annual monitoring report 2008-09 · 2014-05-14 · the local development scheme (lds) and the...

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09

Local Development Framework

December 2009

Head of Regeneration and Strategic Planning London Borough of Havering Mercury House Mercury Gardens Romford RM1 3SL

December 2009

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09

Contents i

Executive Summary iii

1. Introduction 1

2. Havering in Context 6

3. The Local Development Scheme 17

4. Development Control Performance 20

5. Places to Live 24

6. Places to Work 35

7. Town Centres 39

8. Culture 45

9. Community Needs 50

10. Transport 53

11. Waste Management 58

12. Minerals 61

13. Green Belt 62

14. Environmental Management 63

15. Design 71

16. Heritage 73

17. Romford Area Action Plan 74

18. Conclusions 80

Appendices

Appendix A Revisions to Core Output Indicators

Appendix B Calculation of Housing Trajectory

Appendix C Revised Monitoring Framework

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09 i

List of Figures Figure 1 Visual summary of the Core Strategy 5 Figure 2 Havering’s strategic position within the sub region 6 Figure 3 Number of Residents 65+, 2001-2026 8 Figure 4 GLA Household Projections by Type, 2001-2026 9 Figure 5 Median earnings for employees working in Havering 12 Figure 6 Median earnings for employees living in Havering 12 Figure 7 Index of Multiple Deprivation 15 Figure 8 Number of major decisions and percent determined in 13 weeks by borough 21 Figure 9 Number of minor decisions and percent determined in 8 weeks by borough 22 Figure 10 Number of other decisions and percent determined in 8 weeks by borough 23 Figure 11 Housing Trajectory 2003/04 to 2023/24 28 Figure 12 Cumulative difference between target and completions 2003/04 to 2023/24 29 Figure 13 Gross and net employment floorspace completions by type 36 Figure 14 Gross and net ‘town centre uses’ floorspace completions by type 40 Figure 15 Areas deficient in access to local open space 48 Figure 16 Romford total daily two way traffic levels 54 Figure 17 Actual and 6 percent linear projected borough traffic totals, 2001-2009 55 Figure 18 Public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of Romford town centre 56 Figure 19 Total tonnes waste arising by management type, 2006/07 to 2008/09 59 Figure 20 Rivers, urban areas, woodland and SSSIs in Havering 63 Figure 21 Flood zones in Havering 64 Figure 22 Chemical water quality of designated rivers 2007 67

List of Tables Table 1 Summary Results for Core Output Indicators 3 Table 2 Total population, 2001-2017 7 Table 3 Total population, total households and average household size, 2001-2026 9 Table 4 Lowest average houses prices by borough, March 2009 10 Table 5 Employment and unemployment, April 2008 to March 2009 11 Table 6 Employee jobs by industry, 2007 13 Table 7 Progress of DPDs 17 Table 8 Progress of SPDs 19 Table 9 Havering Development Control performance, year ending September 2008 20 Table 10 Housing plan period and targets 27 Table 11 Housing Trajectory 2003/04 to 2023/24 27 Table 12 New build affordable homes completed 2008/09 31 Table 13 Net dwellings completions by size, type and tenure 33 Table 14 Employment in knowledge driven business sectors 38 Table 15 Gross total comparison goods floorspace requirements m2, 2011-2031 42 Table 16 Year on year yield trends for Romford, Hornchurch and Harold Hill 43 Table 17 All ages, all causes SMR by gender and ward for Havering, 2002-2006 52 Table 18 Annual changes in traffic levels to/from Romford Town Centre, 2001-2009 54 Table 19 Total tonnes waste arising by waste type 60 Table 20 Hospital admissions for respiratory disease, counting first episode only 68 Table 21 Areas of biodiversity importance 69 Table 22 Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) priority habitats 70 Table 23 Street crime, residential burglary and vehicle crime rates 72 Table 24 Romford Area Action Plan indicator results 75 Table 25 Summary of indicator results and actions required 82

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09 ii

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

This is the fifth Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) produced by Havering and covers the period from 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009. It takes account of Section 35 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires every local planning authority to make an annual report to the Secretary of State containing information on the implementation of the Local Development Scheme (LDS) and the extent to which the planning policies set out in Local Development Documents are being achieved. This AMR takes account of the CLG guidance provided in Local Development Framework Monitoring: A Good Practice Guide (2005) and the July 2008 update to the Core Output Indicators contained in the 2005 guide.

With the adoption of the Core Strategy in July 2008 and the Romford Area Action Plan in October 2008, this is the first AMR for Havering to deal solely with LDF documents. The focus of this AMR is, therefore, the refinement of the monitoring framework itself; it is too early in the life of the plan to assess LDF performance and effect, which will begin to become evident over the medium term. There are a total of 122 indicators in the 2008/09 AMR, of which 84 relate to the Core Strategy and 38 to the Romford Area Action Plan. These indicators include the 21 Core Output Indicators set by government, Local Output Indicators set by LB Havering to monitor the effects of planning policies, and Significant Effects Indicators (SEI) to monitor the wider sustainability impacts of policies.

The first section of the AMR gathers together baseline data from secondary sources to provide a snapshot of the wider social, economic and environmental circumstances in which the Council’s planning policies are developed and operate. These support the Council’s ‘Living Ambition’ agenda which is aiming for the highest quality of life in London. Havering is a mainly prosperous Borough with a diverse and successful economy although there are a few local pockets of social deprivation. Over half of the Borough is in the Green Belt, with significant areas of the remainder mainly suburban in character and appearance. Havering enjoys a key strategic location within London, and proposed growth in the London Riverside area forms a central element of the spatial strategy for the borough along with the continued regeneration of Romford and maintaining Havering’s established character.

The second section of the AMR assesses progress against the timetable for production of planning policy documents as set out in the LDS, and also highlights the strong performance of the Council as a local planning authority in determining applications against government targets. There have been several achievements during 2008/09, the most notable being the adoption of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies, Site Specific Allocations, Proposals Map and Romford Area Action Plan DPDs. Two SPDs were also adopted, covering the Emerson Park and Hall Lane policy areas. The Council is currently finalising a draft revised LDS which will be submitted to the GLA for approval in early 2010 to take account of the key changes impacting the schedule of production for the remaining DPDs.

The final section forms the bulk of the report, and sets out the results of the suite of indicators related to the Core Strategy and Romford Area Action Plan. The section is divided into 14 chapters: one for each of the twelve objectives of the Core Strategy, one for the Romford Area Action Plan, and a final chapter bringing together conclusions and future actions based on the overall results of the indicators. The results for the Government set Core Output Indicators are summarised directly following the introduction to this AMR (pages 3-4) for quick reference, and tabular presentation of the entire suite of indicators can be found at the end of the document in Table 25.

As the first AMR relating solely to LDF documents, Havering has monitored indicators covering a wide range of policy area, several of which are new indicators for the reporting

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09 iii

Executive Summary

year. Of the 32 Core Strategy indicators with a target, 11 met or part met their target, 12 did not meet their target and 9 did not have sufficient data available for monitoring.

The following results are noteworthy in 2008/09:

• 628 net housing completions, 93 over the London Plan target • A demonstrable five year housing supply exceeding the annual target • Completion of 545 affordable homes, representing 87 percent of total completions • An increase of 472m2 of retail floorspace (A1), 686m2 of office floorspace (B1) and

3701m2 leisure floorspace (D1) • Borough wide traffic growth 4.4 percent below the target for maximum growth • Designation of three statutory Local Nature Reserves, totalling 107.5ha

The detailed analysis of indicators and outcomes involved in preparing this AMR has led to the deletion of 14 local output indicators from the Core Strategy monitoring framework to minimise duplication and respond to changes in Council policy. Several other indicators have been amended so that the information collection in future years is of improved relevance to policy rather than largely a data collection exercise. Both of these outcomes are consistent with the relevant Government advice. The updated monitoring framework can be found in Appendix C. The Council’s commitment to continuous improvement in data collection is reflected in the identified actions that will positively impact the availability and quality of data analysed in future AMRs to provide for comprehensive spatial monitoring of LDF performance and effects.

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09 iv

Introduction

1 Introduction

1.1 This is the fifth Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) produced by Havering and covers the period from 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009. Section 35 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires every local planning authority to make an annual report to the Secretary of State containing information on the implementation of the Local Development Scheme and the extent to which the planning policies set out in Local Development Documents are being achieved.

1.2 Monitoring has a crucial role to play in providing feedback within the process of making planning policy. It provides information on the performance of policy and its impact on environmental, social and economic issues. It can be used to identify the key challenges and opportunities facing planning authorities and to enable appropriate policy adjustments and revisions to be made. In the context of the new planning system, with its focus on the delivery of sustainable development and sustainable communities, monitoring takes on added importance in providing a check on whether these aims are being achieved.

