Last month, the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, went big. She vowed to do big things to make big impacts. The Labour government, she said, would go further and faster to kickstart economic growth.As well as her controversial commitment to a third runway at Heathrow airport, she outlined plans for 18 new towns.But big dreams take time to come true and the government needs quick wins to make a dent in its target of 1.5 million new homes by 2030.AdvertisementBecause despite Labours ambitions, the number of new homes being built in England bumps limply along. Only 107,000 new homes (based on EPC certificates) have been recorded in the wake of Julys election victory, the BBC found, down by a tenth compared with the number built in the same six months a year earlier.Meanwhile, those working on major housing schemes are finding the realities of the new building safety regime a significant and problematic blocker on development.The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has rubberstamped just two out of the 130 higher-risk building schemes (residential proposals over 18m tall) submitted by developers since the new gateway process began in October 2023.So could a resurgence in smaller-scale, infill residential projects be at least a partial solution to the housing crisis?According to the YIMBY Alliance, they could. The pro-development campaigners estimate these kinds of squeezed-in schemes could provide a not-to-be-sniffed-at 30,000 new homes a year.AdvertisementArchitects are hopeful too. Jay Morton, a director at residential expert Bell Phillips, sees infill sites as a low-hanging fruit for delivering new housing. Homes on these kinds of plots such as former garages or high-street gap sites in denser urban areas with good transport, amenities and existing communities could be quicker to build [and] easier to procure.Chlo Phelps goes a step further. The chief executive of architecture studio Grounded at council estate regeneration developer Place Capital Group insists that such schemes are going to be critical to delivering new homes on brownfield sites over the next few years, with estimates that there is capacity for more than 120,000 homes on small sites in London alone. Source:Haze Viz LimitedWorking Title Architects recently won approval for a three-storey, one-bedroom house on a 3m-wide site in East Dulwich, south London. The scheme sits next to a new-build two-storey cottageColm Lacey, now of consultancy Soft Cities but previously with Phelps at Croydon Councils now-defunct small sites housing arm Brick by Brick, agrees that infill projects could have a huge role to play in housing supply far more so than grey belt or new town development.He adds: [Squeezing] a small number of units out of a very large number of infill sites should be far easier than squeezing a large number of units out of an increasingly small number of viable majorsites. Interestingly the House of Lords Built Environment Committee came to a similar conclusion in its inquiry into Labours grey belt policy earlier this month. It said the drive to unlock sites on the boundaries of existing communities would be unlikely to make any significant difference to the number of new homes that can be built.What then is hindering the widespread adoption of infill housing? What are the potential solutions? And how can architects play a role in making this happen?The barriers and challengesThe main culprit in the blame game is the slow and inefficient planning system, with timelines often stretching far beyond expectations. Take as a typical example, MOST Architectures recently approved six-home, upper-level infill project on Kingsland High Street in Dalston, east London.A supposed eight-week timeframe stretched to nearly two years for reasons that practice founder Olga McMurdo claims were sometimes baffling but largely due to unresponsiveness.She tells the AJ: Our experience with navigating the planning process has been exhausting even for a project that enjoyed general support from planners and local conservation groups from theoutset.[Admittedly] it is an unusual project. It builds on top of a one-storey high street retail unit and the yard behind it to create a small courtyard housing development. But my goodness, they made us work for that consent for a project that was never particularly contentious. Source:Kilian OSullivanBell Phillips used a form of pattern book design for two house types in Newham, east London, which were replicated across various sites (Pitchford Street pictured)The scheme was designed as starter homes for first-time buyers but, McMurdo says, Hackney pushed for larger family dwellings within the development. And, despite the scale, the authority asked for numerous detailed technical reports, including construction logistics plans, flood risk assessments and travel plans. It also demanded air quality and noise impact assessments, which were almost certainly identical to those provided for neighbouring developments on the same block.In terms of balancing conflicting demands, Phelps says sites end up getting negotiated so harshly on all sides that they get stuck in planning for ages a drain on project resources in itself. She adds that then they often have features crammed into them to satisfy the full breadth of consultees [which] can sometimes make