
35
-22
668
593
113%
Havering
602
-12
-65
525
1,170
45%
Hillingdon
850
27
-89
788
559
141%
Hounslow
1,150
0
62
1,212
822
147%
Islington
680
900
-145
1,435
1,264
114%
Kensington and Chelsea
194
-44
169
319
733
44%
Kingston upon Thames
274
40
-87
227
643
35%
Lambeth
1,125
-12
22
1,135
1,559
73%
Lewisham
1,579
611
-127
2,063
1,385
149%
London Legacy DC
222
0
0
222
1,471
15%
Merton
451
14
-93
372
411
91%
Newham
2,347
19
-116
2,250
1,994
113%
Redbridge
780
9
-188
601
1,123
54%
Richmond upon Thames
474
-35
-12
427
315
136%
Southwark
2,421
271
-202
2,490
2,736
91%
Sutton
652
83
96
831
363
229%
Tower Hamlets
4,865
57
108
5,030
3,931
128%
Waltham Forest
1,033
-17
-36
980
862
114%
Wandsworth
2,309
370
88
2,767
1,812
153%
Westminster
1,342
-2
181
1,521
1,068
142%
London
41,371
4,526
-392
45,505
42,388
107%

* All long term vacants returning to use from the GOV.UK Housing Live Table 615.

Borough
Total net completions
Total expected by benchmark
Delivery compared to benchmark
Barking and Dagenham
1,896
3,537
54
Barnet
5,444
6,953
78
Bexley
1,732
1,227
141
Brent
4,017
4,115
98
Bromley
2,108
1,782
118
Camden
2,666
2,443
109
City of London
310
392
79
Croydon
6,384
4,200
152
Ealing
3,073
3,484
88
Enfield
1,981
2,156
92
Greenwich
6,378
7,965
80
Hackney
3,958
4,358
91
2,268
2,677
85
Hammersmith and Fulham Haringey
1,979
3,824
52
Harrow
1,975
1,536
129
Havering
3,030
3,310
92
Hillingdon
2,485
1,543
161
Hounslow
3,032
2,114
143
Islington
2,613
3,698
71
Kensington and Chelsea
1,341
2,051
65
Kingston upon Thames
1,107
1,661
67
Lambeth
3,875
4,313
90
Lewisham
4,565
3,875
118
Merton
1,539
1,142
135
Newham
5,787
6,488
89
Redbridge
1,471
3,006
49
Richmond upon Thames
1,408
875
161
Southwark
5,014
7,477
67
Sutton
1,497
936
160
Tower Hamlets
9,635
10,747
90
Waltham Forest
2,700
2,484
109
Wandsworth
6,135
4,769
129
Westminster
2,978
2,906
102
London
106,381
114,044
93

The three year total is calculated as one year at the 32k target from the London Plan 2011 and two years at the 42k target introduced in the London Plan 2015. A 
separate target for the LLDC was introduced in the 2015 Plan so it has not been included in this table. Completions in the LLDC have been excluded from the completions totals for the boroughs with which it overlaps.

Dwellings
1 bed
2 beds
3 beds
4+ beds
Total
Social Rented
1,018
1,120
814
283
3,235
Intermediate
1,151
1,373
409
40
2,973
Affordable Rent
586
840
481
213
2,120
Market
16,162
14,446
4,937
1,879
37,424
All Tenure
18,917
17,779
6,641
2,415
45,752
As a % of total
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
4+ bed
Total
Social Rented
31%
35%
25%
9%
100%
Intermediate
39%
46%
14%
1%
100%
Affordable Rent
28%
40%
23%
10%
100%
Market
43%
39%
13%
5%
100%
All Tenure
41%
39%
15%
5%
100%
Borough
Number of Bedrooms 1
2
3
4+
Total
% 3 or more
Barking and Dagenham
139
241
168
53
601
37%
Barnet
704
1,145
436
99
2,384
22%
Bexley
159
355
151
176
841
39%
Brent
654
653
148
23
1,478
12%
Bromley
428
391
133
83
1,035
21%
Camden
601
534
134
38
1,307
13%
City of London
5
7
0
0
12
0%
Croydon
1,627
878
408
66
2,979
16%
Ealing
652
645
205
64
1,566
17%
Enfield
462
289
175
96
1,022
27%
Greenwich
1,444
765
297
30
2,536
13%
Hackney
494
505
282
89
1,370
27%
Hammersmith and Fulham 531
480
158
161
1,330
24%
Haringey
468
330
103
48
949
16%
Harrow
259
314
94
59
726
21%
Havering
157
206
190
124
677
46%
Hillingdon
396
318
65
118
897
20%
Hounslow
696
362
114
10
1,182
10%
Islington
335
301
79
40
755
16%
Kensington and Chelsea
156
85
77
77
395
39%
Kingston upon Thames
133
107
31
34
305
21%
Lambeth
790
571
198
58
1,617
16%
Lewisham
604
794
216
42
1,656
16%
Merton
246
176
49
60
531
21%
Newham
1,095
1,058
387
54
2,594
17%
Redbridge
403
277
81
60
821
17%
Richmond upon Thames
203
240
46
48
537
18%
Southwark
901
1,136
396
96
2,529
19%
Sutton
379
299
25
20
723
6%
Tower Hamlets
2,159
1,962
832
171
5,124
20%
Waltham Forest
377
476
186
69
1,108
23%
Wandsworth
755
1,282
301
123
2,461
17%
Westminster
505
597
476
126
1,704
35%
London
18,917 17,779 6,641
2,415
45,752
20%
Borough
Number of Bedrooms 1
2
3
4+
Total
% 3 or more
Barking and Dagenham
45
55
48
27
175
43%
Barnet
140
186
131
13
470
31%
Bexley
34
112
22
12
180
19%
Brent
111
122
45
3
281
17%
Bromley
35
43
10
5
93
16%
Camden
52
55
36
7
150
29%
City of London
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Croydon
80
167
84
3
334
26%
Ealing
179
168
78
31
456
24%
Enfield
56
125
65
56
302
40%
Greenwich
144
211
88
5
448
21%
Hackney
91
122
43
25
281
24%
Hammersmith and Fulham 54
50
8
0
112
7%
Haringey
116
38
18
16
188
18%
Harrow
2
2
0
0
4
0%
Havering
9
58
36
0
103
35%
Hillingdon
14
36
9
0
59
15%
Hounslow
148
110
25
0
283
9%
Islington
36
29
23
23
111
41%
Kensington and Chelsea
2
11
4
6
23
43%
Kingston upon Thames
7
5
3
0
15
20%
Lambeth
293
132
99
15
539
21%
Lewisham
67
133
80
23
303
34%
Merton
23
29
21
1
74
30%
Newham
92
157
96
20
365
32%
Redbridge
25
48
3
2
78
6%
Richmond upon Thames
21
18
2
0
41
5%
Southwark
183
223
141
46
593
32%
Sutton
22
1
0
0
23
0%
Tower Hamlets
402
489
358
154
1,403
36%
Waltham Forest
46
152
72
37
307
36%
Wandsworth
179
179
18
2
378
5%
Westminster
47
67
38
4
156
27%
London
2,755
3,333
1,704
536
8,328
27%
Borough
New build
Conversion
Change of use
Total
Lost
Gained
Net
Lost
Gained
Net
Lost
Gained
Net
Lost
gained
Net
Barking and Dagenham
0
556
556
6
15
9
0
30
30
6
601
595
Barnet
69
1,861
1,792
87
195
108
0
328
328
156
2,384
2,228
Bexley
13
796
783
11
17
6
1
28
27
25
841
816
Brent
2
1,040
1,038
111
141
30
1
297
296
114
1,478
1,364
Bromley
95
498
403
24
50
26
2
487
485
121
1,035
914
Camden
19
623
604
80
97
17
2
587
585
101
1,307
1,206
City of London
0
0
0
1
2
1
4
10
6
5
12
7
Croydon
45
1,456
1,411
110
319
209
4
1,204
1,200 159
2,979
2,820
Ealing
228
1,033
805
159
332
173
9
201
192
396
1,566
1,170
Enfield
55
534
479
52
109
57
12
379
367
119
1,022
903
Greenwich
59
2,321
2,262
34
45
11
1
170
169
94
2,536
2,442
Hackney
77
1,091
1,014
96
160
64
4
119
115
177
1,370
1,193
Hammersmith and Fulham
9
377
368
336
476
140
1
477
476
346
1,330
984
Haringey
69
511
442
139
211
72
4
227
223
212
949
737
Harrow
20
392
372
46
90
44
5
244
239
71
726
655
Havering
64
493
429
10
21
11
1
163
162
75
677
602
Hillingdon
25
555
530
21
37
16
1
305
304
47
897
850
Hounslow
27
638
611
5
35
30
0
509
509
32
1,182
1,150
Islington
17
376
359
57
88
31
1
291
290
75
755
680
Kensington and Chelsea
31
165
134
151
141
-10
19
89
70
201
395
194
Kingston upon Thames
18
126
108
12
35
23
1
144
143
31
305
274
Lambeth
388
1,087
699
103
152
49
1
378
377
492
1,617
1,125
Lewisham
32
1,351
1,319
45
77
32
0
228
228
77
1,656
1,579
Merton
34
259
225
44
64
20
2
208
206
80
531
451
Newham
3
2,360
2,357
61
128
67
3
106
103
67
2,594
2,527
Redbridge
7
474
467
33
79
46
1
268
267
41
821
780
Richmond upon Thames
17
286
269
46
41
-5
0
210
210
63
537
474
Southwark
70
2,356
2,286
37
93
56
1
80
79
108
2,529
2,421
Sutton
17
199
182
49
68
19
5
456
451
71
723
652
Tower Hamlets
205
4,628
4,423
25
43
18
0
453
453
230
5,124
4,894
Waltham Forest
3
785
782
51
126
75
21
197
176
75
1,108
1,033
Wandsworth
48
2,067
2,019
104
158
54
0
236
236
152
2,461
2,309
Westminster
129
1,015
886
220
135
-85
13
554
541
362
1,704
1,342
London
1,895 32,309
30,414 2,366
3,780
1,414
120
9,663
9,543 4,381
45,752
41,371
Borough
Existing Units
Proposed Units 
Net Units
Net % affordable.
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Barking and Dagenham
6
0
0
0
426
96
25
54
420
96
25
54
29
Barnet
156
0
0
0
1,914
48
137
285
1,758
48
137
285
21
Bexley
25
0
0
0
661
54
75
51
636
54
75
51
22
Brent
114
0
0
0
1,197
193
30
58
1,083
193
30
58
21
Bromley
75
0
46
0
942
30
41
22
867
30
-5
22
5
Camden
92
9
0
0
1,157
56
58
36
1,065
47
58
36
12
City of London
5
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
Croydon
156
3
0
0
2,645
45
119
170
2,489
42
119
170
12
Ealing
227
169
0
0
1,110
327
111
18
883
158
111
18
25
Enfield
119
0
0
0
720
47
127
128
601
47
127
128
33
Greenwich
49
45
0
0
2,088
277
151
20
2,039
232
151
20
17
Hackney
128
49
0
0
1,089
69
149
63
961
20
149
63
19
Hammersmith and Fulham
343
3
0
0
1,218
8
55
49
875
5
55
49
11
Haringey
172
40
0
0
761
136
15
37
589
96
15
37
20
Harrow
70
1
0
0
722
2
1
1
652
1
1
1
0
Havering
39
36
0
0
574
39
49
15
535
3
49
15
11
Hillingdon
47
0
0
0
838
4
40
15
791
4
40
15
7
Hounslow
7
25
0
0
899
195
64
24
892
170
64
24
22
Islington
63
12
0
0
644
102
9
0
581
90
9
0
15
Kensington and Chelsea
201
0
0
0
372
11
5
7
171
11
5
7
12
Kingston upon Thames
31
0
0
0
290
13
2
0
259
13
2
0
5
Lambeth
145
347
0
0
1,078
173
285
81
933
-174
285
81
17
Lewisham
77
0
0
0
1,353
110
119
74
1,276
110
119
74
19
Merton
80
0
0
0
457
7
55
12
377
7
55
12
16
Newham
67
0
0
0
2,229
70
213
82
2,162
70
213
82
14
Redbridge
40
0
1
0
743
14
2
62
703
14
1
62
10
Richmond upon Thames
63
0
0
0
496
24
11
6
433
24
11
6
9
Southwark
67
41
0
0
1,936
412
159
22
1,869
371
159
22
23
Sutton
58
13
0
0
700
23
0
0
642
10
0
0
2
Tower Hamlets
89
124
0
17
3,721
548
368
487
3,632
424
368
470
26
Waltham Forest
75
0
0
0
801
0
145
162
726
0
145
162
30
Wandsworth
152
0
0
0
2,083
33
283
62
1,931
33
283
62
16
Westminster
362
0
0
0
1,548
69
70
17
1,186
69
70
17
12
London
3,400
917
47
17
37,424
3,235
2,973
2,120
34,024
2,318
2,926
2,103
18
Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Borough
Existing Units
Proposed Units 
Net Units
Net % affordable.
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Barking and Dagenham
0
0
0
0
359
96
25
54
359
96
25
54
33
Barnet
12
0
0
0
1,214
26
137
285
1,202
26
137
285
27
Bexley
6
0
0
0
546
54
75
42
540
54
75
42
24
Brent
0
0
0
0
713
187
30
49
713
187
30
49
27
Bromley
2
0
46
0
246
30
41
22
244
30
-5
22
16
Camden
11
0
0
0
438
39
58
36
427
39
58
36
24
City of London
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Croydon
13
0
0
0
827
34
111
159
814
34
111
159
27
Ealing
72
167
0
0
502
322
111
18
430
155
111
18
40
Enfield
31
0
0
0
222
47
127
128
191
47
127
128
61
Greenwich
6
45
0
0
1,892
265
151
17
1,886
220
151
17
17
Hackney
4
45
0
0
677
66
147
63
673
21
147
63
26
Hammersmith and Fulham
19
0
0
0
194
3
53
49
175
3
53
49
38
Haringey
3
40
0
0
184
136
15
37
181
96
15
37
45
Harrow
5
0
0
0
303
0
1
1
298
0
1
1
1
Havering
0
36
0
0
273
39
48
0
273
3
48
0
16
Hillingdon
5
0
0
0
391
4
40
15
386
4
40
15
13
Hounslow
0
25
0
0
280
185
61
24
280
160
61
24
47
Islington
0
10
0
0
165
95
9
0
165
85
9
0
36
Kensington and Chelsea
3
0
0
0
110
0
5
7
107
0
5
7
10
Kingston upon Thames
0
0
0
0
37
13
2
0
37
13
2
0
29
Lambeth
59
345
0
0
449
165
285
72
390
-180
285
72
31
Lewisham
0
0
0
0
981
106
119
71
981
106
119
71
23
Merton
0
0
0
0
12
4
55
12
12
4
55
12
86
Newham
0
0
0
0
1,894
57
207
82
1,894
57
207
82
15
Redbridge
0
0
0
0
325
10
0
62
325
10
0
62
18
Richmond upon Thames
7
0
0
0
162
18
11
6
155
18
11
6
18
Southwark
20
41
0
0
1,671
411
159
22
1,651
370
159
22
25
Sutton
7
4
0
0
150
12
0
0
143
8
0
0
5
Tower Hamlets
33
124
0
17
3,116
545
358
487
3,083
421
358
470
29
Waltham Forest
1
0
0
0
432
0
137
162
431
0
137
162
41
Wandsworth
24
0
0
0
1,422
30
282
57
1,398
30
282
57
21
Westminster
101
0
0
0
1,020
66
63
15
919
66
63
15
14
London
444
882
46
17
21,207
3,065
2,923
2,054
20,763
2,183
2,877
2,037
25