1.3 With the adoption of the Core Strategy in July 2008 and the Romford Area Action Plan in October 2008, the policies contained in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) have all now been superseded by Local Development Framework (LDF) policies. Consequently, this AMR deals solely with the LDF and is set out in line with Core Strategy and Romford Area Action Plan policies.

1.4 Havering has 122 indicators to monitor the effectiveness of its policies. This suite of indicators includes 21 Core Output Indicators (COI) set by the Government. They are complemented by Local Output Indicators (Local) set by LB Havering and Significant Effects Indicators (SEI) identified in the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report. Because this is the first AMR to deal solely with LDF documents, its focus is on refining the monitoring framework itself; it is too early in the life of the plan to assess the LDFs performance and effects, which will begin to become evident over the medium term (three to five years).

1.5 The Regional Spatial Strategy and Local Development Framework Core Output Indicators – Update 2/2008 document published in July 2008 by the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) set out several change to the COI. The changes comprise wording amendments for improved clarity of purpose, addition of two new indicators, and removal of selected indicators. These changes are summarised in Appendix A. Where COI overlap with SEI or Local Indicators, these have continued to be monitored for completeness. Future AMRs will consider how to best rationalise Havering’s suite of indicators.

1.6 This document in divided into three main sections. The first section (Chapter 2) gathers together baseline data from secondary sources such as the Greater London Authority (GLA) and Office for National Statistics (ONS) to provide a snapshot of the wider social, environmental and economic circumstances in which the Council’s planning policies are developed and operate. The second section (Chapters 3 and 4) assesses progress against the timetable for production of Havering’s planning policy documents as set out in the LDS, and comments on the performance of Development Control.

Annual Monitoring Report 2008/09 1

Introduction

1.7 The final section (Chapters 5 to 18) forms the bulk of the report, and sets out the results of the suite of indicators related to the Core Strategy and the Romford Area Action Plan. The section is divided into 14 chapters: one for each of the twelve objectives of the Core Strategy, one for the Romford Area Action Plan, and a final chapter bringing together conclusions and future actions based on the overall results of the indicators. Chapters 5 to 16 further separate the 12 objectives into Core Strategy policy areas and provide a summary table for each indicator (see template below); the concluding chapter provides a summary of results for all indicators.

Ref Type Description Target Met Indicator reference number from Core Strategy

Core, SEI or Local

Indicator wording as it appears in the Core Strategy Where applicable

Refer to Key on p. 4

1.8 Accounting for changes in COI, there are a total of 122 indicators in the 2008/09 AMR, of which 84 relate to the Core Strategy and 38 relate to the Romford Area Action Plan; 10 indicators within the Romford Area Action Plan are drawn from the Core Strategy. The discrepancy between the reference numbers of the indictors and the actual number of indicators are due the changes to the COI which added and deleted several indicators, and also indicators added by the Inspector during the Core Strategy Examination in Public which resulted in several indicators having alphabetical subdivisions.

1.9 The results for the COI are summarised in Table 1 for easy reference. Of the 32 Core Strategy indicators with a target, 11 met or part met their target, 12 did not meet their target and 9 did not have sufficient data available for monitoring. Of the 52 Core Strategy indicators with no target, 12 did not have sufficient data available for meaningful monitoring. Indicators unique to the Romford Area Action Plan do not have targets; 5 of these 28 indicators did not have sufficient data available for meaningful monitoring.


Introduction

Table 1 Summary Results for Core Output Indicators Ref Description Outcome for LB Havering Objective Page

BD1 Total amount of additional employment floorspace – by type

B1(a): 1,126m2 gross; 686m2 net B1(b)/B1(c): 0 B1(unrecorded): 818m2 gross; -1,591m2 net B2: 1341m2 gross; -1.395m2 net B8: 560m2 gross; -10m2 net TOTAL: 3,845 m2 gross; -2,310m2 net

Places to Work 36

BD2 Total amount of employment floorspace on previously developed land – by type 100% Places to Work 37

BD3 Employment land available – by type Sites designated for employment uses: 322.4ha Permissions granted for employment outside designated areas: 1.1ha

Places to Work 37

BU

SIN

ESS

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T A

ND

TO

WN

CEN

TRES

BD4 Total amount of floor space for ‘town centre uses’ i. within town centre areas; and ii. within the local authority area

i. 623m2 net (Romford town centre only) ii. 5,554m2 gross; 4,859m2 net

Places to Work Town Centres Culture

40

H1 Plan period and housing targets 535 new dwellings per annum 2007/08 to 2016/17 27

H2(a) Net additional dwellings – in previous years

2003/04: 393 2004/05: 468 2005/06: 711 2006/07: 460 2007/08: 603

27

H2(b) Net additional dwellings – for the reporting year 628 27 H2(c) Net additional dwellings – in future years 535 27 H2(d) Managed delivery target Refer to Table 11 27

H3 New and converted dwellings – on previously developed land No data available 30

H4 Net additional pitches (Gypsy and Traveller) None 30 H5 Gross affordable housing completions 545 30

HO

USI

NG

H6 Housing Quality – Building for Life Assessments 0

Places to Live

33

M1 Production of primary land won aggregates by mineral planning authority 165,000 to 180,000 tonnes per annum 61

MIN

ERA

LS M2 Production of secondary and recycled aggregates by mineral planning authority No data available

Minerals 61

W1 Capacity of new waste management facilities by waste planning authority 568m2 extension to the domestic materials recycling facility (DMRF) at Rainham Landfill Site; no increase in capacity

58

WA

STE

W2 Amount of municipal waste arising, and managed by management type by waste planning authority

127,941 tonnes total waste arising • 23.3% recycled (29,814 tonnes) • 32.6% other treatment (41,705 tonnes) • 44.1% landfill (56,422 tonnes)

Waste Management

59


Introduction

E1 Number of planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency advice on flooding and water quality grounds

None 65

E2 Change in areas of biodiversity importance Three additional sites designated as Local Nature Reserves (107.5ha total area) 69

ENVI

RO

NM

ENTA

LQ

UA

LITY

E3 Renewable energy generation Photovoltaic panels: 30,000kWh annual capacity Solar thermal: 9,500kWh annual capacity

Environmental Management

66

Key to symbols used in report:

√ Target met √/X Target partially met X Target not met ∅ No target ! Data currently not available


Introduction

Figure 1 Visual summary of the Core Strategy


Havering in Context

2 Havering in Context

2.1 The London Borough of Havering is located in north east London and is the third largest London Borough, covering 112 square kilometres (approximately 43 square miles). It is bordered by the London Boroughs of Barking and Dagenham, Redbridge, and Bexley; by the Essex Districts of Thurrock, Brentwood and Epping Forest; and by the River Thames along the southern edge.

2.2 Havering is a mainly prosperous Borough with a diverse and successful economy although there are local pockets of social deprivation. Over half of the Borough is in the Green Belt, with significant areas of the remainder mainly suburban in character and appearance. Romford is an important metropolitan town centre for north east London, and there are smaller but significant district centres at Collier Row, Elm Park, Harold Hill, Hornchurch, Rainham and Upminster.

2.3 Havering enjoys a key strategic location within London, as shown in Figure 2: • Less than 20 minutes away from Central London by rail • At the heart of the Thames Gateway, a key priority for London and national

government • Minutes away from the Olympic Park in Stratford • Good access to the London-Stansted-Cambridge Growth Area • Good access to the M25 and routes into the South East of England and Europe

Figure 2 Havering’s strategic position within the sub-region


Havering in Context

2.4 Proposed growth in the London Riverside area of Havering forms a central element of the spatial strategy for the borough. The London Plan (consolidated with Alterations since 2004) identifies the wider London Riverside as an Opportunity Area to provide 20,000 new homes and 14,000 new jobs. Within this area Rainham is identified as a major development opportunity, with the potential for new mixed urban communities along the A1306 and in Rainham. The adjacent Rainham Marshes and riverside open space are to be planned to provide a regionally important environmental and leisure asset for east London.

2.5 In addition to policies in the Core Strategy and Site Specific Allocations DPD, the Council is developing the London Riverside SPD to provide further guidance on development in the area. There is potential to provide 4,000 homes within the Havering area of London Riverside, and for CEME and Beam Reach Business Park to generate and attract higher value advanced manufacturing businesses to the area. Several transport infrastructure interventions are required to support the envisaged growth, including East London Transit; improvements to the c2c London-Tilbury-Southend railway line; a new station at Beam Park; improvements to the Rainham interchange; and bus improvements in the Ferry Lane/Beam Reach employment area.

