Borough Report

Kingston upon Thames

271 determined applications · 19 wards · 4 areas · 26 conservation areas · 2023–2025

Get the report → Download free Snapshot first

Headline findings

54.6%
Refusal rate
148 of 271 decided — among London’s highest
Verified
−44%
10th unit cliff
Per-unit residual collapses at full AH obligation
Verified
5+
DM15 threshold
AH contributions from just 5 units — below the London norm
Verified
29%
Schemes compressed
Avg 2.9 units cut during determination
Verified

Key findings

Verified The 6-unit sweet spot: £148k/unit residual, delegated, zero committee exposure ›
Six units delivers the highest per-unit residual land value with delegated determination and zero committee threshold exposure. Per-unit residual drops at 7 units (committee finance cost) and collapses at 10 units (full AH obligation). Total residual for a 6-unit scheme: ~£890,000.
Verified DM15 creates a double cliff: −30% at 5 units, −44% at 10 units ›
Kingston’s DM15 triggers in-lieu AH contributions at just 5 units — half the London norm. Per-unit residual drops 30% at the 5-unit threshold, then collapses a further 44% at 10 units when full on-site provision applies. The 4-unit scheme is the safe harbour; bid accordingly.
Verified 54.6% refusal rate — more than 1 in 2 small-site schemes refused, zero appeals ›
148 of 271 decided applications are refused — the highest rate in our dataset. Zero appeals were lodged across the entire dataset, meaning the appeal route is entirely unused. Mitigants: pre-app engagement, rigorous space standards compliance, and 30% family housing (DM13). n=271.
Verified 28.9% of schemes compressed — propose N+3 with removable design options ›
28.9% of approved schemes are compressed during determination, with an average loss of 2.9 units (median 2). Strategy: propose 3 additional units above your target with design flexibility for removal to protect your appraisal. n=38 approved applications with proposed and approved counts.
Moderate Pre-app lifts approval from 28% to 34% (+6 points) ›
Pre-application engagement lifts approval rate by 6.4 percentage points (34.2% vs 27.8%). The effect is weaker than in other boroughs, but with a 54.6% base refusal rate, every marginal improvement matters. Determination time is unaffected (p=0.79). n=56 applications with pre-app data.
Verified Conservation area penalty: −37% density (p=0.044) ›
Sites in conservation areas achieve significantly lower density: 29.2 u/ha median vs 46.4 u/ha outside (a 37.1% gap). The effect is statistically significant (p=0.044, Mann-Whitney U). With 26 CAs plus 19 Local Areas of Special Character, heritage constraints cover a large portion of the borough.
Verified Density does not predict refusal — design quality is the primary driver ›
Refused applications propose similar densities to approved ones. Refusals are driven by design quality, amenity impact, heritage sensitivity, and process factors — not unit count. The practical takeaway: propose aggressively at the P75 benchmark without materially increasing refusal risk. n=271.
Verified Two officers handle 21% of all cases: Hickey and Danik (32 applications each) ›
24 officers manage the small sites pipeline, but Carmellena Hickey and Gosia Danik each handle 32 applications. The top 10 officers handle 68% of all cases. Officer assignment materially affects outcome. The report maps every officer’s caseload and approval rate. n=304.

Plus additional findings covering 30% family housing requirement (DM13), ward-level patterns, committee vs delegated benchmarks, amenity impact, and determination time. Each graded Robust, Moderate, Indicative, or Anecdotal.

What you get

The full report

  • 49-page report (HTML & PDF) with 21+ evidence-graded findings
  • Density matrix by site type with P20–P75 ranges
  • PTAL-adjusted density lookup table
  • Viability model with cliff chart and sensitivity analysis
  • Ward-level and area-level approval rate maps
  • Refusal reason analysis with frequency data
  • Conservation area risk assessment (26 CAs + 19 LASCs)
  • Case officer patterns across 24 officers

Kingston-specific insights

  • DM15 double cliff: AH from 5 units (−30%), full obligation at 10 (−44%)
  • 54.6% refusal rate mitigants and strategies
  • DM13 family housing: 30% minimum 3+ bed requirement
  • Conservation area penalty quantified (p=0.044)
  • 4-zone CIL: £50–£210/m² borough + £60 MCIL2

Decision tools

  • Before-you-bid and before-you-submit checklists
  • One-page Market Snapshot for quick reference
  • Underlying data in Excel for your own analysis

Get the report

Borough Intelligence Reports from £1,500. Includes 12 months of free quarterly updates.

View pricing →

Reports delivered via the members’ platform. Includes HTML & PDF report, Excel data, and Market Snapshot.

Want to see the data before you buy?

Download the free Kingston upon Thames Market Snapshot. Five findings, one page, no commitment.

Download free Market Snapshot → See all boroughs