'Major' schemes are those proposing 10 residential units or more.

Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Borough Name
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Total
All tenures Total
Social Rented
Intermediate
Affordable Rent
Social Rented
Intermediate
Affordable Rent
Barking and Dagenham
-101
115
0
19
83
223
96
25
54
14
223
277
514
Barnet
245
49
50
138
67
0
48
137
285
431
253
335
1,019
Bexley
74
156
35
-402
80
174
54
75
51
-274
311
260
297
Brent
294
274
138
7
14
31
193
30
58
494
318
227
1,039
Bromley
-100
23
15
-8
13
5
30
-5
22
-78
31
42
-5
Camden
35
27
0
48
131
3
47
58
36
130
216
39
385
City
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Croydon
296
91
251
23
92
268
42
119
170
361
302
689
1,352
Ealing
101
-36
10
51
145
40
158
111
18
310
220
68
598
Enfield
34
35
33
-37
74
15
47
127
128
44
236
176
456
Greenwich
207
88
3
422
268
130
232
151
20
861
507
153
1,521
Hackney
-185
221
196
94
107
45
20
149
63
-71
477
304
710
Hammersmith and Fulham
2
171
0
14
21
0
5
55
49
21
247
49
317
Haringey
41
181
139
4
35
23
96
15
37
141
231
199
571
Harrow
41
55
0
-213
59
60
1
1
1
-171
115
61
5
Havering
20
22
352
372
95
134
3
49
15
395
166
501
1,062
Hillingdon
59
27
0
55
0
63
4
40
15
118
67
78
263
Hounslow
184
202
63
30
86
56
170
64
24
384
352
143
879
Islington
196
27
0
110
112
0
90
9
0
396
148
0
544
Kensington and Chelsea
-8
61
0
43
24
0
11
5
7
46
90
7
143
Kingston upon Thames
37
19
76
-7
0
0
13
2
0
43
21
76
140
Lambeth
148
143
67
-17
53
102
-174
285
81
-43
481
250
688
Lewisham
241
164
13
157
75
5
110
119
74
508
358
92
958
Merton
34
31
26
30
47
0
7
55
12
71
133
38
242
Newham
320
246
59
190
132
101
70
213
82
580
591
242
1,413
Redbridge
-29
8
1
35
16
47
14
1
62
20
25
110
155
Richmond upon Thames
5
0
0
95
4
0
24
11
6
124
15
6
145
Southwark
-121
169
61
-166
154
132
371
159
22
84
482
215
781
Sutton
157
0
23
-35
32
12
10
0
0
132
32
35
199
Tower Hamlets
477
191
55
303
318
265
424
368
470
1,204
877
790
2,871
Waltham Forest
24
110
147
0
214
456
0
145
162
24
469
765
1,258
Wandsworth
65
56
23
140
278
101
33
283
62
238
617
186
1,041
Westminster
25
23
0
82
98
0
69
70
17
176
191
17
384
London
2,818
2,949
1,836
1,577
2,927
2,491
2,318
2,926
2,103
6,713
8,802
6,430
21,945
Social Rented
Intermediate
Affordable Rent
Social Rented
Intermediate
Affordable Rent
Borough
Total net conventional affordable completions
Affordable as % of net conventional supply
Average over 3 year cycle
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Barking and Dagenham
14
325
175
3%
41%
29%
27%
Barnet
344
205
470
24%
12%
21%
19%
Bexley
265
-148
180
33%
-136%
22%
17%
Brent
706
52
281
44%
5%
21%
26%
Bromley
-62
10
47
-14%
1%
5%
-0%
Camden
62
182
141
12%
19%
12%
14%
City of London
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%
0%
Croydon
638
383
331
42%
19%
12%
21%
Ealing
75
236
287
9%
22%
25%
19%
Enfield
102
52
302
25%
8%
33%
23%
Greenwich
298
820
403
18%
35%
17%
24%
Hackney
232
246
232
18%
17%
19%
18%
Hammersmith and Fulham 173
35
109
20%
9%
11%
14%
Haringey
361
62
148
57%
10%
20%
29%
Harrow
96
-94
3
23%
-10%
0%
0%
Havering
394
601
67
53%
36%
11%
35%
Hillingdon
86
118
59
12%
13%
7%
11%
Hounslow
449
172
258
41%
22%
22%
29%
Islington
223
222
99
25%
21%
15%
21%
Kensington and Chelsea
53
67
23
7%
20%
12%
11%
Kingston upon Thames
132
-7
15
25%
-2%
5%
13%
Lambeth
358
138
192
25%
10%
17%
18%
Lewisham
418
237
303
29%
15%
19%
21%
Merton
91
77
74
19%
12%
16%
16%
Newham
625
423
365
31%
29%
14%
24%
Redbridge
-20
98
77
-12%
19%
10%
11%
Richmond upon Thames
5
99
41
1%
18%
9%
10%
Southwark
109
120
552
9%
9%
23%
16%
Sutton
180
9
10
38%
2%
2%
13%
Tower Hamlets
723
886
1,262
31%
36%
26%
30%
Waltham Forest
281
670
307
40%
69%
30%
47%
Wandsworth
144
519
378
15%
18%
16%
17%
Westminster
48
180
156
7%
20%
12%
13%
London
7,603
6,995
7,347
25%
20%
18%
21%
Table 3.16 Density of Residential Completions by Borough (dwellings per hectare) 2008/09 to 2016/17 Borough
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/03
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Barking and Dagenham
71
72
53
68
48
37
53
96
51
Barnet
35
30
49
46
49
31
35
55
55
Bexley
60
93
44
25
101
53
53
57
68
Brent
76
81
42
70
98
64
107
69
71
Bromley
68
61
86
59
73
97
67
72
71
Camden
83
71
54
59
101
96
67
85
86
City of London
49
45
52
90
67
52
72
70
96
Croydon
47
67
101
80
132
93
48
146
97
Ealing
173
126
194
153
157
112
163
155
107
Enfield
146
238
112
57
166
151
71
130
108
Greenwich
98
64
84
80
93
85
76
68
108
Hackney
98
121
101
75
82
77
97
177
116
Hammersmith and Fulham 110
100
218
171
84
87
61
128
121
Haringey
122
110
239
144
156
102
280
230
126
Harrow
88
66
66
79
97
50
53
96
127
Havering
71
116
79
61
93
83
82
75
128
Hillingdon
159
110
112
102
101
121
101
106
130
Hounslow
159
108
106
148
164
112
125
235
134
Islington
119
184
94
78
55
119
116
119
146
Kensington and Chelsea
131
117
160
125
133
115
132
112
150
Kingston upon Thames
207
209
231
205
223
275
173
185
161
Lambeth
136
188
164
159
134
174
145
284
167
Lewisham
172
165
104
125
163
112
210
225
168
Merton
172
157
290
169
157
200
165
172
180
Newham
274
260
142
195
213
216
187
234
194
Redbridge
145
150
156
141
137
130
110
169
198
Richmond upon Thames
229
183
184
116
178
170
164
159
246
Southwark
267
240
216
163
253
307
280
203
247
Sutton
222
246
198
230
244
235
246
235
260
Tower Hamlets
220
226
372
212
165
190
230
180
320
Waltham Forest
285
199
187
296
207
216
229
294
357
Wandsworth
313
382
404
286
230
310
278
232
372
Westminster
505
500
306
857
376
808
478
298
444
London
127
138
130
114
130
127
120
130
140
| Borough                    | Full   | Outline   |
|----------------------------|--------|-----------|
| Reserved                   |        |           |
| matters                    |        |           |
| Amendments                 |        |           |
| Barking and Dagenham       | 409    | 157       |
| Barnet                     | 1,090  | 14        |
| Bexley                     | 514    | 249       |
| Brent                      | 905    | 144       |
| Bromley                    | 496    | 34        |
| Camden                     | 596    | 0         |
| City of London             | 7      | 0         |
| Croydon                    | 1,237  | 498       |
| Ealing                     | 827    | 1         |
| Enfield                    | 609    | 0         |
| Greenwich                  | 671    | 1,260     |
| Hackney                    | 576    | 8         |
| Hammersmith and Fulham 646 | 0      | 0         |
| Haringey                   | 401    | 0         |
| Harrow                     | 340    | 84        |
| Havering                   | 432    | 35        |
| Hillingdon                 | 370    | 76        |
| Hounslow                   | 544    | 0         |
| Islington                  | 409    | 0         |
| Kensington and Chelsea     | 186    | 0         |
| Kingston upon Thames       | 138    | 13        |
| Lambeth                    | 591    | -38       |
| Lewisham                   | 1,075  | 1         |
| Merton                     | 197    | 63        |
| Newham                     | 2,021  | 0         |
| Redbridge                  | 456    | 24        |
| Richmond upon Thames       | 321    | 0         |
| Southwark                  | 2,382  | 0         |
| Sutton                     | 254    | 0         |
| Tower Hamlets              | 2,739  | 0         |
| Waltham Forest             | 845    | 0         |
| Wandsworth                 | 1,784  | 23        |
| Westminster                | 1,281  | 0         |
| London                     | 25,349 | 2,646     |
| Other Prior                |        |           |
| Approvals                  |        |           |
| All permission             |        |           |
| types                      |        |           |
| S191 Certificate           |        |           |
| of Existing Lawful         |        |           |
| Use                        |        |           |
| Office to                  |        |           |
| Residential Prior          |        |           |
| Approval (Class            |        |           |
| O - formerly J)            |        |           |

Note: Amendments includes Minor Material Amendments and Variations to s106. Other prior approvals includes s192 Certificates of Proposed Lawful Development, but does not include office to residential prior approvals.