Population 2.6 The Office of National Statistics (ONS) estimated population of Havering for mid-2008 is

230,100. This equates to an increase of 2.7 percent since the 2001 census (population 224,000).

2.7 The Greater London Authority (GLA) also produces population estimates, in the form of yearly demographic projections, which include both low and high projections. The low projection is entirely driven by the increase in homes at the borough level and the GLA recommends that the low projections by used for detailed analysis and planning and the borough and ward levels. The high projections establish the impact on London of the ONS 2006 based population projection for England as well as incorporating local housing stock information. Table 2 shows GLA high projections for population up to 2017 (the end of the current housing plan period for the London Plan), with a growth of 5.0 percent by 2017.

Year Table 2 Total population, 2001-2017

Population Period Population Change Percent Change

2001 224,824

2008 230,481 2001-2008 5,657 2.5%

2012 234,987 2008-2012 4,505 2.0%

2017 242,101 2012-2017 7,115 3.0%

2008-2017 11,620 5.0% Source: GLA 2008 Round Demographic Projections (RLP High), © 2009

2.8 In 2001 Havering had the highest proportion of older people of any London Borough, with 17.7 percent of the population 65 or older. While the number of older residents is projected to fall in the short term, despite an increasing population, Havering is expected to have a steady growth in the number of older people from 2011 onwards. The


Havering in Context

projections also show that, in terms of gender, Havering has a higher proportion of females than males in the 65 and over age group (refer to Figure 3). Havering’s ageing population places specific demands in terms of extra care accommodation and the need to create accessible environments and homes adapted to the exigencies of life; the latter point is equally important for households with very young children.

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Num

ber o

f Res

iden

ts 6

5+

Males Females Total

Figure 3 Number of Residents 65+, 2001-2026 Source: GLA 2008 Round Demographic Projections (RLP High), © 2009

Household Size and Type 2.9 The GLA demographic projections also include household projections for every fifth year,

using household representative rates from the Communities and Local Government (CLG) revised 2004-based household projections to link population and households with dwelling and household change. The total number of households in Havering is projected to rise by 15.5 percent (2006-2026); this is fully 5 percent below the CLG reported rate of increase in England (20.7 percent) and London (20.8 percent) for the same period1.

2.10 There is an overall trend for households becoming smaller in size; the average household size in England is projected to fall to 2.11 by 2026 and to 2.15 in London over the same period2. While average household size is predicted to decrease in Havering by 5.3 percent (for the period 2006 to 2026), the average household size of 2.26 projected by the GLA remains above the London average. Refer to Table 3.

1 CLG Revised 2004-based Projections of Households in England to 2029 2 Ibid.


Havering in Context

Table 3 Total population, total households and average household size, 2001-2026 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 Change 06-26

Population 224,824 228,708 234,133 240,363 249,338 256,386 12.1%

Households 91,859 93,733 97,135 101,498 105,597 108,272 15.5%

Average Household Size 2.43 2.39 2.36 2.32 2.29 2.26 -5.4% Source: GLA 2008 Round Demographic Projections (RLP High), © 2009

2.11 The composition of households is also projected to change over time, with a continued shrinkage in married couple households (by 8.9 percent, 2006-2026) and other multi-person households (by 4.6 percent, 2006-2026). The largest increase by far is in cohabiting couple households, projected to grow by 65 percent between 2006-2026. The number of one person households and lone parent households will also increase over the given period, by 39.4 percent and 31.5 percent respectively (refer to Figure 4).

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

Hou

seho

lds

Oneperson Households 25654 27542 30026 32930 35888 38382 Other Multiperson Households 5144 4980 4945 4900 4845 4749 Lone Parent Households 5643 6651 7326 8041 8518 8747 Cohabiting Couple Households 6904 9087 11272 12953 14148 14991 Married Couple Households 48514 45472 43566 42674 42198 41402

2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Figure 4 GLA Household Projections by Type, 2001-2026 Source: GLA 2008 Round Demographic Projections (RLP High), © 2009

2.12 However, while the number of married couple households will shrink, this will remain the most prevalent household type in Havering up until 2026. This is in contrast the trend in both London, where one person households became the most prevalent type in 2006, and


Havering in Context

England, where the same will have occurred by 20263. Therefore, it is important for Havering to retain its stock of and provide additional family homes.

House Prices 2.13 The House Price Index (HPI) is produced by the Land Registry and measures the

movement of house prices in England and Wales. It is considered to be an accurate indicator of house price trends at various geographic levels. March 2009 data shows that the average house price in Havering fell by 15.3 percent over the reporting year, to £238,955, making Havering one of the less expensive boroughs in which to buy a house. Refer to Table 4.

Table 4 Lowest average houses prices by London borough, March 2009 Rank Borough Annual change (%) Average price (£) 1 Barking and Dagenham -18.5 206,145 2 Newham -15.9 218,451 3 Waltham Forest -17.2 221,561 4 Bexley -12.4 222,514 5 Sutton -16.8 227,241 6 Croydon -14.8 237,849 7 Havering -15.3 238,955 8 Enfield -13.2 243,218 9 Greenwich -12.3 246,605 10 Hillingdon -11.1 247,765 Source: Land Registry House Price Index Headline statistics, © March 2009

2.14 The annual rate of change is the price change relative to the same month twelve months earlier (March 2009 as compared with March 2008), and reflects the best estimate for how much the value of a typical property has changed over the preceding twelve months. According to the March 2009 headline statistics, all regions in England and Wales experienced a decrease in average property values, with an overall annual decrease of 16.2 percent. At £238,955 the average house price in Havering is well above the average house price in England and Wales of £152,892, but below the London average of £299,613.

2.15 The 2009 edition of Focus on London also publishes data on housing prices, including price to earnings ratios by borough complied from CLG live tables 576, 577, 582, 583. Within Havering, for Q2 2008, median house price was £225,000 and lower quartile price was £184,950, giving a price to earnings ratio of 7.8 and 8.8 respectively. While house prices in Havering have become relatively more affordable with the context of London as a whole, houses have not necessarily become more affordable for residents; the 2006 Housing Needs Survey Update identified a price to earnings ratio of 8, which has remained relatively consistent to date despite falling house prices.

2.16 Within Havering, housing is relatively less affordable for those with lower incomes. This is reflected in the significant rise in the numbers applying for a council/housing association home; while the number of lettings per year has stayed relatively consistent from 2005/06 to 2008/09, the number on the housing register at the start of the year has risen from

3 CLG Revised 2004-based Projections of Households in England to 2029


Havering in Context

approximately 3,500 in 2005/06 to just under 8,000 in 2008/09 (LB Havering Housing Strategy 2010-2012).

Employment and Unemployment 2.17 In terms of labour supply (residents who are employed), Havering performs comparatively

well both within London and nationally. For the reporting year, ONS estimate 115,300 jobs in Havering, of which 85.4 percent were employee jobs and 13.6 percent were self employed (refer to Table 5). Excluding the City of London, Havering and Wandsworth are the London boroughs with the highest working age employment rate at 77.9 percent; the lowest working age employment rate in London is 58.1 percent. At the regional level, London has the lowest working age employment rate (70.1 percent) in England; Great Britain has a rate of 73.9 percent. Working age is defined as males aged between 16 and 64 and females aged between 16 and 50.

Table 5 Employment and unemployment, April 2008 to March 2009 Havering (number) Havering (%) London (%) Great Britain (%)

Economically active 123,100 83.5 75.8 78.9

In employment 115,300 77.9 70.1 73.9

Employees 98,500 66.1 59.1 64.4 Self employed 15,700 10.9 10.6 9.1

Unemployed (model based) 7,000 5.8 7.4 6.2 Economically active/employment numbers are for those aged 16 and over, % for those of working age Unemployed numbers and % are for those aged 16 and over, % is a proportion of economically active. Source: ONS annual population survey

2.18 Havering also performs comparatively well both within London and nationally in terms of earnings of residents; median gross weekly pay of full-time workers is £608.40, as compared to £580.80 in London and £479.30 in Great Britain. However, the median gross weekly pay (full-time) of people who work in Havering is significantly lower, at £552.00, as compared to £612.70 in London and £479.10 in Great Britain4. Thus residents who are employed outside the borough tend to have higher earnings that those employed in the borough. As can be seen in Figures 5 and 6, earnings of people who work in Havering have risen faster than earnings of people who are resident in Havering; in both cases earnings have grown faster than the London and Great Britain rate.