them too costly and ultimately unviable.Haworth Tompkins director Chris Fellner also feels the current planning rules are too inflexible, treating infill schemes much the same as larger developments. As a result, architects work within highly prescriptive efficiency targets which must comply with minimum space standards and very strict environmental regulations, including biodiversity net gain.There is very little appetite for [architectural] innovation, Fellner adds. He feels design quality is measured solely in terms of what percentage of dual aspect homes are achieved and how may hours of daylight the shared courtyards achieve on the 31 March.Architects lament the lack of design and development expertise within planning departments expertise that could cut through the chaff and subjectively weigh up the impacts and benefits.Infill schemes need to satisfy many different parties, not least the (usually many) neighbours. Backland plots can be riddled with overlooking issues.As McMurdo puts it: Qualitative elements require talent and experience to make nuanced decisions. So, where have all the great plannersgone?Added to this is a patchwork of unpredictable policies that vary across different local authorities even between neighbouring councils creating unwanted complexity.A six-home infill housing scheme by MOST Architecture, which will be built above and behind an existing Boots store in Hackneys busy Kingsland Road. Below: Floorplan of sheme Source:MOST ArchitectureDavid Gouldstone of Gouldstone & Co has recently secured two separate approvals from Lewisham Council, which he praises for having a really pragmatic approach to infill and a good small sites guide too.But his experience has not always been so positive. For example, variations in the affordable housing contribution requiring additional consultant fees have been an unexpectedstruggle.It would be great to have consistent and clear policies, he says, so that the potential contributions could be known from the outset to assist in the early viability of the project and speed up the discussions during planning, ideally based on a clear and basic contribution perdwelling.The amount of ever-shifting red tape can be equally frustrating for the planners too, says James Bazeley, of emerging practice Working Title Architects.His new studio and its sister company and development arm Working Title Land recently won approval for a 66m, three-storey, one-bedroom house on a thin 3m-wide site in East Dulwich, south London. At least two other unsuccessful submissions had been made by other architects. The planning requirements are constantly changing, he says, and there is an ever-increasing number of reports required, such as for noise and biodiversity, which is a challenge for architects. But planners are also finding it difficult as they are already under a lot of pressure.Even if the under-resourced planning officers are onside, that isnt always the end of the approval journey. Political interference can sink the best laid plans.Architect Fourth_space successfully navigated the awkward, lengthy system to get the go-ahead for 100 new low-energy affordable homes across 13 different sites in Hounslow, west London, all for affordable housing provider Sapphire Independent Living.But practice directors Huw Williams and Steve Sinclair say compliant submissions were often referred to local councillors at planning committee.Decisions were subject to councillors lacking in planning and design knowledge, who may not have been fully behind the original local authority promise, they say. So, in some ways, local politics was trumping the original pledge for homes.Many authorities are also failing to think strategically about their potential sites, approaching smaller-scale development in a piecemeal, one-off way. This feeds into the sometimes insurmountable barrier facing the trickier brownfield plots: the moneyquestion.Problems often arise with access and servicing which, Fellner points out, can mean extra cost for abnormal enabling works, for example the need to widen the access road or to provide utilities and below-ground services.Infill sites, he goes on, result in less efficient, less repetitive schemes and more bespoke untried and tested solutions. They create fewer homes per floor and core, higher wall-to-floor ratios, and lower net-to-gross efficiencies. It is not the model that makes the larger housebuilders all their cash. Source:PRPPRP's Hitchin Square scheme on a previous garage site in the London borough of Tower Hamlets the five three-bedroom home project was delivered for Circle Housing/Old Ford HousingPossible solutions?The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) already has a presumption in favour of sustainable development and recognises that small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area.It also encourages authorities to avoid complex and restrictive obligations on smaller plots that could reduce their viability anddelivery.But local planning authorities are clearly interpreting the framework differently and the pro-development presumption is not always apparent. There is an argument that the smaller the proposal, the stronger the presumption should be.Lacey goes further. For private housing, and I say this hesitantly, but there is room for a form of permitted development for infill