Borough
Existing Units
Proposed Units 
Net Units
Net % affordable.
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Barking and Dagenham
9
0
0
0
9
222
0
6
1,213
222
0
6
16
Barnet
419
15
0
0
434
107
100
118
3,046
92
100
118
9
Bexley
71
201
6
0
278
0
332
519
1,764
-201
326
519
27
Brent
258
41
0
0
299
412
288
128
3,071
371
288
128
20
Bromley
150
0
0
0
150
0
35
50
1,023
0
35
50
8
Camden
237
1
5
0
243
252
47
0
808
251
42
0
27
City of London
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
404
0
0
0
0
Croydon
239
8
2
0
249
30
176
139
1,887
22
174
139
15
Ealing
402
151
1
0
554
184
506
307
3,671
33
505
307
19
Enfield
124
2
0
0
126
62
35
0
650
60
35
0
13
Greenwich
50
0
0
0
50
249
138
31
1,773
249
138
31
19
Hackney
311
10
7
0
328
60
186
33
1,797
50
179
33
13
Hammersmith and Fulham
335
0
0
0
335
47
15
0
387
47
15
0
14
Haringey
143
0
0
0
143
21
60
95
1,548
21
60
95
10
Harrow
93
0
0
0
93
1
121
135
1,073
1
121
135
19
Havering
52
28
0
0
80
67
30
9
825
39
30
9
9
Hillingdon
100
2
1
0
103
10
7
31
997
8
6
31
4
Hounslow
90
34
14
0
138
5
354
362
2,310
-29
340
362
23
Islington
64
0
0
0
64
111
23
0
391
111
23
0
26
Kensington and Chelsea
275
2
6
0
283
9
8
0
453
7
2
0
2
Kingston upon Thames
118
0
6
0
124
8
87
41
1,284
8
81
41
9
Lambeth
125
78
0
0
203
297
256
145
2,702
219
256
145
19
Lewisham
109
5
0
0
114
110
65
65
967
105
65
65
20
Merton
141
2
0
0
143
21
26
48
856
19
26
48
10
Newham
80
1
0
0
4,980
144
676
730
4,900
143
676
730
24
Redbridge
90
0
0
0
1,047
45
49
145
957
45
49
145
20
Richmond upon Thames
86
0
0
0
649
42
5
17
563
42
5
17
10
Southwark
92
0
1
0
1,218
279
109
0
1,126
279
108
0
26
Sutton
90
11
0
0
1,151
102
18
158
1,061
91
18
158
20
Tower Hamlets
86
18
0
0
6,624
550
469
760
6,538
532
469
760
21
Waltham Forest
141
182
0
0
2,064
228
184
147
1,923
46
184
147
16
Wandsworth
555
94
24
0
2,808
205
441
274
2,253
111
417
274
26
Westminster
605
51
0
0
3,238
184
408
26
2,633
133
408
26
18
London
5,740
937
73
0
28,322
4,064
5,254
4,519
56,854
3,127
5,181
4,519
18
Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Borough
Existing Units
Proposed Units 
Net Units
Net % affordable.
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Barking and Dagenham
2
0
0
0
1,104
216
0
6
1,102
216
0
6
17
Barnet
108
0
0
0
2,103
70
100
102
1,995
70
100
102
12
Bexley
35
201
0
0
1,493
0
321
519
1,458
-201
321
519
30
Brent
63
40
0
0
2,135
396
288
128
2,072
356
288
128
27
Bromley
9
0
0
0
432
0
34
50
423
0
34
50
17
Camden
22
0
5
0
553
249
47
0
531
249
42
0
35
City of London
0
0
0
0
396
0
0
0
396
0
0
0
0
Croydon
53
0
0
0
713
25
169
139
660
25
169
139
34
Ealing
83
148
0
0
2,792
181
504
305
2,709
33
504
305
24
Enfield
7
0
0
0
230
48
32
0
223
48
32
0
26
Greenwich
2
0
0
0
1,593
249
138
31
1,591
249
138
31
21
Hackney
18
0
1
0
1,567
45
181
33
1,549
45
180
33
14
Hammersmith and Fulham
86
0
0
0
144
47
13
0
58
47
13
0
51
Haringey
5
0
0
0
1,099
17
54
91
1,094
17
54
91
13
Harrow
10
0
0
0
459
0
116
132
449
0
116
132
36
Havering
14
9
0
0
342
51
25
0
328
42
25
0
17
Hillingdon
0
0
0
0
564
0
5
31
564
0
5
31
6
Hounslow
9
34
14
0
1,250
5
354
362
1,241
-29
340
362
35
Islington
0
0
0
0
184
96
23
0
184
96
23
0
39
Kensington and Chelsea
96
0
0
0
420
0
0
0
324
0
0
0
0
Kingston upon Thames
56
0
6
0
1,086
6
87
41
1,030
6
81
41
11
Lambeth
21
76
0
0
2,346
295
256
136
2,325
219
256
136
21
Lewisham
25
1
0
0
737
96
65
65
712
95
65
65
24
Merton
2
0
0
0
434
12
25
48
432
12
25
48
16
Newham
6
0
0
0
4,512
135
676
730
4,506
135
676
730
25
Redbridge
8
0
0
0
582
24
49
136
574
24
49
136
27
Richmond upon Thames
0
0
0
0
361
37
5
15
361
37
5
15
14
Southwark
1
0
0
0
627
257
106
0
626
257
106
0
37
Sutton
42
11
0
0
798
102
18
158
756
91
18
158
26
Tower Hamlets
43
18
0
0
6,156
545
469
760
6,113
527
469
760
22
Waltham Forest
56
182
0
0
1,530
210
184
147
1,474
28
184
147
20
Wandsworth
327
94
24
0
1,891
188
439
274
1,564
94
415
274
33
Westminster
313
31
0
0
2,646
173
399
18
2,333
142
399
18
19
London
1,522
845
50
0
43,279
3,775
5,182
4,457
41,757
2,930
5,132
4,457
23

'Major' schemes are those proposing 10 residential units or more.

Rent
Market
Social Rented
Intermediate Affordable 
Rent
Borough
Number of Bedrooms
% 3+
1
2
3
4+
Total
Barking and Dagenham
585
651
134
80
1,450
15
Barnet
1,484
1,557
566
183
3,790
20
Bexley
903
984
648
151
2,686
30
Brent
2,129
1,498
462
68
4,157
13
Bromley
467
492
130
169
1,258
24
Camden
472
508
255
109
1,344
27
City of London
172
182
47
3
404
12
Croydon
1,233
920
242
76
2,471
13
Ealing
2,261
2,130
546
133
5,070
13
Enfield
300
290
206
75
871
32
Greenwich
892
937
334
78
2,241
18
Hackney
905
922
501
59
2,387
23
Hammersmith and Fulham
254
212
142
176
784
41
Haringey
816
786
227
38
1,867
14
Harrow
771
508
121
23
1,423
10
Havering
513
286
142
42
983
19
Hillingdon
479
431
151
84
1,145
21
Hounslow
1,727
1,002
346
46
3,121
13
Islington
183
325
66
15
589
14
Kensington and Chelsea
289
251
140
65
745
28
Kingston upon Thames
520
640
243
135
1,538
25
Lambeth
1,469
1,527
462
67
3,525
15
Lewisham
596
522
164
34
1,316
15
Merton
429
413
149
101
1,092
23
Newham
2,124
2,135
1,826
445
6,530
35
Redbridge
603
530
138
15
1,286
12
Richmond upon Thames
212
307
134
60
713
27
Southwark
627
679
263
37
1,606
19
Sutton
545
581
234
69
1,429
21
Tower Hamlets
4,219
2,842
1,148
194
8,403
16
Waltham Forest
997
1,147
396
83
2,623
18
Wandsworth
1,499
1,592
492
145
3,728
17
Westminster
1,340
1,385
839
292
3,856
29
London
32,015
29,172
11,894
3,350
76,431
20
Borough
Student hall bedrooms
Care home bedrooms
Hostel / HMO bedrooms
Total rooms
Barking and Dagenham
0
0
0
0
Barnet
0
13
2
15
Bexley
18
80
0
98
Brent
1,665
14
-10
1,669
Bromley
0
-23
7
-16
Camden
-277
0
-64
-341
City of London
0
0
0
0
Croydon
0
-25
123
98
Ealing
459
-39
-68
352
Enfield
-347
-1
8
-340
Greenwich
0
0
0
0
Hackney
0
10
341
351
Hammersmith and Fulham
306
10
0
316
Haringey
0
-15
1
-14
Harrow
0
-8
65
57
Havering
0
42
-12
30
Hillingdon
0
0
123
123
Hounslow
0
-14
0
-14
Islington
0
-16
-4
-20
Kensington and Chelsea
0
50
-103
-53
Kingston upon Thames
17
0
-34
-17
Lambeth
466
0
-13
453
Lewisham
0
0
46
46
Merton
0
0
0
0
Newham
511
-4
6
513
Redbridge
0
45
0
45
Richmond upon Thames
0
5
0
5
Southwark
0
0
-9
-9
Sutton
0
17
40
57
Tower Hamlets
-8
0
19
11
Waltham Forest
0
0
31
31
Wandsworth
0
2
-9
-7
Westminster
-66
-10
13
-63
London
2,744
133
499
3,376
Table 3.22 Density of Residential Approvals by Borough (dwellings per hectare) 2008/09 to 2016/17 Borough
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/03
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Barking and Dagenham
80
134
273
126
67
71
100
217
137
Barnet
110
102
100
70
93
93
81
112
108
Bexley
110
83
80
99
64
98
57
96
100
Brent
133
182
185
146
134
193
151
164
200
Bromley
36
49
52
36
40
31
40
58
51
Camden
136
140
139
181
189
133
188
166
112
City of London
329
235
457
507
447
440
340
316
315
Croydon
131
97
141
154
121
164
102
139
102
Ealing
162
153
142
112
94
119
123
88
187
Enfield
65
72
61
61
91
75
73
119
60
Greenwich
211
145
337
239
233
254
283
201
183
Hackney
200
245
235
284
118
245
416
217
188
Hammersmith and Fulham 187
300
183
243
219
393
262
212
147
Haringey
142
107
117
200
146
109
144
138
153
Harrow
62
83
63
89
92
65
130
116
169
Havering
55
99
122
58
57
46
52
48
78
Hillingdon
91
39
57
72
53
60
87
83
68
Hounslow
158
62
75
103
78
138
130
168
146
Islington
244
271
293
285
193
236
360
167
223
Kensington and Chelsea
133
102
225
192
163
140
189
147
159
Kingston upon Thames
75
64
62
50
34
61
86
53
88
Lambeth
130
195
183
177
226
216
339
205
278
Lewisham
161
229
133
230
127
141
207
154
153
Merton
80
69
65
75
46
76
103
89
93
Newham
378
260
398
316
151
176
297
224
297
Redbridge
87
373
158
108
71
102
111
147
175
Richmond upon Thames
58
46
106
71
54
89
72
91
67
Southwark
334
230
224
211
366
296
222
163
96
Sutton
101
58
57
106
57
149
119
113
112
Tower Hamlets
316
361
296
479
189
455
435
550
372
Waltham Forest
123
121
111
144
128
142
142
107
157
Wandsworth
168
150
206
387
261
212
202
283
241
Westminster
155
199
206
218
195
193
164
186
213
London
139
151
137
165
135
151
171
158
153
| Borough                    | Full   | Outline   |
|----------------------------|--------|-----------|
| Reserved                   |        |           |
| matters                    |        |           |
| Amendments                 |        |           |
| Barking and Dagenham       | 976    | 36        |
| Barnet                     | 1,702  | 74        |
| Bexley                     | 937    | 1,223     |
| Brent                      | 1,782  | 590       |
| Bromley                    | 868    | 15        |
| Camden                     | 694    | 0         |
| City of London             | 173    | 0         |
| Croydon                    | 1,856  | 84        |
| Ealing                     | 2,574  | 764       |
| Enfield                    | 595    | 15        |
| Greenwich                  | 1,848  | 0         |
| Hackney                    | 1,008  | 0         |
| Hammersmith and Fulham 359 | 0      | 0         |
| Haringey                   | 1,440  | 144       |
| Harrow                     | 880    | 0         |
| Havering                   | 510    | 1         |
| Hillingdon                 | 535    | 9         |
| Hounslow                   | 1,898  | 0         |
| Islington                  | 427    | 0         |
| Kensington and Chelsea     | 450    | 0         |
| Kingston upon Thames       | 1,195  | 7         |
| Lambeth                    | 1,384  | 4         |
| Lewisham                   | 1,053  | 0         |
| Merton                     | 796    | 2         |
| Newham                     | 1,849  | 3,508     |
| Redbridge                  | 612    | 2         |
| Richmond upon Thames       | 280    | 0         |
| Southwark                  | 1,302  | 0         |
| Sutton                     | 493    | 0         |
| Tower Hamlets              | 5,394  | 36        |
| Waltham Forest             | 2,058  | 0         |
| Wandsworth                 | 1,316  | 431       |
| Westminster                | 3,047  | 0         |
| London                     | 42,291 | 6,945     |
| Other prior                |        |           |
| approvals                  |        |           |
| All permission             |        |           |
| types                      |        |           |
| S191 Certificate           |        |           |
| of Existing Lawful         |        |           |
| Use                        |        |           |
| Office to                  |        |           |
| Residential Prior          |        |           |
| Approval (Class            |        |           |
| O - formerly J)            |        |           |

Note: Amendments includes Minor Material Amendments and Variations to s106. Other prior approvals includes s192 Certificates of Proposed Lawful Development, but does not include office to residential prior approvals.

