We’d need to build 36 Milton Keyneses to solve UK housing crisis. Are new towns really the answer?

For some the words ‘new town’ make the mind’s eye picture concrete carbuncles, others a bygone atomic-age dream of collective living. But decades after Milton Keynes, Swindon and Bracknell were sprung from the earth in the wake of the war, looking to our past could soothe the UK’s very modern housing crisis. Does our salvation lie in new towns?

Labour’s manifesto, unveiled on Thursday (13 June), has promised a “new generation of new towns”, inspired by the wave of new settlements built by Attlee’s 1945 Labour government. “Alongside urban extensions and regeneration projects, these will form part of a series of large-scale new communities across England,” the party’s manifesto says.

But in the here and now, plans are often met with controversy – not least in middle England. King Charles’ idea for a new town in Kent has led residents to complain it’d turn Faversham into an “urban mass”. The Daily Mail has given its readers a guide on how to object to a new housing development.

Beyond squabbles over planning permission, we’ve spoken to architects, experts and artists to discover if new towns hold the answers.

The case for new towns

At their best, new towns can offer something intangible beyond roofs over heads. Take Harlow, in Essex, which was designated as a new town in 1947. “Right from the start Harlow has celebrated arts and culture, thanks to the visionary town planner Sir Frederick Gibberd, who decorated the town with world class sculptures and artworks,” explained Harlow-based artist Jordan Cook, whose work focuses on the everyday life of the town and its evolution. 

This was no accident, Cook said, explaining the ethos lives on nearly 80 years later: “The new town movement brought together people from all kinds of classes, and because of that there’s a real unique voice which gets fostered here. It’s cultivated a unique identity for Harlow. It feels essential to preserve this ethos, especially for the younger generation experiencing the evolution of communal living.”

For Liz Emerson of the Intergenerational Foundation, it’s very simple: build more houses and fix the unfairness of young people paying through the nose for a basic right.

“The argument that new towns shouldn’t be built is again intergenerationally unfair. We’ve had Milton Keynes, we’ve had Swindon. Towns have been built before,” said Emerson.

“The idea that somebody’s existing view shouldn’t be taken by new housing is a complete NIMBY idea. That existing housing is likely to be post-war housing who stole the view from the people that live further within a town or village.”

Even if new towns aren’t perfect for younger people, they can free up housing elsewhere – meaning it’s not just in the interests of young people struggling to get on the housing ladder. “If you want your children to live nearby, then you should be supporting new housing in your local area,” said Emerson. 

How to get new towns right

If you are going to build new towns, location matters. To fill an estimated shortfall of 4.3 million homes, we’d need to build 36 new Milton Keyneses. But where to put them?

“The housing crisis we face in the UK is principally one in the greater South East. That isn’t to say there aren’t housing challenges elsewhere, but they’re much less acute,” said Paul Swinney, director of policy and research at the Centre for Cities think tank.

Some new towns – like Milton Keynes – have developed a thriving economy, while others have faltered. Jobs, transport and all the other things that make a town desirable are not a given.

“If you were going to build more new towns, the data would suggest you do it in the greater South East. You probably would be doing it as close to London, in particular, as possible,” said Swinney. The Elizabeth Line, stretching out to Reading in the west, provides opportunities, as do train stations surrounded by fields.

Building new transport links is the idea behind West Town, a 205-acre, 7,000 home new town planned near Edinburgh Airport. The £2bn development includes parks, cycle tracks, schools and shops.

New towns are not an easy task, Russell Curtis, an architect whose work includes making sure new homes in London are up to scratch, told the Big Issue. 

“In order to properly do a new town, you need to put all of the infrastructure in. But first, before you do all that, you’ve got to assemble the land, you’ve probably got to compulsory purchase farmland or stuff that other people own, which is going to take years. Then you’ve got all the infrastructure, and you’ve got planning permission.

“That’s a long term exercise, there’s no way the Labour Party, for example, if they get in, are going to be able to deliver new towns within the first period of government.”

The 21st century’s new towns couldn’t just be a copy-and-paste of the 1950s settlements, either.

“I can see the allure of why politicians may think that could be part of the answer, but there are challenges around the new town model. They were pretty low density developments which baked in car-dependence,” said Swinney

In fact, new towns would need to come with a change in the way towns are thought of, said Christopher Martin, vice chair of Living Streets. “The biggest barrier to new towns at the moment is connectivity and transport,” said Martin.

Towns are usually planned using the “predict and provide” model, which takes current trends and extends them into the future.

“The funding proposals everyone puts together means they build a new dual carriageway, and a new massive roundabout to service the development. That’s because they’re basing it on existing vehicle use,” said Martin. 

Instead, starting to use what’s known as “vision and validate” – imaging an ideal town and working towards that – could see new new towns fit for the future. In the long run, this will benefit the public purse too, argued Martin.

“Getting the transport right saves a huge amount of money”, he said.

The alternatives to new towns

There are alternatives. Russell Curtis has just published a piece of research arguing London could accommodate 900,000 new homes by relaxing planning rules. Following in the footsteps of Croydon, boroughs could allow developers to intensify small sites with relative ease.

“It allowed you to buy a big detached house on a large plot, and demolish it and build a block of flats,” said Curtis. Looking at the areas within a 10 minute walk of the capital’s stations, he found potential for nearly a million extra homes.

“What I’m trying to do is find a way we can deliver these homes without fundamentally changing the character of the areas in which we intensify,” he added.

“Even 900,000 homes across London isn’t going to solve the housing crisis. We need a bit of new towns, and building around rural stations.”

Do we really need to build at all? In London, buildings account for around two thirds of the city’s carbon emissions. A mass building project is likely to take us far beyond our climate goals, argued Rachael Owens, co-director of the National Retrofit Hub.

“We don’t have the carbon budget to build the amount of homes current and future governments are projecting,” said Owens.

“Retrofit has to be part of the solution because it’s much less carbon intensive to retrofit existing buildings.

“There’s definitely a place for building new homes, as long as they’re good quality. But we can’t rely on just building new homes.”