New planning rules issued last week aim to make the system more forward-looking and market-based - although not 'market-led'. They provide more local flexibility, with local authorities setting their own brownfield and density targets. And they place great emphasis on houses with gardens, for people with children.

Family-friendly planning:

• Housing mix - local plans should factor in needs of families
• Design - more gardens, play areas, informal play space
• Re-use - recycle / convert existing stock e.g. HMOs
• Infrastructure - calculate new homes' impact on local schools
• Parking - develop local car parking policies.

This family focus is due to a growing backlash is beginning against the Urban Task Force vision of 'urban renaissance'. When arch-urbanist Richard Rogers calls publicly for a policy focus on suburbs, it's clear something big is going on.

The UK has too little housing, but too many small flats. In the North, city centre living has been driven by apartments, with families leaving for the suburbs. In the South, the Growth Areas need at least some family homes. But, for example, the Government says that 96 per cent of planned homes in the Lower Lea Valley are studio, one- or two- bed flats.

So will the new housing planning guidance work for families? Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) faces four big tests. The first is will everyone be able to use it. Big cities will welcome new powers to fine-tune their housing strategies. But smaller places with fewer resources may be less good at handling the strategic approach - or the evidence base required.

Secondly it is unclear whether PPS3 will work everywhere. The Government's key building sites - inner rings and Growth Areas - may end up taking population from surrounding regions, which makes planning for future growth tricky. A lot will depend on the detailed housing market area guidance, which has yet to be published.

Many Northern cities are remodelling their inner ring neighbourhoods to attract young families - but outer suburban authorities are also building family housing. Regional Spatial Strategies should co-ordinate the two, but many go with both preferences rather than choose between them. Regions and city-regions need more connected strategies.

Thirdly, is the guidance itself joined up? Developers can pay in lieu of affordable housing 'as long as the agreed approach contributes to the creation of mixed communities'. But this could lead to blocs of social housing - the opposite of the mixed communities approach.

Finally, what about the rest of the offer? Family-friendly cities need homes with gardens, good transport links and good public services. But our research suggests the 'infrastructure gap' in the growth areas will be about £300m a year over the next decade. The Government's proposed land tax, the planning gain supplement, would only fill part of this funding hole. The priority is to improve the alignment of mainstream budgets and funding formulae, the co-ordination of delivery bodies and the creation of incentives of collaboration.

Family friendly cities need proper financing and supporting frameworks, not just houses. The clues will be in the big policy reviews reporting to the Budget and PBR, particularly Lyons and the reviews of regeneration and social infrastructure.