Borough
Existing
Proposed
Net
% Aff.
Market
Soc.Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Barking and Dagenham
21
0
0
0
575
20
49
2
554
20
49
2
11
Barnet
286
0
0
0
1,856
195
198
69
1,570
195
198
69
23
Bexley
58
192
0
0
356
0
159
196
298
-192
159
196
35
Brent
212
187
0
0
1,199
238
200
44
987
51
200
44
23
Bromley
73
0
0
0
897
11
43
129
824
11
43
129
18
Camden
107
0
0
0
741
58
19
0
634
58
19
0
11
City of London
0
0
0
0
250
0
0
0
250
0
0
0
0
Croydon
153
34
0
0
2,230
105
125
142
2,077
71
125
142
14
Ealing
210
324
0
0
1,543
292
98
18
1,333
-32
98
18
6
Enfield
131
128
0
0
629
171
70
0
498
43
70
0
18
Greenwich
22
0
0
0
11,346
172
957
2,081
11,324
172
957
2,081
22
Hackney
208
189
1
0
2,065
181
282
81
1,857
-8
281
81
16
Hammersmith and Fulham
193
8
0
0
745
16
38
0
552
8
38
0
8
Haringey
167
0
0
0
2,250
0
39
296
2,083
0
39
296
14
Harrow
65
40
0
0
1,110
1
133
154
1,045
-39
133
154
19
Havering
18
36
0
0
262
9
19
15
244
-27
19
15
3
Hillingdon
36
31
0
0
421
23
18
4
385
-8
18
4
4
Hounslow
8
34
14
0
1,419
57
431
273
1,411
23
417
273
34
Islington
77
28
0
0
709
246
47
0
632
218
47
0
30
Kensington and Chelsea
269
2
0
0
540
11
0
0
271
9
0
0
3
Kingston upon Thames
39
0
0
0
287
23
25
9
248
23
25
9
19
Lambeth
104
76
0
0
3,121
227
296
177
3,017
151
296
177
17
Lewisham
72
0
30
0
1,017
64
120
40
945
64
90
40
17
Merton
85
3
0
0
476
11
0
0
391
8
0
0
2
Newham
197
0
0
0
2,632
12
217
223
2,435
12
217
223
16
Redbridge
57
0
1
0
853
62
22
73
796
62
21
73
16
Richmond upon Thames
61
0
0
0
455
74
37
0
394
74
37
0
22
Southwark
57
51
0
0
1,568
186
116
6
1,511
135
116
6
15
Sutton
63
20
0
0
539
111
18
0
476
91
18
0
19
Tower Hamlets
78
18
0
0
5,348
87
387
493
5,270
69
387
493
15
Waltham Forest
72
20
0
0
569
106
93
11
497
86
93
11
28
Wandsworth
471
0
24
0
8,286
320
754
330
7,815
320
730
330
15
Westminster
348
91
0
0
2,739
155
342
41
2,391
64
342
41
16
London
4,018
1,512
70
0
59,033
3,244
5,352
4,907
55,015
1,732
5,282
4,907
18
Borough
Existing
Proposed
Net
% Aff.
Market
Soc.Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Barking and Dagenham
18
0
0
0
521
14
49
0
503
14
49
0
11
Barnet
149
0
0
0
1,382
195
198
69
1,233
195
198
69
27
Bexley
38
192
0
0
207
0
159
187
169
-192
159
187
48
Brent
86
187
0
0
849
238
197
44
763
51
197
44
28
Bromley
10
0
0
0
544
11
42
129
534
11
42
129
25
Camden
9
0
0
0
408
55
19
0
399
55
19
0
16
City of London
0
0
0
0
231
0
0
0
231
0
0
0
0
Croydon
20
33
0
0
757
96
120
137
737
63
120
137
30
Ealing
119
318
0
0
863
292
98
17
744
-26
98
17
11
Enfield
37
128
0
0
287
137
67
0
250
9
67
0
23
Greenwich
8
0
0
0
11,219
171
957
2,078
11,211
171
957
2,078
22
Hackney
47
180
1
0
1,589
173
281
81
1,542
-7
280
81
19
Hammersmith and Fulham
8
8
0
0
290
16
34
0
282
8
34
0
13
Haringey
6
0
0
0
1,802
0
32
296
1,796
0
32
296
15
Harrow
9
40
0
0
834
0
133
148
825
-40
133
148
23
Havering
0
36
0
0
9
9
14
0
9
-27
14
0
0
Hillingdon
0
0
0
0
255
23
18
4
255
23
18
4
15
Hounslow
6
34
14
0
1,061
57
431
273
1,055
23
417
273
40
Islington
7
28
0
0
385
239
47
0
378
211
47
0
41
Kensington and Chelsea
57
0
0
0
249
0
0
0
192
0
0
0
0
Kingston upon Thames
1
0
0
0
97
23
25
9
96
23
25
9
37
Lambeth
18
76
0
0
2,626
226
296
168
2,608
150
296
168
19
Lewisham
17
0
30
0
760
56
120
40
743
56
90
40
20
Merton
2
0
0
0
125
0
0
0
123
0
0
0
0
Newham
0
0
0
0
2,349
3
217
223
2,349
3
217
223
16
Redbridge
3
0
0
0
579
48
20
73
576
48
20
73
20
Richmond upon Thames
0
0
0
0
240
74
37
0
240
74
37
0
32
Southwark
9
51
0
0
1,290
183
116
6
1,281
132
116
6
17
Sutton
28
11
0
0
134
102
18
0
106
91
18
0
51
Tower Hamlets
30
18
0
0
5,172
83
387
493
5,142
65
387
493
16
Waltham Forest
8
20
0
0
146
60
93
11
138
40
93
11
51
Wandsworth
290
0
24
0
7,796
320
752
326
7,506
320
728
326
15
Westminster
174
91
0
0
2,301
155
342
33
2,127
64
342
33
17
London
1,214
1,451
69
0
47,357
3,059
5,319
4,845
46,143
1,608
5,250
4,845
20

'Major' schemes are those proposing 10 residential units or more.

| Borough                    | Full   | Outline   |
|----------------------------|--------|-----------|
| Reserved                   |        |           |
| matters                    |        |           |
| Amendments                 |        |           |
| Barking and Dagenham       | 593    | 0         |
| Barnet                     | 1,333  | 149       |
| Bexley                     | 410    | 25        |
| Brent                      | 817    | 0         |
| Bromley                    | 881    | 0         |
| Camden                     | 597    | 0         |
| City of London             | 19     | 0         |
| Croydon                    | 1,537  | 75        |
| Ealing                     | 810    | 0         |
| Enfield                    | 539    | 9         |
| Greenwich                  | 1,570  | 12,898    |
| Hackney                    | 820    | 15        |
| Hammersmith and Fulham 519 | 0      | 0         |
| Haringey                   | 1,275  | 1,056     |
| Harrow                     | 1,176  | 30        |
| Havering                   | 110    | 0         |
| Hillingdon                 | 255    | 0         |
| Hounslow                   | 1,821  | 0         |
| Islington                  | 768    | 0         |
| Kensington and Chelsea     | 270    | 0         |
| Kingston upon Thames       | 222    | 0         |
| Lambeth                    | 1,563  | 0         |
| Lewisham                   | 1,084  | 0         |
| Merton                     | 305    | 11        |
| Newham                     | 1,232  | 0         |
| Redbridge                  | 453    | 0         |
| Richmond upon Thames       | 432    | 0         |
| Southwark                  | 930    | 800       |
| Sutton                     | 386    | 0         |
| Tower Hamlets              | 3,651  | 508       |
| Waltham Forest             | 453    | 0         |
| Wandsworth                 | 5,452  | 0         |
| Westminster                | 2,715  | 0         |
| London                     | 34,998 | 15,576    |
| Other prior                |        |           |
| approvals                  |        |           |
| All permission             |        |           |
| types                      |        |           |
| S191 Certificate           |        |           |
| of Existing Lawful         |        |           |
| Use                        |        |           |
| Office to                  |        |           |
| Residential Prior          |        |           |
| Approval (Class            |        |           |
| O - formerly J)            |        |           |

Note: Amendments includes Minor Material Amendments and Variations to s106. Other prior approvals includes s192 Certificates of Proposed Lawful Development, but does not include office to residential prior approvals.

Borough
Number of Bedrooms 1
2
3
4+
Total
% 3+
Barking and Dagenham
185
366
5
90
646
15
Barnet
722
907
420
269
2,318
30
Bexley
165
374
134
38
711
24
Brent
721
629
296
35
1,681
20
Bromley
323
441
102
214
1,080
29
Camden
289
293
169
67
818
29
City of London
112
109
29
0
250
12
Croydon
1,472
807
226
97
2,602
12
Ealing
845
765
285
56
1,951
17
Enfield
329
313
171
57
870
26
Greenwich
7,272
5,121
2,153
10
14,556
15
Hackney
954
1,105
425
125
2,609
21
Hammersmith and Fulham
275
259
126
139
799
33
Haringey
1,530
742
225
88
2,585
12
Harrow
582
645
151
20
1,398
12
Havering
129
96
46
34
305
26
Hillingdon
161
173
73
59
466
28
Hounslow
925
850
352
53
2,180
19
Islington
310
530
123
39
1,002
16
Kensington and Chelsea
215
151
117
68
551
34
Kingston upon Thames
133
124
53
34
344
25
Lambeth
1,670
1,614
442
95
3,821
14
Lewisham
512
545
156
28
1,241
15
Merton
186
191
62
48
487
23
Newham
1,207
1,012
743
122
3,084
28
Redbridge
392
504
102
12
1,010
11
Richmond upon Thames
138
210
106
112
566
39
Southwark
658
851
313
54
1,876
20
Sutton
367
183
89
29
668
18
Tower Hamlets
3,502
2,183
571
59
6,315
10
Waltham Forest
359
304
95
21
779
15
Wandsworth
2,740
5,015
1,595
340
9,690
20
Westminster
1,120
1,176
733
248
3,277
30
London
27,735
25,768
10,555
3,063
67,121
19
Number of Bedrooms
Borough
1
2
3
4+
Not known
Total
% 3+
Barking and D.
2,673
7,054
3,668
1,625
0
15,020
35
Barnet
8,431
11,145
3,930
1,359
18
24,883
21
Bexley
1,243
1,501
817
225
1
3,787
28
Brent
3,961
4,115
1,717
304
0
10,097
20
Bromley
1,006
1,341
294
399
2
3,042
23
Camden
2,530
2,987
1,332
434
0
7,283
24
City of London
411
377
81
20
0
889
11
Croydon
3,795
2,778
684
382
0
7,639
14
Ealing
5,565
7,209
2,476
837
0
16,087
21
Enfield
731
1,086
617
262
0
2,696
33
Greenwich
13,542
11,461
4,493
403
770
30,669
16
Hackney
4,046
4,180
2,077
469
588
11,360
22
Hammersmith and F. 6,792
5,043
2,407
685
1,472
16,399
19
Haringey
2,344
1,822
666
245
12
5,089
18
Harrow
2,255
2,223
410
247
0
5,135
13
Havering
978
843
449
178
0
2,448
26
Hillingdon
1,842
1,915
481
210
0
4,448
16
Hounslow
3,670
3,177
1,024
219
31
8,121
15
Islington
1,744
1,933
578
150
0
4,405
17
Kensington and C.
1,515
1,496
934
406
0
4,351
31
Kingston
1,052
1,038
330
243
0
2,663
22
Lambeth
3,626
4,491
1,493
279
0
9,889
18
Lewisham
3,244
3,662
908
283
3,500
11,597
10
Merton
771
947
253
203
0
2,174
21
Newham
7,132
7,454
4,378
775
4,693
24,432
21
Redbridge
1,277
1,140
301
136
1
2,855
15
Richmond
572
787
294
184
1
1,838
26
Southwark
5,335
6,861
2,536
854
1
15,587
22
Sutton
1,254
1,444
485
149
0
3,332
19
Tower Hamlets
13,356
10,631
4,529
706
650
29,872
18
Waltham Forest
1,463
1,879
703
109
0
4,154
20
Wandsworth
6,179
9,609
3,628
918
1
20,335
22
Westminster
3,565
3,799
2,659
738
66
10,827
31
London
117,901 127,430 51,635
14,636
11,807
323,409 20
Borough
Not Started
Started
Total Pipeline
Existing
Proposed
Net
Existing
Proposed
Net
Existing
Proposed
Net
Barking and Dagenham
9
2,713
2,704
1,597
12,307
10,710
1,606
15,020
13,414
Barnet
739
12,309
11,570
2,824
12,574
9,750
3,563
24,883
21,320
Bexley
293
2,862
2,569
255
925
670
548
3,787
3,239
Brent
281
4,023
3,742
691
6,074
5,383
972
10,097
9,125
Bromley
160
1,330
1,170
113
1,712
1,599
273
3,042
2,769
Camden
366
2,814
2,448
1,087
4,469
3,382
1,453
7,283
5,830
City of London
3
41
38
13
848
835
16
889
873
Croydon
223
3,368
3,145
182
4,271
4,089
405
7,639
7,234
Ealing
1,307
9,223
7,916
3,806
6,864
3,058
5,113
16,087
10,974
Enfield
97
1,139
1,042
516
1,557
1,041
613
2,696
2,083
Greenwich
479
2,561
2,082
2,326
28,108
25,782
2,805
30,669
27,864
Hackney
2,240
6,358
4,118
2,911
5,002
2,091
5,151
11,360
6,209
Hammersmith and Fulham
1,119
10,750
9,631
715
5,649
4,934
1,834
16,399
14,565
Haringey
183
1,693
1,510
145
3,396
3,251
328
5,089
4,761
Harrow
134
2,736
2,602
181
2,399
2,218
315
5,135
4,820
Havering
165
1,865
1,700
382
583
201
547
2,448
1,901
Hillingdon
123
1,582
1,459
77
2,866
2,789
200
4,448
4,248
Hounslow
185
5,002
4,817
107
3,119
3,012
292
8,121
7,829
Islington
82
353
271
398
4,052
3,654
480
4,405
3,925
Kensington and Chelsea
669
1,186
517
337
3,165
2,828
1,006
4,351
3,345
Kingston upon Thames
144
1,839
1,695
60
824
764
204
2,663
2,459
Lambeth
133
1,837
1,704
1,324
8,052
6,728
1,457
9,889
8,432
Lewisham
87
8,505
8,418
354
3,092
2,738
441
11,597
11,156
Merton
147
1,325
1,178
133
849
716
280
2,174
1,894
Newham
28
16,334
16,306
412
8,098
7,686
440
24,432
23,992
Redbridge
101
1,122
1,021
78
1,733
1,655
179
2,855
2,676
Richmond upon Thames
120
816
696
104
1,022
918
224
1,838
1,614
Southwark
2,843
6,085
3,242
1,572
9,502
7,930
4,415
15,587
11,172
Sutton
62
1,471
1,409
732
1,861
1,129
794
3,332
2,538
Tower Hamlets
111
7,558
7,447
1,095
22,314
21,219
1,206
29,872
28,666
Waltham Forest
273
2,681
2,408
72
1,473
1,401
345
4,154
3,809
Wandsworth
798
4,354
3,556
1,190
15,981
14,791
1,988
20,335
18,347
Westminster
910
4,050
3,140
729
6,777
6,048
1,639
10,827
9,188
London
14,614
131,885
117,271
26,518
191,518
165,000
41,132
323,403
282,271
Borough
Existing
Proposed
Net
% Aff.
Market
Soc.Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Barking and Dagenham
469
1,137
0
0
9,310
2,640
2,616
454
8,841
1,503
2,616
454
34
Barnet
1,559
2,004
0
0
20,875
2,155
1,331
522
19,316
151
1,331
522
9
Bexley
149
393
6
0
2,714
0
417
656
2,565
-393
411
656
21
Brent
459
513
0
0
7,461
1,325
1,038
273
7,002
812
1,038
273
23
Bromley
273
0
0
0
2,739
66
110
127
2,466
66
110
127
11
Camden
812
601
40
0
5,418
1,358
442
65
4,606
757
402
65
21
City of London
16
0
0
0
862
0
0
27
846
0
0
27
3
Croydon
314
88
2
1
6,605
181
430
423
6,291
93
428
422
13
Ealing
1,440
3,627
46
0
11,062
2,809
1,870
346
9,622
-818
1,824
346
12
Enfield
257
356
0
0
2,220
228
155
93
1,963
-128
155
93
6
Greenwich
170
2,332
0
303
24,463
1,651
2,123
2,432
24,293
-681
2,123
2,129
13
Hackney
750
4,124
276
1
7,997
1,585
1,598
180
7,247
-2,539
1,322
179
-17
Hammersmith and Fulham
1,212
621
1
0
13,488
1,405
1,399
107
12,276
784
1,398
107
16
Haringey
320
8
0
0
4,418
104
225
342
4,098
96
225
342
14
Harrow
210
105
0
0
4,465
5
309
356
4,255
-100
309
356
12
Havering
130
417
0
0
2,282
92
58
16
2,152
-325
58
16
-13
Hillingdon
166
33
1
0
4,139
119
91
99
3,973
86
90
99
6
Hounslow
210
68
14
0
6,520
213
750
638
6,310
145
736
638
19
Islington
202
278
0
0
3,056
800
356
193
2,854
522
356
193
27
Kensington and Chelsea
588
412
6
0
3,418
721
207
5
2,830
309
201
5
15
Kingston upon Thames
196
1
1
6
2,424
24
168
47
2,228
23
167
41
9
Lambeth
444
1,013
0
0
7,403
1,138
750
598
6,959
125
750
598
17
Lewisham
174
191
30
46
9,277
580
802
938
9,103
389
772
892
18
Merton
236
44
0
0
1,924
92
88
70
1,688
48
88
70
11
Newham
191
249
0
0
19,289
1,207
2,405
1,531
19,098
958
2,405
1,531
20
Redbridge
175
4
0
0
2,372
220
118
145
2,197
216
118
145
18
Richmond upon Thames
224
0
0
0
1,655
126
40
17
1,431
126
40
17
11
Southwark
724
3,690
1
0
11,331
2,497
1,516
243
10,607
-1,193
1,515
243
5
Sutton
130
637
27
0
2,686
268
149
229
2,556
-369
122
229
-1
Tower Hamlets
348
858
0
0
23,744
2,366
1,696
2,066
23,396
1,508
1,696
2,066
18
Waltham Forest
147
198
0
0
3,275
267
350
262
3,128
69
350
262
18
Wandsworth
1,248
331
151
258
16,907
817
1,733
878
15,659
486
1,582
620
15
Westminster
1,375
264
0
0
9,001
738
945
143
7,626
474
945
143
17
London
15,318
24,597
602
615
254,800
27,797
26,285
14,521
239,482
3,200
25,683
13,906
15
Borough
Existing
Proposed
Net
% Aff.
Market
Soc.Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Market
Soc. Rent
Int.
Aff. Rent
Barking and Dagenham
461
1,137
0
0
9,034
2,620
2,616
452
8,573
1,483
2,616
452
35
Barnet
1,008
1,989
0
0
18,189
2,118
1,331
506
17,181
129
1,331
506
10
Bexley
78
393
0
0
2,002
0
406
656
1,924
-393
406
656
26
Brent
130
512
0
0
5,686
1,295
1,035
273
5,556
783
1,035
273
27
Bromley
33
0
0
0
1,388
65
109
127
1,355
65
109
127
18
Camden
327
597
39
0
3,712
1,344
442
65
3,385
747
403
65
26
City of London
14
0
0
0
783
0
0
27
769
0
0
27
3
Croydon
64
81
0
1
3,123
177
385
420
3,059
96
385
419
23
Ealing
993
3,619
45
0
8,799
2,806
1,868
341
7,806
-813
1,823
341
15
Enfield
119
324
0
0
1,444
176
150
93
1,325
-148
150
93
7
Greenwich
95
2,332
0
303
23,919
1,645
2,117
2,432
23,824
-687
2,117
2,129
13
Hackney
336
4,115
269
1
6,740
1,568
1,592
180
6,404
-2,547
1,323
179
-19
Hammersmith and Fulham
914
621
0
0
12,429
1,401
1,397
107
11,515
780
1,397
107
17
Haringey
61
7
0
0
3,371
84
206
336
3,310
77
206
336
16
Harrow
32
105
0
0
2,668
2
304
341
2,636
-103
304
341
17
Havering
33
398
0
0
1,396
68
53
6
1,363
-330
53
6
-25
Hillingdon
10
31
0
0
3,111
109
86
99
3,101
78
86
99
8
Hounslow
69
68
14
0
4,434
212
749
638
4,365
144
735
638
26
Islington
61
274
0
0
2,325
769
356
193
2,264
495
356
193
32
Kensington and Chelsea
205
410
0
0
2,850
719
192
5
2,645
309
192
5
16
Kingston upon Thames
63
0
0
6
1,601
22
168
47
1,538
22
168
41
13
Lambeth
307
1,010
0
0
6,350
1,136
750
598
6,043
126
750
598
20
Lewisham
81
152
30
46
8,381
570
802
936
8,300
418
772
890
20
Merton
24
40
0
0
1,088
72
87
70
1,064
32
87
70
15
Newham
151
249
0
0
18,747
1,171
2,396
1,531
18,596
922
2,396
1,531
21
Redbridge
53
0
0
0
1,404
187
118
136
1,351
187
118
136
25
Richmond upon Thames
21
0
0
0
790
111
40
15
769
111
40
15
18
Southwark
566
3,688
0
0
10,056
2,463
1,508
243
9,490
-1,225
1,508
243
5
Sutton
69
637
27
0
1,807
268
149
229
1,738
-369
122
229
-1
Tower Hamlets
273
854
0
0
22,116
2,355
1,696
2,066
21,843
1,501
1,696
2,066
19
Waltham Forest
62
198
0
0
2,481
210
350
262
2,419
12
350
262
21
Wandsworth
852
331
151
258
15,211
781
1,731
866
14,359
450
1,580
608
16
Westminster
717
243
0
0
7,189
717
931
135
6,472
474
931
135
19
London
8,282
24,415
575
615
214,624
27,241
26,120
14,431
206,342
2,826
25,545
13,816
17

