Buro Happold defined a new methodology in order to address a complex topic for the Greater London Authority, distilling previously separate datasets into an evidence base to inform the next London Plan.

Commissioned to examine the opportunities and constraints for data centre growth across Greater London, our team combined spatial analytics, infrastructure insight and market understanding to produce a city‑wide picture that did not previously exist. We mapped historic and emerging development patterns, integrated planning and utility data, and framed the implications for energy, water and fibre in a way that supports balanced, long‑term decision‑making.

The study provides an impartial foundation for further policy development. The report sits within a rapidly shifting context. London’s position as a leading hub in Europe has created strong demand, while power availability, land pressures and water stress are shaping where and how capacity can be delivered. Our role was to make sense of these pressures, draw together disparate viewpoints across utilities and boroughs, and set out what the current trajectory means for strategic planning.

Challenge

The rise of AI, cloud expansion, and digital infrastructure demand is creating intense, pressure for new data centres, driven by national growth, connectivity, and digital‑sovereignty agendas. Well‑planned facilities can support strategic economic development and resilience, but unmanaged growth risks over‑stretching local infrastructure, amplifying local opposition and squeezing out other local priorities, from housing and transport to net‑zero delivery.

Data centres are now recognised as Critical National Infrastructure and are significant drivers of economic growth and digital resilience. With demand accelerating, local authorities are under growing pressure to accommodate development, often without the right level of clarity, or tools needed to manage trade‑offs and long‑term impacts.

The underlying infrastructure required to support data centres cuts across multiple systems. Energy, water, fibre, land use and planning are governed by different organisations, timelines and regulatory requirements. Stakeholders rarely see a single London‑wide view. Bringing these perspectives together in a way that is useful to city planners and utilities, and digestible for local borough authorities, was essential

Solution

We built a consolidated geospatial baseline of operational and planned data centres across London, drawing on the Planning London Datahub, utility data and stakeholder engagement insights. The result is a city‑wide picture that identifies four principal clusters on an east–west axis, including Park Royal, Hayes, the Isle of Dogs and inner north‑east boroughs, along with emerging activity in the east. This spatial frame anchors the narrative for both existing capacity and forward pipeline.

The study analysed historic development patterns, emerging clusters and future trajectories, revealing that London’s operational capacity of around 1 GW could rise tenfold by 2050. It highlighted the city’s strategic role within Europe’s FLAP-D network (Frankfurt, London, Amsterdam, Paris, and Dublin) and its importance for AI, cloud and digital services, while identifying critical constraints such as electricity grid bottlenecks, water stress and limited industrial land.

First, we normalised and cross‑checked planning records against independent sources, capturing confidence levels where figures were indicative rather than definitive. Second, we layered qualitative stakeholder input from utilities and operators to explain observed patterns and gaps, for example where grid constraints, site assembly or cooling choices influence delivery timing.

Energy analysis focused on what matters most to delivery. We reviewed transmission and distribution connection data to understand the scale and distribution of future demand, highlighting the concentration of requests in West London and the pattern of distribution‑level growth in the east. We explored how evolving connection reforms and queue management could affect timing, without overstating certainty. The study presents growth pathways to 2050 as ranges rather than forecasts, reflecting both the strength of demand and the uncertainty inherent in multi‑system dependencies.

Recognising that water is also a key factor, we summarised supply and licensing routes, the trajectory of non‑household demand, and the implications of cooling technology choices. The analysis notes that while potable water is still the prevailing source for many facilities, there is growing interest in alternatives and recycled sources, and that early engagement is critical in a stressed system. The report states what is happening in the market, where the infrastructure pinch points are, and how different choices could shape outcomes, leaving policy decisions to the GLA.

Value

The study gives the GLA a single, trusted reference point on a fast‑moving topic. By consolidating separate data and perspectives into one London‑wide view, we have equipped policymakers with the means to understand where data centres are clustering, why that matters for energy and land, and how growth might unfold under different conditions. This is the first time several utilities and public stakeholders have seen their information aligned at this scale, which strengthens cross‑sector collaboration.

For energy planning, the value lies in realism. We translated connection activity into understandable implications for timing and location, clarifying the relationship between distribution and transmission routes, and the practical effect of reforms on project readiness. This supports more informed conversations with network operators, helps boroughs anticipate where applications are likely to arise, and frames the risk of locking in capacity for long periods.

For land use, the analysis highlights the interaction between Strategic Industrial Locations, locally significant sites and the emerging pull of outer‑borough opportunities. Mapping shows why some locations continue to attract large‑format schemes while others see smaller, retrofitted facilities, and it sets out the practical constraints that influence design, from flood risk to multi‑storey typologies. This helps the GLA and boroughs consider how digital infrastructure sits alongside wider employment and regeneration priorities.

On water and sustainability, we set out the implications of cooling choices, licensing, and potential for heat reuse, without overstating benefits. The outcome is a shared basis for early, evidence‑led engagement between developers, utilities and planning authorities.

Crucially, we respected the brief’s requirement for objectivity. Our language avoids advocacy and our figures are caveated and sourced, which allows the GLA to adopt the work within its formal evidence base. The team’s multidisciplinary approach, including GIS, utilities, economics and planning expertise, delivered an analysis that is accessible to non‑specialists. It is a template for how the public sector and market can discuss digital infrastructure pragmatically, with the city’s long‑term interests in mind.

In short, we have given London a clearer picture of what is happening, what might happen next, and why. The study strengthens coordination across planning and infrastructure, provides a practical frame for borough‑level dialogue, and enables the GLA to build a coherent, future‑ready policy response grounded in evidence.

 

***END***

Disclaimer:  DATACENTRE.ME may not be held responsible or liable for the content or details within this news article.

For further information, please refer to the full details of this article via the original source here.