sites below a certain size, say nine units, he tells the AJ.Arguably the planning challenges of converting a large office block to residential use are far greater than those presented by a small contextual residential infill scheme. So why should permitted development rights apply to one and not theother?Under this model, he adds, there would need to be a sustainability assessment, along the lines of the Building for Life standards, and schemes would need to be broadly contextual in terms of massing, based on some consistent designprinciples.Bell Phillips Morton thinks a pattern-book approach might work. Her practice has already worked on a form of design template in Newham, where it designed two house typesa standard terrace and a wheelchair-accessible optionwhich were replicated across various sites.Councils could package sites together and use pre-approved designs to deliver high-quality homes across multiple locations, she says. Architects could develop flexible, innovative designs to address site constraints, ranging from single dwellings to terraces.These could also be delivered by self-builders, community land trusts, or small-scale developers, promoting diversity in housing delivery. Source:fourth_spaceFourth_space won approval for 100 new low energy affordable homes across 13 sites in HounslowAs well as calls for each authority to have a clear Small Sites SPD (Supplementary Planning Document), many architects are urging a reduction in repetitive and over-the-top requirements on infill schemes. Even someexemptions.McMurdo suggests rolling levels of planning consent allowing a swift decision within eight weeks, based on plans, sections, elevations, visualisations and a short designstatement. Under this multilevel gateway approach, other issues like sustainability could be addressed later. Gouldstone would also like to see fewer planning committee hearings for minor proposals and more decisions based on professional policy judgement and not local political considerations.Money, money, moneyA revolution in infill housing will also need financial support, including to address land acquisition costs. This could potentially be through public-sector land ownership or discounted rates for community-led schemes.Fellner says the government should set up an enabling fund, which would help cover the costs of clearing up and sorting out the abnormals found on some plots, through higher levels of grant funding.Local authorities should also be encouraged to offer up land for community-led homes spearheaded by local people, says Archios Mellis Haward.However, this set-up would also need a small amount of pre-construction funding [to] get things going.Its unreasonable to expect community groups to take all the risk, Haward says. If a council undertakes the due diligence to find the sites and makes sure the right people secure the tender, then funding could also be provided, such as the former Community Housing Fund that ended recently.Another idea would be a national clearing house with the government guaranteeing a fixed minimum price for compliant affordable housingunits.Lacey adds: This would reduce the potential for debate about the impact of affordable housing requirements on viability and create a much stronger link between land value and profitability.Gouldstone and Co's approved Lewisham Way scheme in Lewisham, London. The project will deliver eight new homes, featuring a four storey building to the front of the site and a newmews to the rearHow can architects help?Undeveloped parcels of land are usually undeveloped for areason.But architects have the skills to identify infill sites, especially those with genuine potential from the outset, says PRP director Bhupinder Chawla.Though there are many examples of plots that have had over-optimistic expectations later burdened with wasteful assessments before being scrapped, he says that bringing an architect on board at the very beginning of this process means there is a better-quality appraisal of whether a site isviable.Gouldstone agrees. Once identified, these typically awkward, atypical and constrained bits of leftover land need architects to come up with creative design solutions more so than on larger sites delivered by volume housebuilders, he says.In fact, argues Fellner, these plots could be used to explore ideas, take risks and innovate, becoming a real test bed for new housing typologies.For instance, he explains, their small scale allows architects to specify recycled or upcycled materials more feasibly: While it is hard to source reclaimed bricks for a new 35-storey tower block, it is totally doable for a short row of infill townhouses.The rise of the proactive architect as developer could also be part of the solution, if housebuilding can be made profitable for those willing to take the risk. Yet, for now, the planning shackles remain on.McMurdo makes a final plea: Please, let us experiment with new ideas, addressing tight urban sites with skill and imagination to create outstanding projects, she says.The current planning system is not enabling this; worse, in many cases, it is making these projects financially unviable.Archio's infill scheme for London Community Land Trust and Greenwich Citizens Housing using two council-owned sites for community land trust homes.2025-02-20Richard Waitecomment and share