'Major' schemes are those proposing 10 residential units or more.

| Borough                       | Full    | Outline   |
|-------------------------------|---------|-----------|
| Reserved                      |         |           |
| matters                       |         |           |
| Amendments                    |         |           |
| Barking and Dagenham          | 2,332   | 10,290    |
| Barnet                        | 7,243   | 10,994    |
| Bexley                        | 1,509   | 1,225     |
| Brent                         | 3,907   | 2,757     |
| Bromley                       | 2,078   | 211       |
| Camden                        | 4,386   | 576       |
| City of London                | 482     | 0         |
| Croydon                       | 4,358   | 564       |
| Ealing                        | 4,237   | 4,669     |
| Enfield                       | 1,422   | 516       |
| Greenwich                     | 7,212   | 19,148    |
| Hackney                       | 1,641   | 2,663     |
| Hammersmith and Fulham 10,459 | 2,689   | 1,076     |
| Haringey                      | 3,292   | 1,318     |
| Harrow                        | 2,202   | 1,067     |
| Havering                      | 1,539   | 168       |
| Hillingdon                    | 1,583   | 1,642     |
| Hounslow                      | 4,019   | 1,393     |
| Islington                     | 2,738   | 930       |
| Kensington and Chelsea        | 2,220   | 344       |
| Kingston upon Thames          | 1,952   | 14        |
| Lambeth                       | 4,834   | 840       |
| Lewisham                      | 2,772   | 7,502     |
| Merton                        | 1,688   | 14        |
| Newham                        | 8,374   | 8,465     |
| Redbridge                     | 1,869   | 2         |
| Richmond upon Thames          | 987     | 2         |
| Southwark                     | 7,030   | 3,345     |
| Sutton                        | 1,438   | 9         |
| Tower Hamlets                 | 16,216  | 4,846     |
| Waltham Forest                | 3,262   | 311       |
| Wandsworth                    | 9,945   | 3,074     |
| Westminster                   | 8,623   | 0         |
| London                        | 137,849 | 91,588    |
| Other prior                   |         |           |
| approvals                     |         |           |
| All permission                |         |           |
| types                         |         |           |
| Prior Approval                |         |           |
| (Class O -                    |         |           |
| formerly J)                   |         |           |

Note: Amendments includes Minor Material Amendments and Variations to s106. Other prior approvals includes s192 Certificates of Proposed Lawful Development, but does not include office to residential prior approvals.

| Borough                | Not Started   | Started   | Total   |
|------------------------|---------------|-----------|---------|
| Barking and Dagenham   | 18            | 176       | 194     |
| Barnet                 | 120           | -124      | -4      |
| Bexley                 | 98            | 234       | 332     |
| Brent                  | -8            | 2,341     | 2,333   |
| Bromley                | 146           | -89       | 57      |
| Camden                 | -300          | 727       | 427     |
| City of London         | 0             | -202      | -202    |
| Croydon                | 0             | 4         | 4       |
| Ealing                 | 38            | 326       | 364     |
| Enfield                | 18            | -266      | -248    |
| Greenwich              | -63           | 745       | 682     |
| Hackney                | 270           | 313       | 583     |
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 111           | -9        | 102     |
| Haringey               | -1            | -21       | -22     |
| Harrow                 | 185           | 32        | 217     |
| Havering               | -21           | 0         | -21     |
| Hillingdon             | 109           | 254       | 363     |
| Hounslow               | -11           | 32        | 21      |
| Islington              | -30           | 1,081     | 1,051   |
| Kensington and Chelsea | 107           | -56       | 51      |
| Kingston upon Thames   | 551           | 479       | 1,030   |
| Lambeth                | 1,492         | 556       | 2,048   |
| Lewisham               | 100           | 923       | 1,023   |
| Merton                 | 0             | -78       | -78     |
| Newham                 | 160           | 1,128     | 1,288   |
| Redbridge              | 67            | 0         | 67      |
| Richmond upon Thames   | -24           | 0         | -24     |
| Southwark              | -44           | 1,000     | 956     |
| Sutton                 | 60            | 257       | 317     |
| Tower Hamlets          | 44            | 568       | 612     |
| Waltham Forest         | -8            | 570       | 562     |
| Wandsworth             | 294           | -36       | 258     |
| Westminster            | -27           | -473      | -500    |
| London                 | 3,451         | 10,392    | 13,843  |

## Affordable Housing Delivery Monitor

3.170	The measure of affordable housing delivery used in the Mayor's London 
Housing Strategy is very different from the measure of housing provision used in the London Plan. Affordable housing delivery is measured in gross terms and includes acquisitions of existing private sector homes for use as affordable housing. Therefore it is often higher than the net provision of affordable housing in planning terms reported in the main body of the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) and the Housing Provision Monitor.
3.171	The data source for monitoring affordable housing delivery targets is the set of 
statistics on affordable housing supply published by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government. MHCLG no longer publish regional statistics but have provided the GLA with updated figures at London level.
3.172	These statistics are compiled from a range of sources. The vast majority of 
delivery in London in recent years has been funded by the Greater London Authority, but the statistics also include units provided without any public funding and a number of assisted purchases.
3.173	Table 3.34 shows affordable housing delivery in London by type in the five 
years 2012/13 to 2016/17. Over this period a total of 49,270 affordable homes were delivered, of which 14,020 were social rented housing,18,490 Affordable Rent and 16,760 intermediate housing.
3.174	Figure 3.7 shows the trend in total affordable housing delivery in London since 
1991/92, while table 3.27 shows delivery by borough and type in 2015/16. 

| Affordable Housing              | 2012/13   | 2013/14   | 2014/15   | 2015/16   | 2016/17   |
|---------------------------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| Social Rent                     | 5,060     | 3,590     | 3,160     | 1,060     | 1,150     |
| Affordable Rent                 | 480       | 2,400     | 9,630     | 2,810     | 3,170     |
| Intermediate Affordable Housing | 3,360     | 3,390     | 5,440     | 1,920     | 2,650     |
| All affordable                  | 8,910     | 9,380     | 18,230    | 5,790     | 6,960     |

See MHCLG live table 1000 and statistical release for full notes and definitions.

Source: MHCLG

## Intermediate Housing

3.175	Paragraph 3.61 of the 2016 London Plan sets out the income thresholds for 
intermediate housing and states that these will be updated on an annual basis in the London Plan AMR.
3.176	In the 2016 AMR, to reflect Government's approach to shared ownership, a 
single £90,000 household income was introduced for intermediate housing; in effect removing the previous higher income cap for families in larger homes. However, recognising the different role that intermediate rented products play in meeting affordable housing need compared to shared ownership products, and to ensure those rented products are genuinely affordable in line with the Mayor's London Living Rent product, the cap for intermediate rented products was reduced to a household income of £60,000 per annum, the income required to afford a two-bedroom London Living Rent home in the most expensive ward. These thresholds have not been changed in this AMR.