4 ONS annual survey of hours and earnings – resident analysis


Havering in Context

700

600

Gro

ss w

eekl

y pa

y (£

)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

500

400

300

200

100

0

Havering London Great Britain

Figure 5 Median earnings for employees working in Havering Source: ONS Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings - workplace analysis

700

600

Gro

ss w

eekl

y pa

y (£

)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

500

400

300

200

100

0

Havering London Great Britain

Figure 6 Median earnings for employees living in Havering Source: ONS Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings - resident analysis


Havering in Context

2.19 In 2007 Havering had a job density of 0.60; job density is the ratio of total jobs to working age population. This is significantly lower than both the London density of 0.93 and the Great Britain density of 0.83. With a total of 82,000 jobs in the borough (including employees, self-employed, government supported trainees and HM Forces), Havering has significantly more residents than jobs5. The 2007 Annual Business Inquiry showed that the majority of employee jobs (86 percent) within Havering were in the service industry, with construction and manufacturing making up the remainder (refer to Table 6). Because of the low labour demand within Havering, a significant number of residents must travel outside the borough to gain employment. Moreover, the job density has been decreasing steadily, from 0.66 in 2000.

Table 6 Employee jobs by industry, 2007 Number of employees

Manufacturing 4,000

Construction 5,200

Services 59,600

Distribution, hotels and restaurants 20,700 Transport and communications 4,300 Finance, IT, other business activities 15,400 Public administration, education & health 15,700 Other services 3,600

Total 69,200 Source: ONS Annual Business Inquiry - Employee Analysis

2.20 In April 2009 there were 5,255 people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA), equivalent to 3.8 percent of the resident working age population. This is lower than the unemployment rate in both London (4.1 percent) and Great Britain (4.1 percent). This is the highest rate of unemployment in Havering since January 1997, when 4.0 percent of residents were claiming JSA; Havering achieved its lowest unemployment rate of 1.6 percent in October 2007. Havering is largely congruent with trends in unemployment over time in London and Great Britain, however Havering’s unemployment rate of 3.8 percent has stayed consistent up to October 2009, whereas the rate is London rose to 4.3 percent in July 2009 and 4.5 percent in October 2009.

Deprivation 2.21 Havering is ranked 200 out of 354 local authorities in England in terms of average

deprivation, where 1 is the most deprived. There are 149 Super Output Areas in Havering, with one in the top 10 percent most deprived.

2.22 In August 2008, Havering had 6,880 income support claimants, equivalent to a rate of 5.0 percent; Havering ranks 161 out of the 354 local authorities in England by claimant rate. The majority of these claimants were Disabled (47 percent) and Lone Parents (44 percent). Havering compares favourably to both the London claimant rate of 7.3 percent and the claimant rate of 6.0 percent in Great Britain.6

2.23 Havering is a relatively affluent Borough but this hides localised deprivation. In particular, parts of Harold Hill, Mardyke in Rainham and Waterloo Road in Romford fall within the 20

5 ONS jobs density 2007 6 DWP Information Directorate: Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study


Havering in Context

percent most deprived areas in England (see Figure 7). These areas tend to suffer from poor educational achievement, poor health and poor housing conditions. In response to this LB Havering has initiated several regeneration programmes.

2.24 For example, Harold Hill Ambitions is a long-term regeneration programme that aims to transform the quality of life for residents through physical regeneration and creation of opportunities for local residents. Demolition of the Mardyke Estate begin in November 2009, marking the beginning of phase one of a six year regeneration programme, spread over four phases, that will see all existing properties demolished and replaced with up to 555 homes in modern low-rise blocks.


Havering in Context

Figure 7 Index of Multiple Deprivation


Havering in Context

Key Findings

• Havering is expected to have a steady growth in the number of older people from 2011 onwards, placing specific demands in terms of extra care accommodation and the need to create accessible environments and homes adapted to the exigencies of life.

• While the total number of households is expected to rise and the size of households decrease, this will happen more slowly in Havering than in England and London.

• Married couple households will remain the most prevalent household type in Havering in 2026, in contrast the trend in both London, where one person households became the most prevalent type in 2006, and England, where the same will have occurred by 2026.

• The average house price in Havering fell by 15.3 percent over the reporting year, to £238,955, making Havering one of the least expensive London boroughs in which to buy a house. Regardless, the house price to earning ratio remained relatively unchanged and just under 8,000 people remained on the housing register at the end of the reporting period.

• Along with Wandsworth (and excluding the City of London), Havering residents have the highest working age employment rate at 77.9 percent and comparatively high earnings. However, the job density in Havering is low at 0.60 and while the unemployment rate compares favourably within London and Great Britain, it is the highest since January 1997.

• Havering is a relatively affluent Borough, ranking 200 out of 354 local authorities in England in terms of average deprivation, but this hides pockets of localised deprivation which tend to suffer from poor educational achievement, poor health and poor housing conditions.


Local Development Scheme

3 The Local Development Scheme

3.1 The Local Development Scheme (LDS) sets out the timetable for the production of Development Plan Documents (DPDs) and Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs). Havering’s first LDS was approved by the Government Office for London (GOL) in March 2005, meeting the requirement to have an approved LDS in place by 28 March 2005. The current LDS was approved in June 2007, and this AMR monitors the progress of document production in the reporting period against the milestones set in the 2007 LDS.

Development Plan Documents 3.2 Good progress has been made on the DPDs, with the Core Strategy, Development

Control Policies, Site Specific Allocations, Proposals Map and Romford Area Action Plan all adopted in 2008/09. Progress on the remaining DPDs can be found in Table 7 below. It can be seen that implications arising from the LDF examination affected the timetable for the preparation of the key DPDs. The current LDS accommodated necessary changes in the timetable for preparing the Joint Waste DPD with Barking and Dagenham, Newham and Redbridge and included two new DPDs covering Sites for Minerals and Gypsy and Traveller Sites.

Table 7 Progress of DPDs DPD Adoption Date Comments

Core Strategy

Development Control Policies

Site Specific Allocations

July 2008

October 2008

July 2008

The Core Strategy was adopted seven months later that the December 2007 date set out in the 2007 LDS, due to the need for further consultation on CP2 Affordable Housing. The Development Control Policies were adopted later than the Core Strategy because the Council took up the Inspector’s recommended changes to DC6 with the Secretary of State, who issued a direction that the 50 percent site specific target for affordable housing be deleted to reflect the Council’s objectives. The Site Specific Allocations DPD was adopted one month earlier than the date set out in the 2007 LDS.

Proposals Map October 2008 Adoption of the Proposals Map could only be undertaken with the Development Control Policies DPD so it was adopted six months later than the date set out in the 2007 LDS.

Romford Area Action Plan October 2008

The Romford Area Action Plan was adopted six months earlier than set out in the 2007 LDS.

Joint Waste

Minerals

The proposed submission DPD was consulted on in August and September 2009. Plans to formally submit in March 2010. The call for sites closed 31st December 2008. The Sustainability Appraisal and Issues and Options Report are planned to take the DPD forward in 2010.

Gypsies & Travellers Refer to paragraph 3.6



3.3 The Council is currently finalising a draft revised LDS which will be submitted to the GLA for approval in early 2010 to take account of the key changes impacting the schedule of production. These are addressed below.

3.4 In 2008 changes came into force which require local authorities to publish a proposed submission document for a period of consultation before it is formally submitted to the Secretary of State, requiring changes to the timetable for preparation of the Joint Waste DPD to reflect the additional time needed to consider comments received on the proposed submission document.

3.5 Other LDF priorities, staff resources and the need to consider whether specialist input was required have delayed progress on the Minerals DPD following the call for sites which ended in December 2008. However, the timescale in the proposed revised LDS reflects this delay while identifying the council’s commitment to progress this DPD in 2010/11.

3.6 The timetable for the production of the Gypsy and Traveller DPD was based on the expectation that the necessary GLA Needs Assessment would inform the document. Following the publication of the Needs Assessment in 2008 there followed a period during which the GLA considered different statistical methods for how it may seek to apportion the London-wide need for pitch provision across the London boroughs, causing a delay to the preparation of the DPD. The timescale in the proposed revised LDS reflects this delay while identifying the council’s commitment to progress this DPD in 2010/11.

Supplementary Planning Documents 3.7 Progress on the preparation of SPDs partly reflects the fact that SPDs cannot be adopted

until the policies they support have been formally adopted, and as such they were affected by the outcomes of the LDF examination as set out in Table 7. In addition, staff resources in the Development Planning team have had to be utilised to also allow the Council’s other planning and regeneration directives to be tackled. Progress on the SPDs has been helped by staff from other service areas undertaking work on a number of SPDs. The progress to date is summarised in Table 8. Two SPDs were adopted in the reporting period, and a further three up to the end of 2009.

3.8 Subject to Member approval, three draft SPDs are scheduled to be published for public consultation in winter 2009/10: Residential Design, Planning Obligations and Heritage. The remaining (number) of SPDs will be taken forward in 2010/11. The Council also proposes to delete four SPDs from the proposed revised LDS: Affordable Housing, Educational Needs Generated by New Development, Hornchurch and Travel Plans. The SPDs have been identified for deletion to avoid duplication; their proposed content is sufficiently covered within the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies and other relevant London wide policies.



