The government's renewed enthusiasm for building new towns may be exciting, but it risks overlooking the people who need housing the most. Even seasoned planners involved in the post-war new towns program have warned that the current proposals lack ambition for social housing and may not reach those in greatest need. Other analyses suggest that new towns have historically contributed only a small proportion of the homes required and are unlikely to deliver at the scale ministers claim. Instead of pouring resources into speculative new settlements, we should focus on the towns and cities we already have – places with infrastructure, identity, and communities that are being steadily hollowed out. Across the UK, redundant land, vacant upper floors, derelict retail units, and brownfield sites offer enormous potential for affordable, well-located homes. This approach would deliver housing faster and more sustainably, and in ways that strengthen existing communities rather than displacing them. At the same time, our high streets are being drained by the gravitational pull of out-of-town shopping malls. Every time a retailer relocates, it accelerates decline, reduces footfall, and undermines the economic and social fabric of our town centers. If we are serious about revitalizing local economies, we must stop incentivizing retail flight and instead reinvest in the places where people already live, work, and shop. New towns may suit developers, but they will not solve the housing crisis for those who need help most. Strengthening and repurposing our existing urban areas while protecting and revitalizing our high streets would deliver more homes, more quickly, and with far greater social value. Richard Eltringham, Leicester, argues that the former planners of Milton Keynes are right to criticize the government's new towns plan for failing to meet the priority need for social housing at council rents. They are also right to stress how well the earlier new towns met this need. However, the story of Milton Keynes is a cautionary tale. The Labour government's policy was already swinging towards owner-occupation when the city was designated in 1967, and among its board members was Stanley Morton, chairman of the Abbey National building society and previously of the Building Societies Association. The board was undecided on the relative weight to be attached to homes for sale and homes for the corporation to rent. As the economist in the consultant team, Michael Edwards was charged with analyzing the implications of the choices. He prepared a report for a meeting of the board, which Mr. Morton hosted at Abbey National's headquarters in Baker Street, London. Edwards concluded that Milton Keynes would have to build at least half its housing for social rent to achieve the board's objectives of social and industrial mix. His argument carried the day, but it was a close shave. Les Bright, Exeter, Devon, reflects on the success of Peterborough, a new town established in the 1980s. The Peterborough Development Corporation (PDC) addressed all aspects of making the city home for a population that was set to double. Employment, leisure opportunities, a network of safe cycle routes, and a number of discrete self-supporting neighborhoods with schools, libraries, shops, and play facilities, along with teams of community workers, made the city a vibrant place for incomers and locals alike. Bright suggests that experts expressing concern about government plans should turn their attention to protesters like those in the village of Adlington, Cheshire, who see more houses and cars, not people and progress, in the plans to build 20,000 new homes on their doorstep in a new standalone development. Gordon Davies, Dornoch, Sutherland, reflects on his career as an architect/planner in the UK's new towns program. He regards the British new towns program as one of the most significant and successful planning initiatives of any British government. Davies attributes the success of new towns, particularly in Scotland in the 80s and 90s, to continued support from government of whatever color. This support provided new jobs in emerging industries like microelectronics and healthcare research, which were an important component of government credibility and re-electability. Davies emphasizes that new towns should not be just massive housing developments built for developer profit. Instead, they should provide new jobs in emerging industries, supported by good-quality public housing and community facilities to engender community development, efficient public transport, and all that goes with the requirements to provide sustainable communities. But above all, it requires sustained central government support, politically and financially, and the establishment of a new tranche of development corporations with the power to acquire land at existing use value and planning powers equivalent to those of their predecessors.