3.177	Therefore, the costs (including service charges) of intermediate ownership 
products such as London Shared Ownership and Discounted Market Sale (where they meet the NPPF and London Plan definition of affordable housing) should be affordable to households on incomes of £90,000 or less, the costs for all intermediate rented products (including London Living Rent and Discounted Market Rent, Affordable Private Rent and Intermediate Rent) should be affordable to households on incomes of £60,000 or less.
3.178	For dwellings to be considered affordable, annual housing costs, including 
mortgage payments (assuming reasonable interest rates and deposit requirements18), rent and service charge, should be no greater than 40% of net household income, based on the household income limits set out above. 
3.179	Local planning authorities should seek to ensure that intermediate provision 
provides for households with a range of incomes below the upper limit, and provides a range of dwelling types in terms of a mix of unit sizes (measured by number of bedrooms). The 2016 AMR stated that average housing costs, including service charges for Shared Ownership and Discounted Market Sale, should be affordable by households on annual gross incomes of £56,200 pa, calculated as the mid-point of the upper income threshold of £90,000 and a lower threshold of £22,400 that was derived by increasing the previous year's threshold by RPI. This lower threshold has also not been increased in this AMR. 
3.180	On this basis, average housing costs for Shared Ownership and Discounted 
Market Sale, including service charges, should be £1,311 a month or £303 a week (housing costs at 40% of net income, net income being assumed to be 70% of gross income), the same as in the previous AMR. Similarly, for intermediate rent products average housing costs, including service charges should be affordable by households with an annual gross income of £41,200, resulting in housing costs of £11,536 a year or £961 a month and £222 a week. For London Living Rent - please refer to the rent setting guidance provided on the GLA website.

3.181	These figures could be used for monitoring purposes, and the income caps are 
also applied by the GLA to determine eligibility for GLA funded intermediate products.
18	
 The Affordable Housing and Viability Supplementary Planning Guidance 
advises that a repayment mortgage of 25 years with a 90 per cent loan to value ratio should be assumed for shared ownership

Table 3.35 Affordable Delivery in London by Tenure 2016/17 Borough
Social rent
Affordable Rent Intermediate
Total
Barking and Dagenham
0
50
10
60
Barnet
0
260
60
320
Bexley
0
50
20
70
Brent
0
200
20
230
Bromley
0
40
40
70
Camden
10
50
20
70
City of London
0
0
0
0
Croydon
20
80
90
190
Ealing
0
10
20
30
Enfield
20
130
220
370
Greenwich
270
120
90
470
Hackney
50
70
40
170
0
0
50
50
Hammersmith and Fulham Haringey
0
170
20
190
Harrow
0
70
10
80
Havering
0
10
30
40
Hillingdon
60
20
40
120
Hounslow
140
120
40
290
Islington
120
20
60
190
Kensington and Chelsea
0
0
0
10
Kingston upon Thames
0
110
0
110
Lambeth
0
10
70
80
Lewisham
10
160
120
290
Merton
0
10
0
10
Newham
110
290
440
840
Redbridge
0
50
10
60
Richmond upon Thames
0
40
20
60
Southwark
200
50
140
390
Sutton
10
50
40
100
Tower Hamlets
70
660
350
1,090
Waltham Forest
10
40
70
110
Wandsworth
0
90
240
330
Westminster
60
150
100
300
London
0
0
200
200
Not recorded
0
10
50
50

Source: MHCLG. Figures rounded to the nearest 10.

## Local Affordable Housing Policies 3.182	Paragraph 50 Of The National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012)

requires all boroughs which have identified a need for affordable housing to set out policies for meeting this need. London Plan Policy 3.11 states that targets should be consistent with the overall strategic target of at least 17,000 affordable homes in London p.a. (This target relates to the 2015 London Plan, increased from 13,200 in the 2011 Plan). Boroughs are free to set targets in absolute or percentage terms. The London Plan sets out a range of issues boroughs should consider (capacity, viability, balanced communities etc.). Table 3.36 shows adopted and emerging borough affordable housing targets.

Borough
Adopted Borough Policy Target as at January 2017 (Numerical/ Percentage)
Emerging Borough Policy Target
Affordable Housing Tenure Split
Barking & Dagenham
Use London Plan Policy
25%/ 30%
Emerging 10% or 12% intermediate; 15%/18% affordable rent
Barnet
40% for sites of 10 units or more (0.4 ha or more)
n/a
60% social rented; 40% intermediate 
Bexley
50% and a minimum of 35%
n/a
70% social rented; 30% intermediate
Brent
50%
50% for sites of 10 or more dwellings
Adopted 70% social rented; 30% intermediate
Bromley
35% provision for sites of 11 or more dwellings or residential floorspace of more than 1,000sq m
Emerging: 60% social-rented/affordable; 40% intermediate
Camden
A sliding scale target, 2% for each additional unit up to 24 units, and 50% provision for sites with 25 units or more.
City of London
 30% provision for sites of 10 dwellings or more on site and 60% off site
n/a
60% social/affordable rent; 40% intermediate including key worker housing
Croydon
50% for sites of 10 or more dwellings
60% affordable; 40% intermediate
Ealing
50% for developments of 10 or more dwellings
n/a
60% social/affordable rented; 40% intermediate
n/a
70% social rented; 30% intermediate
Enfield
40% provision for sites with 10 or more dwellings; developments with fewer than 10 units, a contribution towards off site affordable housing required based on borough wide target of 20%
n/a
70% social/affordable rented; 30% intermediate
Greenwich
35% provision for sites of 10 dwellings or more than 0.5 ha
Hackney
50% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings
 n/a
60% social rented; 40% intermediate Emerging 70% social/affordable rented; 30% intermediate 70% social-rented; 30% intermediate 60% social-affordable rented; 40% intermediate
Borough
Adopted Borough Policy Target as at January 2017 (Numerical/ Percentage)
Emerging Borough Policy Target
Affordable Housing Tenure Split
Hammersmith & Fulham
50% for developments of/sites with capacity for 11 or more units
Haringey
40% of habitable rooms on sites delivering 10 or more dwellings
Harrow
40% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings
n/a
London Plan Policy (60% social/ affordable rented, 40% intermediate) but to be agreed on a case by case basis at pre application stage
Havering
35% provision based on habitable rooms for sites of 10 or more dwellings or residential floorspace of more than 1,000sq m
Hillingdon
35% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings 
n/a
70% social rent; 30% intermediate
 n/a
60% affordable/social rent; 40% intermediate
Hounslow
40% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings (strategic borough-wide target of 40% of all new housing)
n/a
70% social rent; 30% intermediate
Islington
50% additional housing built in the borough; Sites below 10 units required to provide financial contribution
Kensington & Chelsea
50% by floor area on residential floorspace in excess of 800sq m gross internal area
n/a
A minimum 15% affordable units to be intermediate in Golborne, St Charles, Notting Barns, Norland, Colville, Earls' Court and Cremorne wards. All other wards a minimum of 85% social rented.
Kingston upon Thames 50% on sites of 10 or more units.
n/a
70% social/affordable rent; 30% intermediate
Sites of 5 - 10 units: 5 units (1 affordable) 6 units (1 affordable) 7 units (2 affordable) 8 units (3 affordable) 9 units (4 affordable) 10 units (5 affordable)
n/a
70% social/affordable; 30% intermediate
Lambeth
50% on sites of 0.1 ha or 10 or more homes where public subsidy is available. 40% without public subsidy. Financial contribution for sites fewer than 10 units
Lewisham
50% from all sources
n/a
70% social rented; 30% intermediate
35% minimum (or 455 our of 1,471)
n/a
60% social/ affordable rent; 40% intermediate 60% social/affordable rent (especially families), 40% intermediate 60% affordable (including social); 40% intermediate 70% social/ affordable rented; 30% intermediate on sites with 10 or more dwellings or sites of 0.5ha or more
Borough
Adopted Borough Policy Target as at January 2017 (Numerical/ Percentage)
Emerging Borough Policy Target
Affordable Housing Tenure Split
n/a
60% social rented; 40% intermediate
Merton
40% borough-wide 40% ten units or more 20% 1-9 units
Newham
50% of all new homes 35-50% of sites with 10 or more dwellings
n/a
50% social rent; 50% intermediate
n/a
50% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings or residential floorspace of more than 1,000sq m
Old Oak Park Royal Development Corporation Redbridge
50% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings or residential sites of 0.5ha or more
n/a
60% social rent; 40% intermediate
Richmond upon Thames
50% of all new units
n/a
80% social rent 20% intermediate
Southwark
35% everywhere
35% provision for sites providing 10 or more dwellings
Sutton
35% provision for sites of 11 or more dwellings or residential floorspace of more than 1,000sq m
Tower Hamlets
35%-50% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings
35% - 50% provision for sites of 11 of more dwellings
Waltham Forest
50%
n/a
n/a
n/a
60% social/ affordable rent; 40% intermediate
Wandsworth
33% provision for sites of 10 or more dwellings. Minimum 15% in Nine Elms.
Westminster
30%
60% social/ affordable rent; 40% intermediate Emerging: 30% affordable rent; 70% intermediate 70% social rented; 30% intermediate. Elephant & Castle OA 50% - 50%; Peckham AA 30% - 70%; Old Kent Road AA 50% - 50%; West Camberwell AA 50% - 50%. 75% social/affordable rent; 25% intermediate

## Achieving An Inclusive Environment Accessible Dwellings

3.183	Since 1st October 2015, the accessibility of dwellings in London has been 
defined by compliance with the London Plan policy on accessible housing which refers to the following design standards found in Part M Volume 1 of the Building Regulations: •	M4(1) Visitable dwellings •	M4(2) Accessible and adaptable dwellings •	M4(3) Wheelchair user dwellings (wheelchair accessible or wheelchair 
adaptable)
3.184	M4(1) is the basic standard for all new-build dwellings. LDD monitors 
compliance with the higher standards of M4(2) and M4(3) at scheme level as these are the standards required by the London Plan policy. 
3.185	The standards contained within Part M fully replaced accessible housing 
standards used previously, with M4(2) roughly equating to the old Lifetime Homes standard and M4(3) roughly equating to the previous Wheelchair Accessible Housing Standard. M4(2) and M4(3) are 'optional' and can only be applied if they are 'switched on' by adopted local planning policy and required by planning condition. Unlike Lifetime Homes and Wheelchair Housing standards, the optional Building Regulations standards only apply to new build dwellings, and they are exclusive so each dwelling can be required to meet just one of the standards (previously a dwelling could satisfy both Lifetime Homes standard and Wheelchair Accessible Housing standard) . London Plan policy therefore states that 90% of new build dwellings should meet M4(2) and 10% M4(3).

3.186	The figures in both tables are 'gross' approvals calculated at scheme level. 
This means that units could be counted twice where a revised application for part of a scheme is approved within the same year as the original permission (usually through details or reserved matters applications). Only schemes that are 100% new build are included. Percentages are shown rather than absolute numbers to avoid confusion as total units will be different to the total approvals in the Housing Monitor, and because the London Plan policy requirement is expressed in percentage terms.

3.187	Table 3.37 shows the compliance with M4(2) and M4(3) during 2016/17. The 
total of 76% meeting M4(2) is well below the 90% policy requirement. A further 9% of dwellings comply with M4(3), meaning that 85% of new build dwellings are achieving M4(2) or M4(3) standards in London, which is some way off the 100% policy coverage aimed for. M4(2) and M4(3) must be required by condition on the planning permission to be valid, so a commitment to meet these standards in the Design and Access statement or any other application document is not sufficient. The transition to a more rigorous assessment of the presence of a condition in determining compliance with these standards could account for the fall in compliance with previous monitoring of Lifetime Homes and Wheelchair Accessible Housing standards.

## Specialist Housing For Older People

3.188	The 2015 London Plan introduced new strategic benchmarks to inform local 
targets for specialist housing for older people. LDD now includes the facility to record specialist housing for older people separately from other sheltered accommodation for residential (C3) dwellings. Care homes can also be identified as being specifically for older residents (however do not fall under the C3 use classification). Table 3.38 shows the totals of the net approvals during 2016/17 for these three types of specialist accommodation, with care home rooms being described as 'non-self-contained rooms for older people'.

## Affordable Student Accommodation

3.189	The Mayor's Housing SPG (2016) states that the Mayor will publish, in his 
Annual Monitoring Report for the London Plan, the annual rental cost for purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) that is considered affordable for the coming academic. As set out in the Housing SPG, the annual rental cost for affordable PBSA equates to 55% of the maximum student maintenance loan for living costs available to a UK full-time student in London living away from home for that academic year. For the academic year 2018/19 the annual rental cost for affordable PBSA must not exceed £6,245.

Borough
% M4(2) Compliant
% M4(3) Compliant
Barking and Dagenham
90
9
Barnet
90
3
Bexley
91
9
Brent
88
11
Bromley
20
2
Camden
84
9
City of London
59
39
Croydon
42
2
Ealing
88
10
Enfield
35
8
Greenwich
31
4
Hackney
77
10
Hammersmith and Fulham 64
13
Haringey
91
9
Harrow
83
17
Havering
45
5
Hillingdon
80
8
Hounslow
33
3
Islington
94
5
Kensington and Chelsea
49
11
Kingston upon Thames
77
8
Lambeth
82
11
Lewisham
77
15
Merton
92
3
Newham
74
9
Redbridge
43
8
Richmond upon Thames
87
7
Southwark
31
6
Sutton
84
10
Tower Hamlets
90
10
Waltham Forest
76
9
Wandsworth
78
10
Westminster
82
10
London
76
9

Notes: Only schemes that are 100% New Build are included in the above table. Split schemes (some new build and some conversion of existing buildings) are not taken into account. M4(2) and M4(3) replaced Lifetime Homes and Wheelchair Accessible Homes standards in London on all approvals granted from 01/10/2015 onwards. Although homes may be designed to these standards, they are only counted if compliance with these standards is conditioned in the decision notice.