Table 8 Progress of SPDs SPD Adoption Date Comments

Emerson Park February 2009 None

Hall Lane Protection of Trees During Development Sustainable Design and Construction Protecting and Enhancing the Borough’s Biodiversity

Designing Safer Places

Residential Design

February 2009

April 2009

April 2009

May 2009

None

None

None

None

The Draft Designing Safer Places SPD was published for consultation from 19th October to 30th November 2009. Adoption is expected in early 2010

Proposed January 2010 consultation

Planning Obligations Proposed January 2010 consultation

Heritage Proposed February 2010 consultation


Development Control Performance

4 Development Control Performance

4.1 DCLG produces a biannual (March and September) Checklist on Planning Performance of Local Authorities to show how local authorities are reaching decisions on planning applications in the preceding 12 month period. The Checklist looks at the total number of major, minor and other applications, and the percent determined within the specified timeframe. Government targets for handling applications are: • 60 percent of major applications (10 or more dwellings or over 1000m2 floorspace or

one hectare site area) to be determined within 13 weeks • 65 percent of minor applications to be determined within 8 weeks • 80 percent of all other applications (including householder, change of use, listed

building and conservation consents and applications to display advertisements) to be determined within 8 weeks

4.2 The most recent data published by CLG is for the year ending September 2008. Havering performed very well, determining 90.4 percent of major application, 90.3 percent of minor applications, and 96.7 percent of other decisions within target. Within London for this period, Havering is the best performing local authority for minor decisions, the second best performing for other decisions, and the third best for major decisions. Nationally, Havering ranks 13th, 12th and 25th respectively. Details can be found in Table 9. For comparison purposes, the performance in the 12 month period ending 31 March 2008 is shown in brackest.

Table 9 Havering Development Control performance, year ending September 2008

Rank No. of Decisions % decided within Government targets Major Decisions 25 52 90.4 (93.8)

Minor Decisions 13 535 90.3 (92.7)

Other Decisions 12 1713 96.7 (98.0) Source: CLG Planning Performance Checklist – Year ending September 2008, May 2009

4.3 The significant majority (74.4 percent) of the 2300 decisions made by LB Havering Development Control from September 2007 – September 2008 fell into the other category of application, as can be seen in Figures 8, 9 and 10. Havering is close to the median in all categories in terms of the number of applications determined for all categories.

4.4 LB Havering is exploring the feasibility of monitoring the outcomes of planning decisions based on the usage of policies in the decision making process to identify if Core Strategy and Development Control Polices and producing their intended outcomes. For example the policies quoted in officer reports and the policies used at appeal may be monitored to determine the success of policies. This will contribute to assessing the effectiveness of the LDF and to identifying the need for policy revisions.



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Barki

ngan

d Dag

enha

mBa

rnet

Bexle

yBr

ent

Brom

ley

Camd

en

City of

Lond

onCr

oydo

nEa

ling

Enfie

ld Gr

eenw

ich

Hack

ney

Hamm

ersmi

th and

Fulha

mHa

ringe

y Ha

rrow

Have

ring

Hillin

gdon

Ho

unslo

w Isl

ington

Kens

ington

and C

helse

a

Kings

ton up

onTh

ames

La

mbeth

Le

wish

am

Merto

n Ne

wham

Re

dbrid

ge

Richm

ond u

pon T

hame

s So

uthwa

rk Su

tton

Towe

r Ham

lets

Walth

amF

orest

Wand

swort

h

Westm

inster

No.

of d

ecis

ions

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

% d

ecid

ed w

ithin

13

wee

ks

No. of decisions % decided within 13 weeks

Figure 8 Number of major decisions and percent determined in 13 weeks by London borough Source: DCLG Checklist on Planning Performance of Local Authorities, September 2008



0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Barki

ngan

d Dag

enha

mBa

rnet

Bexle

yBr

ent

Brom

ley

Camd

en

City o

f Lon

don

Croy

don

Ealin

gEn

field

Gree

nwich

Ha

ckne

y

Hamm

ersmi

than

d Fulh

am

Harin

gey

Harro

w Ha

verin

g Hil

lingd

on

Houn

slow

Isling

ton

Kens

ington

and C

helse

a

Kings

tonup

onTh

ames

Lamb

eth

Lewi

sham

Merto

n Ne

wham

Re

dbrid

ge

Richm

ond u

pon T

hame

s So

uthwa

rk Su

tton

Towe

r Ham

lets

Walth

amFo

rest

Wand

swort

h

Westm

inster

No. of decisions

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

% d

ecid

ed w

ithin

8 w

eeks


Figure 9 Number of minor decisions and percent determined in 8 weeks by London borough Source: DCLG Checklist on Planning Performance of Local Authorities, September 2008



0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Barki

ng an

d Dag

enha

mBa

rnet

Bexle

yBr

ent

Brom

ley

Camd

en

City o

f Lon

don

Croy

don

Ealin

gEn

field

Gree

nwich

Ha

ckne

y

Hamm

ersmi

th and

Fulha

mHa

ringe

y Ha

rrow

Have

ring

Hillin

gdon

Ho

unslo

w Isl

ington

Kens

ington

and C

helse

a

Kings

ton up

onTh

ames

La

mbeth

Le

wish

am

Merto

n Ne

wham

Re

dbrid

ge

Richm

ond u

pon T

hame

s So

uthwa

rk Su

tton

Towe

r Ham

lets

Walth

amF

orest

Wand

swort

h

Westm

inster

No.

of d

ecis

ions

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

% d

ecid

ed w

ithin

8 w

eeks


Figure 10 Number of other decisions and percent determined in 8 weeks by London borough Source: DCLG Checklist on Planning Performance of Local Authorities, September 2008


5

Places to Live

Places to Live Core Policy Strategic Objectives

• Make Havering a place where people will want to live and where local people are able to stay and prosper, by ensuring that local and subregional housing need is addressed whilst maintaining and enhancing the character of Havering’s residential environment which makes the borough such an attractive place to live

• Ensure the housing needs of the borough’s more vulnerable people are met. • Achieve sustainable new communities in London Riverside and support the continuing

urban renaissance of Romford Town Centre.

Relevant LDF Indicators: 1 to 16 (7,8 and 9 are no longer Core Output Indicators; new Core Output Indicators are highlighted as ‘N’)

5.1 Most of Havering’s almost 98,000 dwellings are suburban in character, built between 1919 and 1964. At 42 percent Havering has the second highest number of semidetached homes in London as a proportion of total stock, though in recent a number of flatted schemes have been introduced into town centre locations. Havering is the only east London borough with more than 10 percent of its stock being detached. However there are important concentrations of local authority/housing association stock in Waterloo Road, the Mardyke Estate and Harold Hill. Sub-regionally Havering therefore plays an important role in offering a diversity of and quality of housing stock and residential environment that is limited in other parts of East London.

5.2 The 2006 Update to the Havering Housing Needs Survey estimated that 78.9 percent of the borough’s households are owner-occupiers, 14.5 percent are in the social rented sector and 6.6 percent are in the private rented sector. This housing tenure profile differs significantly from London as a whole, with 58 percent owner-occupied, 26 percent social rented and 14 percent private rented; and from Outer London, with 68 percent owner-occupied, 18 percent social rented and 12 percent private rented.7 Havering’s rate of owner-occupation is also above the UK average of 73 percent.

5.3 Within the owner-occupied sector, there is a surplus of three and four bedroom accommodation, with the result that the main shortfall is for one and two bedroom homes. Data from the 2006 Update also shows a large surplus of private rented housing for all dwellings sizes except one bedroom properties. Although there is a significant shortfall in the borough of affordable housing of all sizes, it is more pronounced for two and three bedroom houses. While intermediate forms of housing have recently become more prominent, the 2006 Update recommends that the annual need for affordable homes should be met by social rented housing as intermediate forms are not affordable for households in need.

7 GLA DMAG Briefing 2007-17 A profile of Londoners by housing tenure: Analysis of Annual Population Survey & Labour Force Survey Data


Places to Live

CP1 Housing Supply Ref Type Description Target Met 1 Core H2(a)

Net additional dwellings – in previous years (for the previous 5 year period) No target ∅

2 Core H2(b) Net additional dwellings – for the reporting year 535 √

3 Core H2(c) Net additional dwellings – in future years No target ∅

4 Core H1 Plan period and housing targets No target ∅

5 Core H2(d) Managed delivery target No target ∅

5.4 Indicators 1 to 5 inclusive are based on the housing trajectory, updated annually, which sets out the expected delivery of new housing over the coming 15 years based on past trends and known sites expected to be developed. The housing trajectory is shown in Table 11 and Figures 11 and 12. As can be seen, the Council expects to meet and exceed its housing delivery targets over the plan period. The key reason for this is the ability of London Riverside to accommodate up to 4,000 additional homes.

