Delivering 1.5m new homes: the good news
All the data points to a big opportunity for the government and the sector in delivering this ambitious target of 1.5m new homes.
First, LandTech’s data-led approach to identifying land makes clear that there are sufficient potential sites to achieve (and potentially exceed) the target with denser brownfield developments and by using those parts of the “grey belt” that best fit the new definition.
We have then added a “Stack adjustment” to exclude areas where known opposition to local housebuilding outweighs local support. The result is land sufficient to yield between 1.4m and 1.7m new homes, depending on the density of developments on “grey belt” land, as shown in the table below:
Aggregated impact of Grey Belt and Brownfield housing delivery, with Stack adjustment, from “A data-led approach to delivering 1.5 million homes” by Stack Data Strategy and LandTech
Second, there is majority backing for the 1.5m target, with 53% of the population supporting it, and net support (that is, supporters minus opponents) across all groups except those who oppose local housebuilding:
“The Government has set a target of building 1.5 million new homes over the next five years. To what extent do you support that target?” (Net support: supporters minus opponents)
The government’s policy priorities are also well-chosen from the perspective of achieving local support.
Grey Belt
Reframing peri-urban land which doesn’t fulfil Green Belt purposes as “grey belt” improves support for developing it, with net support of +31% (compared to -24% net support for developing Green Belt land):
“In principle, to what extent would you support or oppose the following in your local area…?” (Net support: supporters minus opponents)
“Grey belt” sites, however, are not created equal - neither from a policy perspective nor in respect of public opinion. We conducted visual tests to explore how people react to distinct types of potential “grey belt” sites and the results are important.
First we tested the kinds of sites that Keir Starmer himself referenced when introducing the concept last year - a former airfield and a disused car park. Developing these kinds of sites enjoys significant net support (+57% in both cases), even amongst those most opposed to development (+25% and +36% respectively):
Source: “A data-led approach to delivering 1.5 million homes” by Stack Data Strategy and LandTech
We also then tested a simple policy statement that aligns with the new language - “land which the Council thinks could be developed sustainably” - and whilst there is substantial net support (+40%) overall for that in principle, we observe that opponents of development slip into net opposition (-4%).
Finally we tested two greener images - “‘low-quality’ agricultural land” and a golf course - and support further softens.
Source: “A data-led approach to delivering 1.5 million homes” by Stack Data Strategy and LandTech
Intuitively, the greener a “grey belt” site is, the more sceptical opponents, in particular, become.
Brownfield
There is a consensus around developing brownfield land, and we find that “brownfield passports” are well-supported in that context.
Describing the policy as meaning “that on brownfield land (i.e., land that has been built on before) a development would automatically be approved if it met all technical requirements, even if local residents objected” attracts overall net support of +33%, but notably fails to win net support from those most opposed to development (-4%).
But when the argument for brownfield passports is reframed as “partly intended to reduce the need to build on Green Belt or “grey belt” land” those opponents also become net-supportive (+17%).
Source: “A data-led approach to delivering 1.5 million homes” by Stack Data Strategy and LandTech
So, properly explained, the policy levers are an intelligent way to start to win over opponents. Which is good because there are a stubborn and growing number of them.
Land won’t be the problem and neither will winning the overall argument about the need for housing. Local politics will be the problem…
All of Stack’s data relating to development, planning and the built environment is now accessible via strata: check it out for free!
Explore the series: