Local-level chaos is punching holes in the government’s housebuilding target, warns James Clark, partner in the planning and environment team at national law firm Foot Anstey
The government is now materially off track to deliver 1.5m homes over this Parliament. While the target reflects the scale of the housing crisis, a significant shortfall looks increasingly inevitable.
At current delivery rates, the gap between ambition and output is widening. The causes lie in a convergence of structural, market and policy constraints that continue to suppress delivery.
At a national level, recent reforms have sought to create a more pro-development planning framework. However, a clear disconnect remains between policy ambition and local implementation.
Only around 30% of local planning authorities currently have an up-to-date local plan. This lack of coverage creates real uncertainty for developers considering whether to bring schemes forward. In practice, many are forced to weigh the risks of pursuing planning permission against an outdated or ambiguous policy backdrop, which is slowing the pipeline of applications.
Resourcing within local authorities represents a further and often underappreciated bottleneck. Many planning departments continue to operate with constrained budgets and insufficient staffing levels, despite commitments to increase capacity and reform fees.
The consequences are clear: slower decision-making, longer determination periods and reduced consistency in outcomes. Even where policy is supportive in principle, the ability to process applications efficiently remains a key constraint on delivery.
Market pressures on scheme viability
Beyond the planning system, wider market conditions are exerting a powerful influence. Persistent build cost inflation, combined with ongoing labour shortages, continues to put pressure on scheme viability.
These challenges are particularly acute for higher-density developments, where margins are tighter and costs are more sensitive. As a result, even schemes with planning permission are not always progressing as expected, with some being redesigned, delayed or paused altogether.
These pressures are compounded by demand-side uncertainty. Fluctuations in borrowing costs, exacerbated by geopolitical instability, have created a more cautious lending and investment environment.
At the same time, the investor market for flats remains notably weaker than in previous cycles. Given the importance of private and institutional investment in supporting higher-density urban development, this weakening demand directly affects developers’ confidence in bringing schemes forward.
Policy and delivery mismatch
There is also an inherent timing mismatch between policy reform and housing delivery. Even where recent changes are positive, there will inevitably be a lag before they translate into increased housing starts and completions.
The development process, from site identification and planning through to construction and sale, is inherently long-term. Improvements introduced now are unlikely to generate meaningful outputs within the timescales required to meet current targets.
Recent developments provide little reassurance. In March, the mayor of London and the housing secretary announced measures to “kickstart” housebuilding in the capital.
However, in May, Enfield Council withdrew from the government’s New Towns Programme following a change in political control. The programme had been seen as a key component of the 1.5m homes target. If other authorities follow suit in response to political shifts or local opposition, its contribution to delivery could be materially undermined.
Looking ahead, political considerations may also influence developer behaviour. Some developers may prioritise securing planning permissions under the current framework, particularly if there is concern that future governments could adopt a less favourable approach.
While this could drive an uptick in applications, it is unlikely to translate into a corresponding increase in completions within this Parliament.
Taken together, these factors point to a delivery system under sustained strain. While the government’s target remains an important statement of intent, achieving it will require more than policy reform alone.
Addressing local authority resourcing, improving market confidence and ensuring local plans are up to date and aligned with national policy will be critical. Without these changes, the shortfall is not just likely, but effectively locked in.
The post Why England is set to miss its housebuilding target appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
