Havering’s Housing Explosion: How Many New Homes Are Really Being Planned for the Borough?

15th September 202615th September 2026 Francesca Lilleystone 0 Comments Havering, Housing, Tower Blocks min read

Havering is facing a huge programme of housing growth, with thousands of homes already planned or being delivered across the borough while a new London Plan proposes a further 12,060-home target for the next decade. But with residents already raising concerns about roads, parking, schools, healthcare, flooding and the character of established neighbourhoods, questions are increasingly being asked about how much development Havering can realistically accommodate.

The scale of housing development facing Havering is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

From major regeneration schemes in Romford and Rainham to developments on former industrial land, council-owned sites and proposals involving land currently regarded as Green Belt, the borough is undergoing significant change.

But exactly how many homes are Havering expected to deliver?

And how does that compare with the number of homes already being planned?

What is Havering’s housing target?

There are several figures which can easily cause confusion.

Havering’s adopted Local Plan has a housing target of 1,262 homes per year, a figure confirmed by the Government in Parliament in 2024.

The current London Plan 2021 sets Havering a ten-year target of 12,850 homes, covering 2019/20 to 2028/29. That equates to an average of 1,285 homes a year.

The borough’s adopted Local Plan itself provides for at least 12,505 homes over its 2016–2031 plan period, reflecting the different targets that applied during the period.

And now another figure has entered the debate.

The 2026 Draft London Plan proposes 12,060 homes for Havering over ten years, an average of approximately 1,206 homes a year. This is a draft proposal and not yet an adopted target.

So residents should not be told that Havering has suddenly been given a final new target of 12,060 homes.

It is currently a proposal.

But the housing pipeline is already substantial

The numbers become particularly significant when individual schemes are considered.

Havering Council’s own 12 Sites Regeneration Programme is intended to deliver more than 3,500 homes across 12 existing council housing sites.

The programme includes the huge Waterloo Estate regeneration in Romford, which is planned to provide 1,380 homes.

Other schemes in the programme include 138 homes at Chippenham Road and 478 homes at Farnham and Hilldene in Harold Hill. Some of the remaining sites have currently been paused, meaning they should not be described as developments that are all definitely going ahead at this stage.

There are also major developments outside the 12 Sites programme.

Beam Park

One of the largest housing schemes affecting Havering is Beam Park, a development spanning Havering and Barking & Dagenham.

The scheme has consent for 3,990 homes, with 54 per cent designated as affordable housing according to the Mayor of London’s development information. More than 1,158 homes had been delivered at the time of the latest GLA information.

The development is being delivered on the former Ford plant site and is also linked to the proposed Beam Park railway station.

Bridge Close

Another major scheme is the regeneration of Bridge Close in Romford.

Council budget documents identify 899 homes associated with the scheme.

The development is intended to form part of the wider transformation of the area around Romford town centre.

Como Street

And now residents are facing the prospect of another major development in an established residential area.

The Como Street Car Park application proposes 138 residential dwellings, alongside flexible commercial and community floorspace and public realm improvements.

The scheme has generated significant opposition from local residents, with concerns including height, scale, privacy, parking, traffic and the effect on the character of surrounding streets.

The council’s own financial documentation also lists the 138-home Como Street scheme within its Mercury Land Holdings programme.

Thousands of homes — but they cannot simply be added together

This is where the figures require careful explanation.

It would be misleading to simply take every major housing figure and add them together.

Some developments form part of wider regeneration programmes, meaning they can overlap.

For example, Waterloo’s 1,380 homes are already included within the council’s wider 3,500-plus 12 Sites programme.

Similarly, developments can span borough boundaries or form part of wider masterplans.

The issue is therefore not about producing one sensational headline number by adding every scheme together.

It is about understanding the scale and number of separate developments contributing to Havering’s housing growth.

And that scale is substantial.

The question residents are asking: can the infrastructure cope?

For many residents, the debate is not simply about whether Havering needs more homes.

It is about whether the infrastructure needed to support those homes is being delivered alongside them.

More homes mean more residents.

That potentially means greater demand for GP appointments, dentists, schools, public transport, roads, parking, drainage, policing, social services and other public infrastructure.

Havering has already seen significant population growth.

The 2021 Census recorded around 262,100 residents, compared with around 237,000 in 2011.

And the Government has previously highlighted that Havering was delivering below its housing target, with average annual net additions of 830 between 2020/21 and 2022/23 compared with the adopted target of 1,262 homes a year.

That under-delivery has planning consequences.

The Government said Havering’s Housing Delivery Test result was 55 per cent, meaning the borough was subject to the presumption in favour of sustainable development at the time of that assessment.

In simple terms, failing to meet housing requirements can make it more difficult for a council to resist certain housing proposals.

And then there is the Green Belt

Alongside the major brownfield and regeneration schemes, another increasingly contentious part of Havering’s housing debate is development involving land designated as Green Belt.

Residents and campaign groups have raised concerns about proposals involving Green Belt and other open land, arguing that the borough should prioritise genuinely brownfield sites wherever possible.

Developers and planning authorities, meanwhile, must assess individual applications against the relevant planning policies, housing requirements and other material considerations.

That distinction is important.

A site being described by residents as Green Belt does not automatically mean a development will be approved.

Equally, a housing target does not mean every proposed development must automatically be accepted.

Each planning application must be considered on its own merits.

So is Havering facing overdevelopment?

That is ultimately a question for residents, councillors and planning authorities to debate.

What cannot easily be disputed is that Havering is facing a significant period of housing growth.

The council’s own regeneration programme alone is intended to provide more than 3,500 homes across 12 sites. Beam Park is a 3,990-home development. Bridge Close is another major residential scheme, while individual proposals such as Como Street are continuing to come forward.

At the same time, Havering remains subject to a substantial housing requirement under the current London Plan, while a new draft London Plan proposes another ten-year target of 12,060 homes.

The central question for Havering may therefore no longer simply be:

“How many homes do we need?”

It may increasingly be:

“Where will they go — and can the infrastructure keep up?”

For residents watching towers rise, car parks disappear, established streets change and large regeneration schemes transform parts of the borough, that question is becoming increasingly important.

Havering is changing.

The debate now is about how that change is managed, where development takes place, what infrastructure comes with it and whether the voices of existing communities are properly he

Stay up to date with all of our latest updates and content by following us on our social media accounts!