In December 2024, the Government set a mandatory housing target for EHDC at 1,142 homes per year.
However, legal advice suggested that, considering East Hampshire’s unique circumstances (e.g., a significant portion of the district lies within the South Downs National Park), a more appropriate figure might be 828 homes per year.
The proposed adjusted figure represents a 27.5% reduction from the Government’s standard housing target
Five-Year Housing Land Supply (2024-2029):
Shortfall: As of April 1, 2024, EHDC reported a shortfall of 2,036 dwellings in its five-year housing land supply, equating to a supply of only 2.7 years instead of the required five years.
Delivery Period: This shortfall pertains to the five-year period from April 1, 2024, to March 31, 2029.
📅 Over 5 years, you’d calculate total required supply like this:
(828 homes/year × 5 years) + 2,036 backlog = 4,140 + 2,036 = 6,176 homes needed from 2024 to 2029
So the total five-year requirement = ~6,176 dwellings
And if EHDC only has land supply for ~2.7 years of that total, the tilted balance is triggered.
Long-Term Housing Target (up to 2040):
The Government’s standard methodology calculated that EHDC needs to plan for nearly 11,000 new homes by 2040.
Approving a major+ housing or commercial development isn’t just about ticking boxes — it’s like preparing a patient for surgery.
And just like in real healthcare, you don’t go straight to the operating theatre without tests. You start with a health check. You look for warning signs. You bring in the right specialists. You ask: Will this operation do more good than harm? And if there’s risk, you take action before it’s too late.
That’s exactly how Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) should work.
In this analogy:
🏛️ EHDC is the GP, doing the initial assessment (screening)
🏗️ The proposed development is the patient, ready for major intervention
🩻 The EIA is the full diagnostic scan, to check for risks before cutting
👨⚕️ The consultees are medical specialists, brought in when symptoms suggest specific risks
🧑⚕️ Who Does What? — The Planning “Specialists” as Medical Consultants
Planning Topic
Consultee
Medical Analogy (Before Surgery Role)
🛣️ Strategic roads
National Highways
🦴 Orthopaedic surgeon — checks the spine can bear the strain of the operation
🚗 Local roads and access
Local Highways Authority
💪 Musculoskeletal specialist — ensures mobility works day-to-day after the procedure
🔥 Emergency access
Fire & Rescue Services
🧠 Reflex specialist — ensures responses to danger are instant and pathways are clear
👮 Crime prevention design
Designing Out Crime Officer
🧬 Immunologist — prevents external threats from compromising recovery
🚽 Wastewater infrastructure
Southern/Thames Water
💩 Gastroenterologist — ensures waste can be processed without harmful backup
🐾 Biodiversity / habitat loss
EHDC Ecologist / Wildlife Trust
🌬️ Respiratory specialist — makes sure the system can breathe and self-regulate
🛑 Flooding (rivers)
Environment Agency (EA)
💧 Vascular surgeon — manages the body’s rivers and prevents internal flooding
🌧️ Surface water / drainage
Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA)
🩺 Kidney specialist (nephrologist) — controls water retention and filtering
🧱 Heritage / archaeology
Historic England
🧠 Memory care specialist — preserves long-term memory and cultural identity
🎓 School capacity
HCC Education
🧒 Paediatric consultant — checks whether the body can support its growing parts
🏥 GP and NHS pressure
NHS / ICB
🏥 Capacity planner / hospital coordinator — ensures the care system won’t collapse
💪 What Happens After the Diagnosis?
Once EHDC has done the screening, it decides whether to refer the “patient” (development) to relevant specialists. Each one:
A document that adds detail to policies in the Local Plan. Can guide expectations on design, viability assessments, profit transparency, etc. Not legally binding, but strongly material.
Developers often control not just the land, but also construction supply chains and procurement standards. This concentration of control can allow them to artificially inflate costs and argue that profit caps make schemes “unviable.”
To counter this:
Require developers to benchmark costs against regional/national standards.
Demand explanations for inflated material, labour, or procurement costs — especially when alternative solutions are available.
Use independent viability reviewers to challenge developer-submitted figures.
Implement post-completion profit clawback mechanisms if actual profits exceed declared expectations.
This ensures the profit cap remains enforceable and not subverted by internal cost manipulation.
⏱️ Total Rollout Duration (Trial-to-SPD Adoption):
✅ Immediate launch via Cabinet pilot: 1–2 months
📋 SPD formalisation: 6–9 months
1. Pilot SPD on Profit Transparency and Fair Return
2. Tiered Developer Contributions Based on Profit Levels
3. “High-Impact Site” Classification Criteria
4. Affordable Housing Delivery Escalator
5. Early Viability Disclosure for Tilted Balance Sites
6. Public Access to All Viability Data in Registry
1. Local Plan Policy on Profit Caps
2. Developer Preference Framework
3. Enforceable Profit Cap in Planning Conditions or S106
4. National Reform Campaign
5. Relative Impact Threshold Policy