5.5 While the housing trajectory has been prepared on the basis of the best information available, it is not a guarantee that the housing shown will come forward in the time indicated or at all. Most of the development sites identified rely on the private sector for implementation. Although the current plan period began in 2007/08, Tables 10 and 11 and Figures 11 and 12 begin in 2004/05 to cover the previous five year period as recommended by CLG guidance on housing trajectories.

5.6 The current plan period set by the London Plan (consolidated with Alterations since 2004) runs from 2007/08 to 2016/17, and sets a target for Havering of 535 new dwellings per annum; because the period covered by the Core Strategy is until 2020 the figure of 535 new dwellings per annum has been used for this period despite no targets being set by the GLA for 2017 onwards, as recommended by the London Plan.

5.7 Between 2003/04 and 2007/08 a total of 2,635 dwellings were completed, an average of 527 dwellings per year. This exceeds the target of 350 new dwellings per annum for the period 1997/98 to 2006/07, but falls short of the target of 535 new dwellings per annum from 2007/08 onwards.

5.8 There were 628 net additional dwellings completed in 2008/09, exceeding the target of 535 by 23 percent. However, last year’s AMR forecast completions of 758, meaning actual completions fell short of projections by 130 dwellings. Although there was a decrease in the number of private sector homes built due to the prevailing economic conditions, this was offset by additional affordable homes brought forward from the 2009/10 programme on the Oldchurch Hospital site in Romford.

5.9 Completions data to the end of September 2009 show that 150 dwellings have been completed to date in the current year (2009/10), accounting for 28 percent of the target of 535 additional dwellings. Due to demolitions at the Chippenham/Darlington Gardens site and the Mardyke Estate, net completions are projected as 272, significantly below the target.


Places to Live

5.10 However, as can be seen in Table 11, the five year assessment of sites (covering the period 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2015) identifies the delivery of an additional 3,794 dwellings, which exceeds the target of 2,675 dwellings by 42 percent. The five year calculation is based on historical trends in minor completions (set at 160 per year) and a detailed analysis of major sites underway, with planning permission, and within the planning pipeline. This includes sites that have been allocated within the Core Strategy and Romford Area Action Plan as well as other sites that have come forward.

5.11 All sites included within the five year calculation have been assessed following the CLG criteria of being available, suitable and achievable. The capacity of those allocated sites not projected to be delivered by 2014/15 has been distributed equally between the remaining five years until the end of the plan period (2019/20). The site schedule for delivery is included in Appendix B, along with the method for completing the housing trajectory.

5.12 The managed delivery target is the annual number of completions needed to meet the strategic plan total, taking into account any shortfalls or surpluses from both previous and future years; it represents the number of completions needed to get a plan strategy back on track at any point in time. The managed delivery target for each year allows the Council to assess if past shortfalls or surpluses will be addressed through future trends in supply, or if there is a need for action to ensure delivery of the strategic allocation.

5.13 If the projected completions in future years are realised, Havering will meet a cumulative target calculated on the basis of the current annual target until 2023/24, despite projected net additions of zero in the final four years of the 15 year period. The manage line shows that despite projected completions below target in 2009/10 and 2010/11, Havering is expected to meet it housing target a year early, in 2018/19 (refer to Figure 11). Moreover, the Monitor line (Figure 12) remains above zero through the trajectory, indicating that Havering is over-delivering every year relative to its requirement.

5.14 Over the 20 year period of the projection, it is expected that Havering will exceed its current target of 535 new dwelling per annum. The Draft Replacement London Plan issued for consultation in October 2009 sets an annual average housing target of 1,235 for Havering from 2011-2021, based on the London Strategic Housing Land Availability Study/Housing Capacity Study (SHLAA/HCS). However, 1,235 is a draft target and will not be incorporated into Havering’s housing trajectory until the revised London Plan is adopted. In addition, the Council is seeking to reduce this target as part of its response to the Draft Replacement London Plan.


Places to Live

Table 10 Housing plan period and targets Start of Plan period End of Plan period Total housing required Source of plan target

H1 Plan period & housing targets 1 April 2007 31 March 2017 5,350 The London Plan

H1(b) (if required) 1 April 2007 31 March 2020 6,955 Havering Core Strategy

Table 11 Housing Trajectory 2003/04 to 2023/24 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24

Rep Cur 1 2 3 4 5

H2a 393 468 711 460 603

H2b 628

H2c

Net additions 272 335 846 844 1017 752 1037 1037 1037 1037 1037 0 0 0 0

Hecatres 2.90 6.89 6.26 6.27 6.68

Target 350 350 350 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535 535

H2d 507 509 498 500 494 485 500 513 485 453 396 357 272 162 16 -188 -494 -659 -988 -1976


2003

/0420

04/05

2005

/0620

06/07

2007

/08

2008

/09

2009

/1020

10/11

2011

/1220

12/13

2013

/1420

14/15

2015

/1620

16/17

2017

/1820

18/19

2019

/2020

20/21

2021

/2220

22/23

2023

/24

Places to Live

393

468

711

460

603

844

1017

752

1037 1037 1037 1037 1037

0 0 0 0

846

335

272

628

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100 D

wel

lings

Annual Past CompletionsAnnual Projected CompletionsReporting Year CompletionsPLAN - Strategic AllocationMANAGE - Annual requirement taking account of past/projected completions

Figure 11 Housing Trajectory 2003/04 to 2023/24


Places to Live

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

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

2017

/18

2018

/19

2019

/20

2020

/21

2021

/22

2022

/23

2023

/24

Dw

ellin

gs

M O NITOR - Number of dwellings abov e or below

Figure 12 Cumulative difference between target and completions 2003/04 to 2023/24


Places to Live

CP2 Sustainable Communities Ref Type Description Target Met 6 Core H3

New and converted dwellings on previously developed land

Maintain current percent of homes built on brownfield sites !

5.15 No data available. The Council is currently liaising with other departments to ensure collection of this indicator in future AMRs.

Ref Type Description Target Met N1 Core H4

Net additional pitches (Gypsy and Traveller) No target ∅

5.16 N1 is a new indicator for 2008/09, based on the revision to the COI published by DCLG in July 2008. The London Boroughs’ Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (March 2008) was commissioned by the GLA in response to the Housing Act 2004 which requires local authorities to consider Gypsies and Travellers accommodation needs in their local housing assessments. It identified a minimum of 17 and maximum of 23 additional pitches required in the borough up to 2017.

5.17 However, the Draft Replacement London Plan issued for consultation in October 2009 allocates the provision of 42 pitches to Havering over the same period. LB Havering is currently seeking clarification from the GLA on the basis and justification for the figure apportioned in the London Plan due to it being almost double the figure identified in the 2008 Accommodation Needs Assessment. The Gypsies and Travellers DPD is scheduled to be taken forward in 2010/2011.

5.18 There were no additional Gypsy and Traveller pitches (permanent or transit) designated in 2008/09. Havering currently has five private authorised sites with permanent planning permission, with a total of 14 caravans/mobile homes; seven private authorised sites with temporary planning permission due to expire 2009-2012, with a total of 24 caravans/mobile homes; and 8 unauthorised sites with a total of 54 caravans.

Ref Type Description Target Met 10 Core H5 Gross affordable housing completions 50 percent of all new housing affordable √

5.19 There were 545 affordable housing completions in 2008/09, of which 154 were social rent homes and 391 were intermediate homes. This represents 86.7 percent of new housing completions, and exceeds the target of 50 percent of all new housing built in Havering to be affordable set out in the Core Strategy under policy DC6 (Affordable Housing).

5.20 Intermediate homes are broken down into the following categories as shown in Table 12: • Open Market HomeBuy, including First Time Buyers Initiative (FTBI), London Wide

Initiative, MyChoiceHomeBy (MCHB) and Homey Direct (HB Direct) • New Build HomeBuy (NBHB) • Intermediate Market Rent (IMR) for key workers

Open Market HomeBuy is a government-backed flexible equity loan scheme designed to help local authority and housing association tenants, key workers and others who are not able to afford to buy a suitable home in an area where they live or work without


Places to Live

assistance. New Build HomeBuy properties are sold as leasehold on shared ownership terms to key workers, existing social housing tenants and those in priority housing need, with rents on the share not owned calculated to be affordable.

