Sir – Daniel Scharf made interesting comments (Letters, November 10). It is rather a circular argument to calculate housing need based on a predicted reduced average number of people per home. Could this not encourage exactly that? The average in West Oxfordshire is 2.44 people per home.

However, despite building 5,800 homes over the last decade, leading to a staggering 15.2 per cent growth, this average actually rose marginally.

That doesn’t stop the housing need for the next 15 years being calculated based on 2.35 people per home across the district.

Only two per cent of people in the South East are in a home which is considered overcrowded, with 74 per cent in a home which has more space than needed. So why do we need to accommodate even less people per home?

Apart from immigration, which the Government has pledged to reduce to a sensible level, population growth is due to increased life expectancy.

Yet the over-65 population on the vast estates that councils seem to prefer, is very low. Why not specifically target sheltered accommodation? These units are appropriate for an ageing/widowed population (a fact of life) and take up much less space than standard family housing.

People moving in at a time that is right for them, would be safe and secure, and existing, larger houses would be freed up for young families. This would reduce the need for new two- and three-bedroom houses and the associated land take.

Science needs to be applied to housing policy. That way the social, economic and environmental aspects will not be ignored in favour of what is considered an easy solution, like dumping vast numbers of high density houses on open countryside.

Let’s hope the Government will appropriately define sustainable development, so there is always betterment in all three key areas.

Justine Garbutt, Alvescot