Our nation's housing crisis demands a bold and innovative approach, yet the government's plan to build new towns may not be the panacea it seems. While it makes for dramatic headlines, it risks overlooking the very people who need housing the most.
Even seasoned planners, veterans of the post-war new towns program, have sounded the alarm. They warn that the current proposals fall short in their commitment to social housing and may fail to reach those with the greatest need. Other analyses suggest that new towns have historically contributed only a fraction of the required housing, and the scale of the government's claims is questionable.
Instead of investing in speculative new settlements, we should refocus our efforts on the towns and cities we already have. These places, with their established infrastructure, unique identities, and thriving communities, are being slowly eroded. Across the UK, there is untapped potential in redundant land, vacant upper floors, abandoned retail spaces, and brownfield sites, which could provide affordable and well-located homes. This approach offers a faster and more sustainable solution, one that strengthens existing communities rather than displacing them.
Our high streets are also suffering, pulled under by the gravitational force of out-of-town shopping malls. Every time a retailer relocates, it accelerates the decline of our town centers, reducing footfall and undermining the economic and social fabric. If we truly want to revitalize local economies, we must stop incentivizing retail flight and reinvest in the places where people live, work, and shop.
New towns may benefit developers, but they won't solve the housing crisis for those who need it most. By strengthening and repurposing our existing urban areas while protecting and revitalizing our high streets, we can deliver more homes, more quickly, and with far greater social value.
Richard Eltringham, Leicester
The critics of the government's new towns plan, including the former planners of Milton Keynes, have a valid point. The priority for social housing at council rents is being overlooked, and the earlier new towns excelled in meeting this need. However, the success of Milton Keynes was almost jeopardized by a shift in government policy towards owner-occupation.
As an economist on the consultant team, Michael Edwards played a crucial role in ensuring that Milton Keynes prioritized social rent. His analysis and report, presented at a board meeting hosted by Stanley Morton, chairman of the Abbey National building society, concluded that at least half of the housing needed to be built for social rent to achieve the board's objectives of social and industrial mix. It was a close call, but Edwards' argument prevailed.
Michael Edwards, Honorary Professor, Bartlett School of Planning, University College London
In 1981, Les Bright moved to Peterborough with his partner and young son. He took up a new job, partly funded by the Peterborough Development Corporation (PDC), to establish a social welfare organization for the city. This move provided his family with a three-bedroom house and garden, an upgrade from their cramped and overpriced rental in Brighton.
PDC's master plan went beyond housing. It addressed all aspects of creating a vibrant city, doubling the population, and providing employment opportunities, leisure activities, safe cycle routes, and self-supporting neighborhoods with essential amenities and community support. This holistic approach made Peterborough an attractive and thriving place for both newcomers and locals.
Les Bright, Exeter, Devon
Gordon Davies, an architect and planner who dedicated his career to the UK's new towns program, offers a unique perspective. He worked in Skelmersdale as a student, then in East Kilbride and Livingston, contributing to the planning of new towns in Scotland.
Davies regards the British new towns program as a remarkable and successful planning initiative, largely due to consistent government support, regardless of political affiliation. This support was pragmatic and counter to conventional policy, but it resulted in significant job creation in emerging industries like microelectronics and healthcare research, boosting government credibility and re-electability.
New towns, past and future, should be more than just massive housing developments for developer profit. They should provide new jobs, good-quality public housing, community facilities, efficient public transport, and sustainable communities. Above all, they require sustained central government support, both politically and financially, and the establishment of powerful development corporations with land acquisition and planning powers.
Gordon Davies, Dornoch, Sutherland
