The future of high-rise: why restoring public trust means redefining value

Over the past decade, high-rise development in the UK has found itself at the centre of an increasingly polarised debate. Tall buildings are regularly described as an essential tool to address the UK’s housing shortage, and are seen as symbols of urban ambition. But, at the same time, they are often the uncomfortable focus of planning disputes, safety concerns and community pushback. What is clear is that the public conversation around density, risk and the liveability of our cities has changed.

Knowledge gap and technical issues

URSA’s 2025 survey of over 100 UK architects revealed that the sector is undergoing one of the most significant regulatory and cultural shifts in a generation. While the Building Safety Act (BSA) is rightly reshaping expectations for transparency, it is also exposing deep knowledge gaps that are slowing delivery. The impact of these knowledge gaps has already been seen in the large number of high-rise projects being rejected by the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) due to missing or inaccurate information. Higher-risk buildings (projects over seven storeys or 18m high) are facing lengthy delays at Gateway 2 stage (a crucial checkpoint under the BSA, which requires developers to get approvals from the BSR before starting construction to prove their detailed designs are fully compliant with stringent building regulations).

In URSA’s research, 58% of architects said they had experienced hold-ups on one or two projects due to Gateway 2 checks. Additionally, more than a third (38%) of architects said that they now spend considerable time educating clients about the legislation, while half admitted that they themselves are still navigating what the regulatory changes mean in practice.

These findings matter not just for project timelines, but for public confidence. Every stalled application, halted high-rise or redesign triggered by further regulatory review becomes another headline that feeds the perception that building tall is inherently fraught.

If the UK is to unlock the potential of high-rise development – particularly as demand for new homes intensifies – regulatory clarity and shared competence across the supply chain are fundamental.

However, resolving procedural barriers is only part of the equation. Over half (51%) of the architects we talked to said that new high-rises must take their wider surroundings into account, as the future of high-rise construction will be decided as much by community priorities and social value as it is by technical compliance. In fact, the industry’s ability to overcome public cynicism may ultimately dictate how – and whether – our city skylines grow.

Reframing the value proposition of high-rise development

Historically, the justification for building upwards has been framed around land efficiency and housing numbers: more homes, delivered at scale, in areas where horizontal expansion is limited. But communities increasingly expect high-rise buildings to deliver more than just density. They want them to enhance streetscapes, improve local services, support climate ambitions and be places people genuinely want to live.

This marks a shift in what “value” means. If affordability, community integration and environmental performance are not embedded from the outset, the public is quick to question who benefits from a tall building. Conversely, when tall buildings are conceived as part of a broader placemaking strategy – where open spaces, active frontages, schools, active travel routes and cultural facilities are meaningfully integrated – they can unlock significant support.

The future of high-rise construction, therefore, requires development teams to think less about isolated structures and more about vertically-enabled communities. Structures must offer the same comfort, convenience and neighbourhood richness that people expect at street level. This includes design considerations such as access to natural light, ventilation, safe communal areas, thoughtful circulation routes and amenities that encourage interaction rather than isolation.

Designing for liveability and long-term satisfaction

Public perceptions of high-rise living often reflect real frustrations: concerns about overheating, wind effects, noise, maintenance failures and inadequate green space. Many of these issues stem not from the scale of the buildings themselves, but from decisions made during specification. As high-rise construction becomes more regulated and technologically complex, expanding technical literacy among all stakeholders – including clients, designers, contractors and regulators – is central to improving outcomes.

Liveability must also address affordability in a meaningful way. Tall buildings have, of late, often been criticised for producing homes that, while numerous, are out of financial reach for many. If high-rise development continues to be associated with luxury housing rather than accessible supply, it will struggle to win public support. So delivering greater tenure diversity, safeguarding social and affordable housing contributions, and designing for operational cost efficiency are all critical to shifting perceptions.

Bridging the trust gap through openness and shared knowledge

Public acceptance of tall buildings does not come from architectural visuals or planning statements alone. It comes from understanding. Communities want to know why a high-rise scheme is appropriate; how it fits into long-term city planning; and how the development will enhance daily life both inside and around the building.

This requires the industry to be more transparent. Opening up the design and specification process – particularly around safety, material choices, sustainability metrics and maintenance planning – can play a major role in building trust. Education is not just an industry priority –it should extend to the people who will live with the consequences of the buildings we shape.

Platforms that consolidate guidance, research, emerging regulatory learning and multidisciplinary insights will be vital as the sector transitions. One of the aims of URSA’s ongoing work, including the development of our High-Rise Hub, is to support that collective knowledge-building by bringing together technical updates and industry viewpoints in one place.

A future defined by responsibility, not height

The next chapter of high-rise construction will not be decided by how tall our buildings become, but by how responsibly we design, regulate and explain them. Height alone does not guarantee density, affordability, sustainability or social benefit. It is the quality of our decision-making and the clarity with which those decisions are communicated that will determine whether the public sees tall buildings as assets or liabilities.

If the industry can deliver safer, more inclusive and more socially valuable high-rise environments, the narrative will change. Public scepticism need not be permanent. But it will take collaboration, regulatory clarity and a renewed commitment to liveability to reshape perceptions.