Borough
Specialist housing for older people
Other sheltered accommodation (C3)
Non-self-contained rooms for older people
0
1
0
Barking and Dagenham Barnet
32
1
9
Bexley
74
0
80
Brent
0
-27
8
Bromley
0
-1
12
Camden
38
0
0
City of London
0
0
0
Croydon
75
-1
3
Ealing
0
0
-29
Enfield
0
11
7
Greenwich
0
38
0
Hackney
0
0
10
0
0
0
Hammersmith and Fulham Haringey
0
5
-18
Harrow
58
0
-6
Havering
9
-19
0
Hillingdon
0
-1
0
Hounslow
94
0
0
Islington
0
0
0
0
0
39
Kensington and Chelsea
0
0
2
Kingston upon Thames Lambeth
105
1
0
Lewisham
53
0
0
Merton
9
1
0
Newham
0
0
-6
Redbridge
0
0
0
0
4
0
Richmond upon Thames Southwark
0
0
0
Sutton
0
0
74
Tower Hamlets
28
0
0
Waltham Forest
0
0
-4
Wandsworth
13
0
0
Westminster
36
0
0
London
624
13
181

Note: Changes in non-self-contained accommodation are only recorded on LDD if they meet the criteria for submission, either by proposing a change of 7 rooms or more, or by meeting another criteria such as a loss or gain of residential units.

## Environment And Transport Ptal Map

3.190	Figure 3.8 displays the public transport access levels (PTALs) for London. In 
several important areas of planning policy (for example housing density and parking provision), the London Plan uses PTALs to calculate compliance with the density matrix. Datasets are available from Transport for London (TfL).
3.191	TfL's WebCAT toolkit can be used to measure transport connectivity using 
PTAL and Time Mapping analysis. Further information can be found at: https:// tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/planning-with-webcat/ webcat?intcmp=25932

## Crossrail Funding

3.192	Crossrail is a £15bn investment in public transport that will contribute to 
accommodating economic growth and a rising population within London. Under the funding agreement with the Government the Mayor is required to raise £600m from developer contributions via both S106 contributions related to the Crossrail funding SPG and the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (MCIL). The Mayor's CIL came into effect in April 2012 and it raises funds to contribute to the construction of Crossrail. The MCIL is a London-wide charge, applying to most land uses. The SPG on the "Use of Planning Obligations in the funding of Crossrail, and the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy" was refreshed in March 2016.
3.193	Table 3.39 shows funding secured for Crossrail to date from each funding 
stream. The CIL regulations 2010 (as amended) require the Mayor to report on various aspects of how CIL receipts are being spent. This is set out in Table 3.39A. It is not possible to link CIL to a specific type of Crossrail expenditure as the proceeds are transferred into the Sponsor Funding account (SFA), which then draws on the total to be spent in line with the project's requirements. The amount of CIL 'in hand' is zero, as all of it is transferred to the SFA to fund the Crossrail scheme on a quarterly basis.

| 0.24    | 2010/11   |      0 |
|---------|-----------|--------|
| 1.43    | 2011/12   |   0    |
| 17.20   | 2012/13   |   6.09 |
| 13.31   | 2013/14   |  46.69 |
| 13.69   | 2014/15   |  73.19 |
| 30.24   | 2015/16   | 118.64 |
| 24.90   | 2016/17   | 136.86 |
| 5.88    | 2017/18*  |  80.76 |
| 2018/19 |           |        |
| 2019/20 |           |        |

* figures for 2017/18 are based on actual income up to the end of January 2018. # TfL / GLA admin fee capped at £600k in 2017/18. ## figures correct to the end of January 2018 Source: Transport for London

amount spent (2017/18) on administration by TfL/ GLA (up to 1%) amount spent (2017/18) on administration by
£3,570,498##
collecting authorities (up to 4%) amount of CIL 'in-hand' 0

## Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations

3.194	The Regional Flood Risk Appraisal (RFRA) first review was published in August 2014, updating the previous (2009) RFRA. A new review of the RFRA is underway to support the 
Mayor's new London Plan. This latest version is expected to be published in the Autumn 2018.
3.195	The Mayor published his London Sustainable Drainage Action Plan (LSDAP) in December 2016. The Action Plan contains 40 actions mainly focused on retrofitting sustainable 
drainage measures and progress against those actions will also be reported on an annual basis.

## Table 3.40 Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations No. Recommendation Progress At August 2018

Planning Authorities continue to update their SFRAs, DPDs and Local Plans where necessary, on which there is close liaison with the Environment Agency. Most London boroughs have in place Local Plan policies which make reference to Thames Estuary 2100 or have proposed such policies in their Draft Local Plans.

1
All Thames-side planning authorities should consider in their SFRAs and put in place Local Plan policies to promote the setting back of development from the edge of the Thames and tidal Tributaries to enable sustainable and cost-effective upgrade of river walls/ embankments in line with Policy 5.12, CFMPs, TE2100 and advice from the Environment Agency.
Richmond, Hounslow, Kingston, and Wandsworth all have policies in their Local Plans to address flood risk management from all sources.

2
The London Boroughs of Richmond, Kingston, Hounslow and Wandsworth should put in place policies to ensure alternative responses to managing Fluvial risk such as flood resilience measures (e.g. Flood gates) or Potentially safeguarding land for Future flood storage or, on the fluvial tributaries, setting back local defences or any resilience measures between Teddington Lock and Hammersmith Bridge in line with TE2100 findings.
Greenwich has up-to-date Local Plan policies in place to enable the potential safeguarding of land needs around the existing Thames Barrier. Any major land take for a new flood barrier will be outside London.

3
The London Boroughs of Newham and Greenwich should work with the Environment Agency on issues such as the potential safeguarding of potential land needs around the existing Thames Barrier, and the London Borough of Bexley should work with the Environment agency on future flood risk management options in line with TE2100 findings.
Tidal influences are generally taken into account in the SFRAs modelling addressing the interaction of fluvial and tidal flood risk at confluences.

4
Boroughs at confluences of tributary rivers with the river Thames should ensure flood risk assessments (FRAs) include an assessment of the interaction of all forms of flooding, but fluvial and tidal flood risks in particular. These are the London Boroughs of Havering, Barking & Dagenham, Newham, Tower hamlets, Greenwich, Lewisham, Wandsworth, Hounslow, Richmond and Kingston.
The Environment Agency continues to work with Local Authorities to ensure SFRAs, Local Plan policies, and planning applications apply these flood risk management measures as a standard.

5
Regeneration and redevelopment of London's fluvial river corridors offer a crucial opportunity to reduce flood risk. SFRAs and policies should focus on making the most of this opportunity through appropriate location, layout and design of development as set out in the Thames CFMP. In particular opportunities should be sought to: - Set back development from the river edge to enable sustainable and cost effective flood risk management options - Ensure that developments at residual flood risk are designed to be flood compatible and/or flood resilient - Maximise the use of open spaces within developments which have a residual flood risk to make space for flood water.
In strategic developments reviewed by the GLA, many developments achieve greenfield run-off rates.

6
Developments all across London should reduce surface water discharge in line with the Sustainable Drainage hierarchy set out in Policy 5.13 of the London Plan, the emerging Sustainable Design and construction SPG and the emerging London Sustainable Drainage Action Plan (LSDAP).
However, these schemes often rely on attenuation tanks. GLA officers will seek to promote the use of 'green' sustainable drainage techniques, which can deliver a wider range of benefits and feature higher in the hierarchy. There is also more emphasis on such techniques in the drainage hierarchy of the emerging new draft London Plan policy.

## Table 3.40 Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations No. Recommendation Progress At August 2018

7
Thames Water should continue its programme of addressing foul sewer flooding.
Thames Water continues to address localised sewer flooding problems.
Specifically related to Counters Creek catchment in west London, Thames Water no longer intend to pursue to install a large storm relief sewer. Instead they aim to reduce sewer flooding through a combination of non-return valve installations, targeted sustainable drainage measures, and local pipe upgrades.

8
The groundwater flood risk should be considered in FRAs and SFRAs to ensure that its impacts do not increase.
As SFRAs are reviewed, this is starting to be included, and it is also being addressed in some site specific FRAs. However, poor data quality may prevent more detailed consideration.

9
The reservoir flood risk should be considered in FRAs and SFRAs to ensure its impacts do not increase.	
As SFRAs are reviewed, this is being considered, and is being addressed in some site specific FRAs as well.

10
Detailed flood risk assessments should be undertaken at an early stage at the level of individual major development locations and town centre development sites, and opportunities to reduce flood risk should be maximised where possible.
This is generally being achieved and the GLA has lead work with the Environment Agency, relevant boroughs and water companies to promote Integrated Water Management Strategies (IWMSs) at major development locations including Vauxhall, Nine Elms Battersea, Old Oak & Park Royal, the Charlton to Crayford Riverfront and Old Kent Road. Work is also starting on the Isle of Dogs. The GLA, again working closely with the Environment Agency, is also helping to inform the Sustainable Drainage Strategy for the Old Oak North development area, working with the OPDC Team. In addition, the Environment Agency's Sustainable Places Team is engaging with the London boroughs at the pre-application stage. Through the London Sustainable Drainage Action Plan workstreams, the GLA is working with TfL and London boroughs to increase the role out of sustainable drainage systems across their transport networks/assets. 

11
Relevant transport authorities and operators should examine and regularly review their infrastructure including the networks, stations, depots, underpasses and tunnels for potential flooding locations and flood risk reduction measures. For large stations and depots, solutions should be sought to store or disperse rainwater from heavy storms.
London Underground's comprehensive Investigation into flood risk to their assets and infrastructure is entering its second phase. Through Drain London the GLA has undertaken work to examine surface water flood risk at hospital and emergency services sites across London. 

12
Emergency service authorities and operators covering hospitals, ambulance, fire and police stations as well as prisons should ensure that Emergency Plans in particular for facilities in flood risk areas are in place and regularly reviewed so that they can cope in the event of a major flood. These plans should put in place cover arrangements through other suitable facilities.
Each London borough also has its own Multi-Agency Flood Plan, which should identify critical infrastructure/vulnerable sites at risk of flooding. Through Drain London the GLA has undertaken work to examine surface water flood risk at secondary school sites across London. The LSDAP also identifies school sites as having a good range of opportunities to implement more sustainable drainage measures.

13
Education authorities should ensure that emergency plans in particular for facilities in flood risk areas are in place and regularly reviewed so that they can cope in the event of a major flood. These plans should put in place cover arrangements through other suitable facilities.
Each London borough also has its own Multi-Agency Flood Plan, which should identify education facilities at risk. The update of the RFRA, which is underway, aims to provide a more up-to-date and accurate picture of flood risk to strategic utilities. 

14
Operators of electricity, gas, water, sewerage, and waste utility sites should maintain an up to date assessment of the flood risk to their installations and, considering the likely impacts of failure, establish any necessary protection measures including secondary flood defences.
Electricity: Critical substations and other assets are being upgraded and made more resilient by National Grid. Water/Sewerage: Investment to improve mitigation/resilience of assets to flooding are taking place. Water companies are prioritising based on site-specific flood risk assessments.

## Planning Progress With Supplementary Planning Guidance

3.196	The Mayor produces Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) documents to 
provide further detail on particular policies in the London Plan. In 2016/17 the Mayor published two SPGs: Affordable Housing & Viability and Culture and Night-Time Economy.
3.197	All full and draft SPGs are available on the Mayor's website https://www.
london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/implementing-london-plan/supplementaryplanning-guidance

## London Borough Local Plans And Progress

3.198	The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires local planning 
authorities to produce a Local Plan for their area. In law (Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004) this is described as the development plan documents (DPDs). There is now good coverage of Local Plans across London, with 34 adopted and 17 under review. 
3.199	Under the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 
2012, Regulation 18 requires Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to notify the Mayor of the subject of a Local Plan. This is the Preparation Stage. The Mayor will endeavour to provide comments to the LPAs at this stage but is not required to respond to the consultation. Under Regulation 19, before submitting the Local Plan to the Secretary of State, LPAs must make a copy of the proposed submission documents available and must request an opinion from the Mayor as to the general conformity of their Local Plans (Regulation 21). This is the Publication Stage. The Mayor has 6 weeks to respond to the consultation. The Mayor will respond to Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and Neighbourhood Plans only where strategic policy issues are raised.

3.200	In order to achieve general conformity with the London Plan in accordance 
with Section 24(1) (b) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the Mayor works proactively with the boroughs, commenting on and holding meetings to discuss informal drafts of documents and meetings to discuss the Mayor's response to consultation. Table 3.41 lists policy documents that were published in 2017.

