Don’t scrap housing targets, make them more tangible.

Blocktype co-founder, Euan Mills, writes about the need for a better understanding of housing numbers.

The ‘End of Housing Targets’ has undoubtedly been the most contentious planning policy change proposed by the government since the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in 2012, with some claiming that it will cause housing delivery to "fall to the lowest level in decades."

The reason for this radical change of policy is that when it comes to new housing, everyone wants it, as long as it’s not near them. This leads to a political stalemate between the government and local councillors, with planning appeals and failed local plans at the firing line, and everyone blaming each other for a broken planning system.

The reasons for this are complex, but our lack of nuance when talking about large abstract numbers doesn’t help. Mention ‘1,000 homes’ to a non-professional, and they’ll conjure up images of huge swathes of the countryside built over with low-density sprawling suburbs, which would get most people up in arms. Mention ‘300 dwellings per hectare,' and they won't even know what to think. While these numbers may serve professionals and inspectors who work on spreadsheets and calculate social infrastructure and transport needs, they are meaningless to everyone else.

If we are to navigate the unwavering adversity towards new housing by many local communities, we need to change our language. We need to stop bandying about abstract numbers and talk concretely about what they mean, not only for our own more nuanced understanding but also so that local communities can impactfully engage in the debate.

The reality is that a housing need of 1,000 homes could be met in many different ways, ranging from two 63-storey towers on less than a hectare of land to over 30 hectares of land with detached homes and on-plot parking. The difference this makes to both people's perception and real-world impacts is huge. Not only in terms of character but also infrastructure, transport, open space, and everything else local communities care about.

The challenge the industry has is that, for us to talk in more specific terms about what our housing numbers mean, we need to get a better understanding of it ourselves. We need to move away from abstract spreadsheets and densities into a more spatial understanding of development. We need to better understand the thousands of sites across the country individually and make decisions about what works where.

While traditionally, we would never have had the time or money to do this, new technologies and innovations give us tools and capabilities that allow us to shortcut this process. There are a range of tools out there that can quickly and accurately understand not only development capacity but also typologies and layouts, even giving you a sketch layout to communicate what these numbers mean.

While housing targets may no longer play such a large part in our local plans, the need for housing continues to grow and be compounded by decades of not building enough to meet growing demand. It is our responsibility as planners to continue to find ways to meet our housing need and better communicate that with local communities.