Table 12 New build affordable homes completed 2008/09 RSL/Developer Scheme Units Size Type S106 Funding Month English Partnerships FTBI 1 2 Bed FTBI No HC April 08 Estuary Upper Brentwood Road 4 2 Bed Rent Yes RSL April 08 London & Quadrant P&R 4 3 Bed Rent No HC April 08 English Partnerships FTBI 1 3 Bed FTBI No HC May 08 English Partnerships FTBI 1 2 Bed FTBI No HC May 08 English Partnerships LWI 3 2 Bed LWI No HC May 08 London & Quadrant P&R 3 3 Bed Rent No HC May 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 2 Bed NBHB No HC May 08 English Partnerships LWI 21 2 Bed LWI No HC June 08 London & Quadrant P&R 1 4 Bed Rent No HC June 08 One Housing Group Charrington Court 1 1 Bed Rent No HC June 08 One Housing Group Charrington Court 21 2 Bed Rent No HC June 08 One Housing Group Charrington Court 2 3 Bed Rent No HC June 08 One Housing Group Charrington Court 6 1 Bed NBHB No HC June 08 One Housing Group Charrington Court 33 2 Bed NBHB No HC June 08 English Partnerships FTBI 2 3 Bed FTBI No HC July 08 Paddington Churches HA P&R Phase 2 1 2 Bed Rent No HC July 08 Paddington Churches HA P&R Phase 2 2 4 Bed Rent No HC July 08 Paddington Churches HA P&R Phase 2 2 3 Bed Rent No HC July 08 English Partnerships FTBI 1 2 Bed FTBI No HC August 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 2 3 Bed Rent No HC August 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 2 Bed Rent No HC August 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed NBHB No HC August 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 2 2 Bed NBHB No HC August 08 English Partnerships FTBI 3 2 Bed FTBI No HC September 08 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 3 Bed MCHB No HC September 08 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 2 Bed MCHB No HC September 08 One Housing Group Marks Lodge 9 1 Bed Rent Yes HC September 08 One Housing Group Marks Lodge 16 2 Bed Rent Yes HC September 08 One Housing Group Marks Lodge 4 3 Bed Rent Yes HC September 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed NBHB No HC September 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 2 2 Bed Rent No HC September 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed NBHB No HC September 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 2 Bed NBHB No HC September 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 2 3 Bed Rent No HC September 08 A2Dominion Market Link 3 1 Bed Rent No HC October 08 A2Dominion Market Link 7 2 Bed Rent No HC October 08 A2Dominion Market Link 3 3 Bed Rent No HC October 08 A2Dominion Market Link 14 1 Bed NBHB No HC October 08 A2Dominion Market Link 19 2 Bed NBHB No HC October 08

East Thames Market Place 4 1 Bed NBHB Yes HC October 08 East Thames Void Disposals 6 3 Bed NBHB No RSL October 08


Places to Live

English Partnerships FTBI 1 2 Bed FTBI No HC October 08 Estuary Market Place 10 1 Bed Rent Yes HC October 08 London & Quadrant P&R 1 3 Bed Rent No HC October 08 Paddington Churches HA P&R Phase 2 1 3 Bed Rent No HC October 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed Rent No HC October 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed NBHB No HC October 08 East Thames Market Place 10 2 Bed NBHB Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Gooshays Gardens 3 1 Bed Rent Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Gooshays Gardens 1 2 Bed Rent Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Gooshays Gardens 6 3 Bed Rent Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Gooshays Gardens 1 1 Bed NBHB Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Gooshays Gardens 5 2 Bed NBHB Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Whitchurch Allotments 3 1 Bed Rent Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Whitchurch Allotments 6 2 Bed Rent Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Whitchurch Allotments 7 3 Bed Rent Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Whitchurch Allotments 5 1 Bed NBHB Yes HC November 08 Family Mosaic Whitchurch Allotments 4 2 Bed NBHB Yes HC November 08 London & Quadrant P&R 11 3 Bed Rent No HC November 08 London & Quadrant P&R 3 4 Bed Rent No HC November 08 London & Quadrant Park Place 1 2 Bed HB Direct No HC November 08 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 2 Bed MCHB No HC November 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 2 Bed Rent No HC November 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed NBHB No HC November 08 London & Quadrant P&R 8 3 Bed Rent No HC December 08 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 2 2 Bed MCHB No HC December 08 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 3 Bed MCHB No HC December 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 2 Bed Rent No HC December 08 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed NBHB No HC December 08

MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 2 Bed MCHB No HC January 09 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 1 Bed MCHB No HC January 09 Swan Oldchurch 1 1 Bed IMR Yes HC January 09 Swan Oldchurch 1 2 Bed IMR Yes HC January 09 Swan Oldchurch 21 4 Bed IMR Yes HC January 09

MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 3 3 Bed MCHB No HC February 09 Swan P&R Phase 3 1 3 Bed Rent No HC February 09 MHO MyChoiceHomeBuy 1 1 Bed MCHB No HC March 09 One Housing Group Marks Lodge 9 1 Bed NBHB Yes HC March 09 One Housing Group Marks Lodge 27 2 Bed NBHB Yes HC March 09

Swan Oldchurch 65 1 Bed IMR Yes HC March 09 Swan Oldchurch 39 2 Bed IMR Yes HC March 09 Swan Oldchurch 34 3 Bed IMR Yes HC March 09 Swan Oldchurch 30 4 Bed IMR Yes HC March 09

TOTAL UNITS 545 TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING UNITS* 169 ≥ 3 Bed TOTAL RENTAL UNITS 154

*Family housing units are those with three or more bedrooms * In general, only large schemes (+10 units) are identified by the name of the development


Places to Live

Ref Type Description Target Met N2 Core H6

Housing Quality - Building for Life Assessments No target ∅

5.21 N2 is a new indicator for 2008/09, based on the revision to the COI published by DCLG in July 2008. The indicator monitors the quality of new housing development, and Building for Life forms the national standard for well designed homes.

5.22 There were no Building for Life Assessments carried out in 2008/09. The Residential Design SPD (to be adopted early 2010) expects developers to submit a response to Building for Life questions as part of the Design Statement when making a planning application for 10 or more dwellings, and encourages smaller applications to respond to the criteria as well. Development Control staff are currently undergoing relevant training and a designated Building for Life assessor will be appointed.

Ref Type Description Target Met 11 Local Number of net completions by housing size and type and tenure No target ∅

5.23 Data is currently only available for affordable housing completions. Refer to Table 13.

Table 13 Net dwellings completions by size, type and tenure Size Housing Association Private Sale Total Private Sale + Housing Association Tenure No. Units No. Units

1 Bedroom Rent Buy

29 107

No data available No data available

2 Bedroom Rent Buy

61 179


3 Bedroom Rent Buy

58 54


4 Bedroom Rent Buy

6 51


Family Homes (3+ bedrooms)

Rent Buy

64 105


Rent 154All 83

Buy 391 Total 545 83 628

Ref Type Description Target Met

12 SEI Average density of new housing 30-50 dwellings/ha and >50/ha in areas of high public transport accessibility in line with local density matrix.

!

5.24 The 2008 Update to COI deleted indicators measuring the density of new dwellings. Because of this, and in light of the fact that DC2 Housing Mix and Density includes a density matrix detailing acceptable densities of new development, this indicator will be altered in future AMRs to monitor the average density of major developments in Romford and the six district centres.


628

Places to Live

Ref Type Description Target Met 13 SEI Number of extra elderly people cared for at home/1000 population

At least 100 elderly people helped to live with care at home/1000 population X

5.25 Elderly people are those 65 years of age and older. There were 85 extra elderly people per 1000 population helped to live with care at home, failing to meet the target of 100 people per 1000 population, and representing a decrease from the 94 per 1000 populations achieved in 2007/08. However, this decrease does not represent a reduced level of service, rather it relates to the need to provide more preventative and re-ablement services, which assist service users to live independently so they would not actually be in receipt of a service at the end of the year.

5.26 With the introduction of the National Indicator Dataset in 2008/09, this indicator was dropped from the Council’s Performance Assessment Framework dataset. It has been replaced with NI 136 which measures people supported to live independently through social services (all ages). While data is available for the reporting year, in future years this indicator will not be reported.

Ref Type Description Target Met 14 SEI Need for new affordable homes/annum Reduce annual need for affordable housing √

5.27 The 2006 Housing Needs Survey Update identified a need for 875 new affordable homes per annum from 2006 to 2011, as compared with the need for 887 identified in the previous five year period. While the number has been reduced slightly, the need for new affordable homes is still acute. However, in 2008/09 the shortfall between provision and need was 330 homes, a significant improvement on the shortfall of 569 in 2007/08. The shortfall is most acute for three bedroom properties.

