Planning matters

After much delay and anticipation, the report of the Older People's Housing Taskforce was published on 26^th November. It brings together a range of important research and what older people want from their housing and how older people’s housing (OPH, also termed Later Living Homes or ‘LLH’) operates within the planning system to make recommendations for how Central Government, Local Government, developers, providers and other stakeholders can help meet the needs and demands of our ageing population.

Research has noted for some time now that the UK falls well short of meeting its need for OPH, with the Taskforce confirming again that “the UK is significantly far behind other developed countries in delivering the volume of stock required”. Clearly, planning plays a central role in delivering the homes we need. Whilst the National Planning Policy Framework has specifically referred to older people’s housing needs as far back as its inception in 2012, our research ‘Solutions to an Age Old Problem’ (originally published in 2019, and subsequently updated in 2024) has found that the pace of progress in local plans to address these needs has been somewhat underwhelming. Unsurprisingly, the role of planning therefore features heavily throughout the taskforce’s report and its recommendations.

Whilst most plans now address older people’s needs in their evidence base (albeit with varying levels of consistency and detail), our research found there is a lack of follow-through within local plans; many do no create positive policy environments which support and encourage the delivery of OPH, most do not set clear targets, many do not reflect OPH needs within strategic allocations or in standalone allocations, and fewer than half of authorities monitor delivery of OPH. Figure 1 summarises the findings of our research in terms of how older people’s needs are considered in various parts of the plan-making process, based on when those plans were adopted.

One of our findings – related to the lack of allocation of sites for OPH and the issues this can create – was directly mirrored in the report ‘Research into Patterns and Trends in Planning Applications for Older Persons Housing’ (herein ‘the planning report’) which accompanied the Taskforce’s main report, which stated “unlike general housing, most Local Plans do not make specific allocations for OPH, meaning that schemes either have to compete with general housing for sites, or try and gain permission on sites either not identified or not allocated for residential development.” The planning report also noted some of the other planning barriers, including competition with open market sites, urban design factors (with scale and massing needed for viable schemes potentially conflicting with design policies) and the broader difficulties associated with pursuing schemes on unallocated sites.

In this context, it is somewhat concerning that the planning report highlighted a worrying trend that the number of planning applications for OPH has actually halved in less than 10 years, from around 250 in 2015 (of which around 190 were approved and 60 were refused) to around 120 in 2023 (c.80 approved, 40 refused).

Consequently, the number of units approved per year has fallen from a peak of around 7,000 in 2016 to under 4,000 in 2023 – well short of the 30-50,000 per year that the Taskforce estimates is needed. This clearly raises questions as to whether the current policy environment is positive enough to bring forward OPH, reaffirming the observations we made in our research. Worryingly, the planning report also observes that OPH is more likely to be refused than general housing, with 72% of applications for OPH being approved compared with 81% for housing (on sites of 10 or more units).

It comes as no surprise, then, that planning features strongly within the Taskforce’s report – one of the recommendations of the OPH Taskforce is to ‘strengthen planning policies’ and it gives a range of ways this can be done (Figure 2). It notes that the system needs to address the question of use class, create consistent guidance on addressing need, improve awareness of the benefits of providing OPH, and appropriately incorporate OPH into plan-making. Its recommendations are shown in Figure 2, many of which mirror the recommendations we made in Lichfields’ own research earlier this year.

The Taskforce also recommends “a long-term national strategy for OPH/LLH” which it says is ‘vital’ to drive delivery. This might include a national target, which would need to be ‘ambitious’ and ‘translated to a local level’; encouragingly, 83% of Taskforce developers surveyed said they thought it would encourage more supply and 37% thought it would encourage new entrants into the market.

It is difficult to overstate the benefits associated with the delivery of OPH; they are discussed at length in the Taskforce’s report, and range from personal to wider societal benefits to the housing market, health care system and more. The importance of diversification in increasing housing delivery is also well-documented, and specialist housing is a relatively untapped market which is unlikely to compete with other general housing products. This means increasing delivery of housing for older people would clearly go a significant way to helping support the Government target of delivering 1.5m homes in this Parliament (and furthermore, the planning report also showed that OPH applications take less time to be determined than general housing schemes – around 11 months compared to 17 months for schemes of 50-100 units). In turn this would also release a significant amount of housing (particularly family housing) back into the market, and reduce pressures on the health and social care system arising from people living in homes which do not meet their needs (indeed, this is the basis for the Taskforce’s recommendations that Central Government ‘rewards’ high performing authorities). With all these benefits, enabling greater delivery of OPH would seem like a no-brainer.

Stakeholders will eagerly await the Government’s response to the Taskforce’s recommendations, but when it comes to planning policy it’s clear that some significant changes are needed to see the country delivering anywhere near it’s true need for housing for older people. With the recent NPPF making minimal changes to the way in which housing for older people is dealt with in plan-making, we could see further changes to the NPPF if the Taskforce’s recommendations are acted upon. The Taskforce is clear that Central Government needs to set clear expectations of local planning authorities, and provide the policy framework and guidance to support, educate and incentivise local authorities to enable delivery of OPH through using both ‘carrots’ and ‘sticks’. With only more and more people in old age, quick action is needed to reverse the declining trend in planning applications and approvals, to deliver the homes our older people need.