Table 3.41 London Borough Policy Documents Published in 2017 Borough
Policy Documents
Barking & Dagenham 
-
Barnet
"Local Development Scheme Residential Design Guidance Sustainable Design & Constructions SPDs Graham Park SPD"
Bexley
Article 4 Direction - Housing in Multiple Occupation (HMO)
Brent
"Development Management Policies Adopted Shopfront and Advertising Design Guide "
Bromley 
Local Plan Reg 19 Submission
Camden 
"Draft Local Plan Submission & Examination Highgate Neighbourhood Plan (joint with Haringey) Kentish Town Neighbourhood Plan Article 4 Direction - Basements "
City of London
"Local Plan Issues & Options Archaeology and Development SPD Public Realm SPD Enforcement SPD Fleet Street Area Strategy Air Quality SPD (Jan 2017)"
Croydon 
"Local Plan Strategic Policies Partial Review Reg 19 Local Plan detailed Policies and Proposals Reg 19"
Ealing
"Southall Green SPD Central Ealing SPD"
Enfield
"North East Enfield Area Action Plan Adopted S106 SPD Adopted Ritz Parade SPD consultation CIL SPD Adopted"
Greenwich
"Local Plan Site Allocations Issues & Options Thomas Street SPD Residential Extensions, Conversions and Basements SPD"
Hackney
"New Local Plan Direction of Travel Consultation Hackney Central AAP"
Hammersmith & Fulham - Haringey 
"Examination and post examination modifications into: Alterations to the Strategic Policies Development Management DPD Site Allocations DPD Tottenham Area Action Plan Wood Green Area Action Plan 9Feb 2017) Highgate Neighbourhood Plan (joint with Camden)"
Harrow
-
Havering
New Local Plan Direction of Travel Consultation
Table 3.41 London Borough Policy Documents Published in 2017 Borough
Policy Documents
Hillingdon 
-
Hounslow
"Noise Generating & Noise Sensitive Development SPD Great West Corridor - issues paper West of Borough - issues paper"
Islington
"Local Plan Review (scope) Reg 18 Consultation Planning Obligations SPD Urban Design Guide SPD Article 4 Direction"
Kensington & Chelsea
"Local Plan Partial Review Reg 18 Consultation Basements SPD (Adopted) Article 4 Direction"
Kingston upon Thames
"Local Development Scheme (Adopted) New Local Plan Direction of Travel"
Lambeth
"Development Viability SPD Employment and Skills SPD South Bank & Waterloo Neighbourhood Plan (see also Southwark)"
Lewisham
Gypsy & Traveller Site Allocation
London Legacy Development Corporation
"Bromley by Bow SPD Pudding Mill SPD Hackney Wick and Fish Island SPD Carbon Off-setting SPD Planning Obligations SPD"
Merton
Merton Estates Local Plan Submission
Newham
"Detailed Sites & Policies DPD (Examination, Mods & Adoption) Waste Management in New Development SPD Planning Obligations & Development Viability SPD Gypsy & Traveller DPD" Local Plan Reg 18 Consultation
Old Oak & Park Royal Development Corporation Redbridge
Local Plan 2015-2030 Pre Submission draft
Richmond upon Thames "Local Plan Reg 19

Noise Generating & Noise Sensitive Development SPD Hampton Draft Village Planning Guidance SPD Hampton Hill Draft Village Planning Guidance SPD Hampton Wick & Teddington Draft Village Planning Guidance SPD Ham & Petersham Neighbourhood Plan (Feb 2017)"
Table 3.41 London Borough Policy Documents Published in 2017 Borough
Policy Documents
Southwark
"New Southwark Plan –Area Visions & Site Allocations (Feb 2017) Old Kent Road AAP Article 4 Direction South Bank & Waterloo Neighbourhood Plan (see also Lambeth)"
Sutton
"New Local Plan Reg 19 Hackbridge & Beddington Corner Neighbourhood Plan"
Tower Hamlets
"New Local Plan Reg 18 Consultation Planning Obligations SPD Development Viability SPD"
Waltham Forest
Lee Valley Eastside Vision
Wandsworth
"Historic Environment SPD (Adopted) Housing SPD (Adopted) Local Plan Call for Sites"
Westminster
Local Plan Special Policy Areas Reg 19 & Examination Local Plan Main Mods (Basements & Mixed Use) Article 4 Direction (Basements) Mayfair Neighbourhood Plan Knightsbridge Neighbourhood Plan Opportunity Framework Upper Vauxhall Bridge Rd

Source: Association of London Borough Planning Officers (ALBPO), Local Plan Borough Updates & Borough websites. Town & Country (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 Regulation 18 - preferred options stage of Local Plan issued for consultation

Regulation 19 - submission stage of the Local Plan issued for consultation

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/local-plans--2#preparing-a-local-plan

## Opportunity Areas

3.201	Details on Opportunity Areas (OAs) an be found in Annex 1 of the 2015 
London Plan.
3.202	Opportunity Areas have the potential to deliver a substantial amount of the 
new homes and jobs that London needs. GLA Planning will this Autumn publish the first London's Opportunity Areas Review, a survey of growth in London's many Opportunity Areas. Its purpose is to show how coordination across boroughs and the Mayor's agencies unlocks and accelerates growth opportunities. London's Opportunity Areas Review also supports the monitoring and review processes set up within many Opportunity Areas to ensure supporting infrastructure is delivered at correct pace to the housing and jobs growth.
3.203	For further information including details on housing and employment targets 
please visit our interactive Opportunity Area Map https://www.london.gov.uk/ what-we-do/planning/implementing-london-plan/opportunity-areas/opportunityareas-map-0

## Planning Decisions

3.204	Table 3.42 highlights the ongoing work of the Mayor's Development 
Management Team in helping to implement the London Plan. 

## Table 3.42 Planning Applications Referred To The Mayor

2000- 2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2000- 2017
Total
1,871 334
240
258
300
307
359
373
454
389
382
5,267
-
-
2
1
2
1
2
1
5
3
4
21
Strategic Call-ins

Source: GLA Planning 

## London Planning Awards

3.205	The Mayor, London First, the Royal Town Planning Institute and London 
Councils jointly organise the privately-sponsored annual London Planning Awards to showcase and celebrate good planning practice in the capital. The 15th London Planning Awards were held on 18th January 2018 at Banqueting House, Whitehall. Full details of the winning entries are given in Table 3.43.

## Table 3.43 London Planning Awards - Winners Entry Descriptions And Award Citations Taken From The Mayor'S And Sir Edward Lister'S Speeches At The London Planning Awards Ceremony, City Hall 27Th February 2017 Best New Place To Live Abell & Cleland

A successful scheme which accommodates a mix of private and affordable homes in a central London location. Arranged in two buildings that respond to the character of neighbouring early 20th century mansion blocks and the nearby, 18th century Baroque St John's Smith Square church. The judges were impressed by the scheme's ability to deliver exemplary, tenure blind design, expertly incorporating views across London as well as a high proportion of affordable homes. 

## Best New Place To Live - Highly Commended Dujardin Mews

High quality materials detailing and a refined design approach, combined with a well-considered public realm, has created an exemplary benchmark of housing design for Ponders End and a lasting testament to Enfield's commitment to design quality. Dujardin Mews is 100% affordable, half of which is made up of predominantly family-sized, social rent homes. The judges applauded the residential led design process and the emphasis placed on quality and generosity of living spaces and private amenity space. 

## Best New Place To Work St James' Market

This landmark development located south of Piccadilly Circus has transformed a previously forgotten part of London's West End to provide 260,000sq.ft mixed use scheme across two buildings, centred on a new public space. The two buildings are markedly different in style, yet complementary. Curving, open ribbons of Portland stone, inlaid with metal bands, sit opposite reconstructed Grade II-listed façades. Art is a key element of the public space, which restores the southern link to the Royal Opera Arcade. The free-standing pavilion hosts performances, events and exhibitions St James Market includes BREEAM Excellent offices, five flagship retail stores and seven restaurants within over a quarter of an acre of regenerated, pedestrianised space. 

## Best New Place To Work - Highly Commended Alex Munroe Workshop

Located at the end of Tower Bridge Road, a small property, between a public house and a shop, houses the Alex Monroe Jewellery Workshop; designed by DSDHA Architects. The building is uniquely designed externally and internally, deliberately adding character to the local streetscape. The façade is wrapped in a protective veil of Cor-ten steel slats, replicating the steel security shutters pulled over shopfronts at the end of the day. Its deliberately rough texture hints at a different world of creativity and artistry within the building. 

## Best Mixed Use Scheme Bucklesbury/Bloomberg

The new headquarters for the Bloomberg media company, successfully combines a mix of commercial uses, exemplary architecture and public realm while responding positively to the historic character of the City through an appropriately scaled and sensitively detailed building. The judges praised the scheme's strong heritage led design approach which reinstates the former Roman Watling Street, greatly enhancing pedestrian permeability and capacity, between Cannon Street Station and the City, and linking with a wider network of new public realm. Much of the ground floor is designed to be public facing and includes a broad mix of independent retail units and restaurants to enhance street life in this part of the City. The building accommodates a new entrance to Bank Underground station which will open on to one of 3 new public spaces squares. Crucially the Roman Temple of Mithras is restored and incorporated into a public exhibition space with accompanying gallery space and education facilities.

## Best New Iconic Building Or Scheme Dollar Bay

This new 30 storey tower is a striking addition at the head of South Dock in Canary Wharf. The judges were impressed by its high quality architectural design - A 'pair of crystals', separated by a golden fracture, bringing natural daylight to communal spaces- the dock-facing elevation reflects water and sky from the zigzagging glass louvres. The scheme provides 125 mixed tenure homes all of which exceed the Mayor's design standards by 50%. Making the most of the views across the docks and the Thames, all homes are double or triple aspect. The name, Dollar Bay, is inspired by history of the area. In WWII, US navy officers ships stationed in the docks, used to drop dollar bills to the dock workers who helped tow them as a sign of gratitude.

## Mayor'S Award For Innovation In Planning Rectory Farm

This entry turned a potentially contentious scheme, involving the extraction of minerals from a constrained site, bordered by houses and busy roads, into a commercial development with significant benefits for local residents. The developers approach was an innovative 'Top Down' construction method. This technique provides restored parkland at surface level while excavating minerals underneath the site. Once mining is completed, underground warehouses will be developed providing multi-use commercial as well as a new parkland and recreation space within the green belt. This scheme delivers innovation in planning practice as well as a multiple of social, environmental and economic benefits. Mayor's Award for Excellence in Environmental Planning

## Dollar Bay

With its zigzagging glass louvres which reflect the water and sky, Dollar Bay is a striking addition at the head of South Dock in Canary Wharf. Judges were impressed by the unique dock water cooling solution, used to cool the tower, providing high energy efficiency, reducing the carbon footprint of the building by 23%, and reducing costs for homeowners by 39%.

## Mayors Award For Planning Excellence King'S Cross Station Chapter 4 - Other Contextual Data Sources Waste

This AMR cannot and does not attempt to be comprehensive. There is also a significant amount of relevant data available from both the GLA and other sources. The list of references and links provided here should enable anyone researching these subjects access to the most up to date information.

The Mayor's Municipal Waste Management Strategy can be found here. DEFRA produces statistics on waste and recycling which can be downloaded here. 

## London Datastore

The latest data on London's waste can be found on the Local Authority Waste and Recycling Information Portal 

## Minerals (Aggregates)

The primary source of data and statistics held by the GLA is the London Datastore which includes data not just from the GLA but a range of other public sector organisations.

Information on the London Aggregates Working Party (LAWP), including Annual Monitoring Reports, is available here. 

## London Development Database Waterways

For more information on the Mayor's London Development database please email the Data Team or visit our public page. 

The London Rivers Action Plan, a tool to help restore rivers for people and nature can be found here.

## London Plan Evidence Base Transport

Details on the London Plan evidence base can be found here https://www.london.

gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/new-london-plan/evidence-base The latest information on The Mayor's transport work can be found here. 

## Development Management

Transport for London has performance statistics available to view here and details on how PTAL scores are calculated here. TfL's WebCAT toolkit can be used to measure transport connectivity using PTAL score and time Mapping analysis. 

More information on the activities of the Mayor's Development Management unit (Formerly Planning Decisions Unit/ Development and Projects) can be found at: https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/planning-applications-and-decisions The Department for Transport also holds useful information on transport.

## Gla Economics

The latest reports from GLA economics can be found here and the latest news here.

## Health Sustainable Development

London Health Programmes closed as a separate NHS organisation on the 31 March 2013. Its work has since been carried forward through other organisations. In spring 2018 the work was devolved to the 32 London boroughs and the City of London Corporation. More information can be found on London Councils website. 

Information on the London Sustainable Development Commission and their work can be found here. 

Public Health England have collated resources and data tools to support local areas in improving health in the capital.

United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals http://www.undp.org/content/undp/ en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html

## Education

The London Schools Atlas is an innovative interactive online map providing a uniquely detailed and comprehensive picture of London schools, current patterns of attendance and potential future demand for school places. Covering primary and secondary provision, including academies and free schools, the Atlas uses data to illustrate current patterns of demand for school places at a pan-London level for the first time. It also shows projected changes in demand for school places, helping to provide an indicative picture of areas with particular pressure on places in the future. 

## Government Data Sources

Government departments have moved their websites to a central domain: https:// www.gov.uk Various data and studies on education and skills can be found at: https://www.gov. uk/government/organisations/department-for-education Links to a number of national reports on education provision can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications?keywords=Education&publication_ filter_option=all&topics%5B%5D=all&departments%5B%5D=all&official_document_ status=all&world_locations%5B%5D=all&from_date=&to_date=

## Department Of Environment, Food And Rural Affairs

Various data and studies on the environment can be found on DEFRAs website.

## Ministry Of Housing, Communities And Local Government

The latest information on Government policies and publications related to planning can be found on MHCLGs website.

## Other Formats And Languages

For a large print, Braille, disc, sign language video or audio-tape version of this document, or if you would like a summary of this document in your language please contact us at this address: Public Liaison Unit Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen's Walk London SE1 2AA Telephone 020 7983 4100 Minicom 020 7983 4458 www.london.gov.uk You will need to supply your name, your postal address and state the format and title of the publication you require.