Ref Type Description Target Met 15 SEI New homes built to Lifetime Home standard

100% of all new homes built to Lifetime Home standard X

5.28 Permission was granted for 643 proposed new residential dwellings in the reporting year, of which 347 met Lifetime Home standards. Assuming all of the planned homes are constructed, 54 percent of new homes would be built to Lifetime Home standard, well below the 100 percent target. With the addition of a COI relating to Building for Life, which assesses internal adaptability, future AMRs will not report this indicator to avoid duplication.

Ref Type Description Target Met 16 Local New homes built to wheelchair standard or capable of easy conversion

10% of new homes built to wheelchair standard or capable of easy conversion √

5.29 Of the 643 proposed new residential dwellings granted permission in the reporting year, 112 were wheelchair accessible homes. Assuming all of the planned homes are built, 17.4 percent would be built to wheelchair standard, which exceeds the target of 10 percent.


6

Places to Work

Places to Work Core Policy Strategic Objectives

• Create a dynamic prosperous economy driven by a well educated and trained workforce by addressing current land surpluses and skills shortages.

• Promote London Riverside as a centre for advanced manufacturing and a wide range of modern industries including environmental and ‘green’ industries, supported by a tourist and leisure economy focused on the London Riverside Conservation Park.

Relevant LDF Indicators: 17 to 25 (18, 21 and 22 are no longer Core Output Indicators)

6.1 The unemployment rate of Havering residents has been and continues to be below that of both London and Great Britain, however the working age population is much greater than the total job offer within the borough resulting in a job density well below the London and Great Britain ratio. Moreover, skills levels in Havering are lower than London and Great Britain, with 15 percent of the resident working age population having no qualifications, as compared to 12 percent in London and 12.4 percent in Great Britain8. Qualification levels of residents have been rising slowly over time, and recent initiatives seek to provide new educational opportunities to develop a skilled workforce.

6.2 The Harold Hill Learning Village will provide skills and employment for all ages in the area, and the accompanying youth centre will have a particular focus on enterprise development. Officially opened in 2003, the Centre for Engineering and Manufacturing Excellence (CEME) is situated in the heart of the Thames Gateway and brings together a range of organisations to deliver education, training and skills for students at school and college to help local people take advantage of the economic development of the area by linking education to business.

6.3 The Beam Reach Business Park has the capacity to bring 3,000 jobs to the area, and the Council is working with the London Development Agency, CEME and Oxford Innovation to attract high quality employers particularly those working in cutting edge technologies. The London Riverside Business Improvement District (BID), which works with businesses to improve the area, is in its third successful year, and to date 17 of the 22 business units in Easter Park have been occupied.

6.4 The riverside is a key component of the plans for revitalising Rainham. Over the past five years, the Council has been working with a wide range of partners to create high quality public spaces and easy access to the Thames and Riverside area; £5 million has been secured for a new local nature park to link Rainham with the river, ‘Wildspace for a World City, and £2 million is being spent to build a path from Rainham to the Purfleet visitor centre. Projects underway to link Rainham Village Centre to the riverside with better pathways and green spaces include improvements at Rainham Creekside, building a path from Rainham to Purfleet, and a link to the proposed Three Crowns Café.

8 ONS annual population survey Jan 2008 – Dec 2008


Places to Work

CP3 Employment Ref Type Description Target Met 17 Core BD1

Total amount of additional employment floorspace - by type No target ∅

6.5 Development Control currently records data on completions of over 1000 square metres. Because building inspections on employment related schemes are generally carried out by approved inspectors, it is difficult to gain accurate information on completions of all sizes. Therefore a significant portion of completed schemes may not be captured by the current method of collecting data. Furthermore, in previous years information on employment completions has been reported as gross completions only, so that comparison with net completions in previous years is not possible.

6.6 However, Government guidance on data collection and reporting for COI states that thresholds should not be applied in order that the impact of all development is identified and considered consistently across administrative boundaries (DCLG 2008). The Council is therefore exploring how to better capture employment floorspace completions.

6.7 This indicator reports on gross and net floorspace completions in square metres (m2) for use class orders B1, B2 and B8 to give the total amount of additional employment floorspace brought into use during the reporting period. Use class are defined as follows:

• B1(a) Office • B1(b) Research and Development • B1(c) Light Industry • B2 General Industrial • B8 Warehousing, Distribution and Storage

The cases where the records do not distinguish between the separate categories of B1 uses have been identified as such. Figure 13 shows the gross and net additional employment floorspace; borough wide 2,310m2 employment floorspace was lost.

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

Addi

tiona

l Flo

orsp

ace

(squ

are

met

res)

gross 818 1,126 1,341 560 3,845

net -1,591 686 -1,395 -10 -2,310

B1 unrecorded B1(a) B2 B8 Total

Figure 13 Gross and net employment floorspace completions by type


Places to Work

Ref Type Description Target Met 19 Core BD2

Total amount of employment floorspace on previously developed land – by type No target ∅

6.8 One hundred percent of employment floorspace was on previously developed land.

Ref Type Description Target Met 20 Core BD3 Employment land available - by type No target ∅

6.9 The Core Strategy policy CP3 (Employment) identifies 292 hectares as Strategic Industrial Locations where planning permission will only be granted for B1(b), B1(c), B2 and B8 uses: Rainham Employment Area (251.2ha), Harold Hill Industrial Estate (31ha) and King George Close Estate (Romford, 9.8ha). It also identifies 30.4 hectares of Secondary Employment Areas, where permission will be granted for B1(b), B1(c), B2 and B8 uses provided they do not adversely affect the adjoining residential areas:

• Crow Lane, Romford (three sites) • Harold Wood Industrial Estate • Hillman Close (Stafford Industrial Estate) • Lyon Road, Romford • The Seedbed Centre, Romford

The Strategic Industrial Locations and Secondary Employment Areas designate 322.4 hectares of land within Havering for employment uses.

6.10 There were six change of use permissions granted for employment uses on sites not allocated for employment uses within CP3, with a total area of 1.1 hectares; no new permissions for employment uses were granted outside of designated areas. Five permissions were for offices, B1(a), and one permission was for B8 (general industrial). This gives a total of 323.5 hectares of employment land available in Havering.


23 Core BD2ii

Total amount of floor space for 'town centre uses' within the local authority area (Amount of completed office development)

No target ∅

6.11 The overall results for the COI relating to floorspace for ‘town centre uses’ are discussed in paragraph 7.4 of the subsequent section on Town Centres. Future AMRs will report this and the subsequent indicator within Town Centres to avoid duplication. Completed office developments totalled 1126m2 gross and 686m2 net; all were within use class order B1(a).


Places to Work


24 Core BD2i

Total amount of floor space for 'town centre uses' within town centre areas (percentage of completed office development in town centre areas)

No target ∅

6.12 Of the 686m2 net completed office development, 500m2 net floorspace was in Romford Town Centre, and the remainder was outside town centre areas. This equates to 73 percent of completed office development in town centre areas, and suggests that the policy of directing the development of ‘town centre uses’ to town centres areas is being implemented.

Ref Type Description Target Met 25 SEI Percentage of employment in knowledge-driven business sectors

Year on year increase in percent of employment in knowledge driven sectors √

6.13 The proportion of employees working in knowledge-driven industries in Havering in 2007 was 4.5% which ranked the borough 28th out of the 33 London authorities. The rate in London was 12.5% and in Great Britain was 7.7%. This evidences a year on year increase in percent of employment in knowledge driven sectors; Havering has also improved its ranking within London, from 30th in 2006 to 28th in 2007. Refer to Table 14.

Table 14 Number and percentage of employment in knowledge-driven business sectors 2005 2006 2007

Havering 2,800 (3.7%) 2,900 (4.0%) 3,100 (4.5%)

London 465,100 (11.0%) 480,000 (12.0%) 509,500 (12.5%)

Great Britain 1,858,000 (7.0%) 1,959,700 (7.4%) 2,038,100 (7.7%)

Source: Office of National Statistics (ONS)


7

Town Centres

Town Centres

Core Policy Strategic Objectives

• Promote and enhance the centres, including local centres, within the town centre hierarchy, ensuring their future vitality and viability by enabling a diverse range of shops, services, housing, cultural and community facilities to be provided in convenient and accessible locations, and securing environmental improvements with recourse to external funding wherever possible.

• Promote Romford as a leading Metropolitan Centre serving Essex, East London and the Thames Gateway.

Relevant LDF Indicators: 26 to 35

7.1 Havering’s town centres are a focus for retailing, services, employment and increasingly a place to live. Romford, one of only 11 metropolitan centres in London, is Havering’s main centre and also serves Essex, East London and the Thames Gateway. There are six district centres, with Hornchurch and Upminster classified as major district centres. There is also a diffuse network of major and minor local centres which p