As the New Towns Taskforce reaches its final conclusions, success will depend on building a public consensus about inclusive growth, says Hugh Ellis in this blog from our series on the next generation of New Towns
It has been ten months since the government established the New Towns Taskforce (NTTF) under the stewardship of Sir Michael Lyons. We expect their final report in just over a month and the conclusions will, we hope, be an important milestone in the long history of the Garden Cities and New Towns.
New Towns: exemplars of 21st century living
The TCPA welcomed the new Government’s commitment to a new generation of New Towns. However, we are also conscious that the Taskforce has had to confront an enormous challenge in balancing the needs of the Treasury for increased delivery of housing units, with the legitimate expectations of organisations such as the TCPA.
There is an enormous challenge in balancing the needs of the Treasury for increased delivery of housing units, with the legitimate expectations of organisations such as the TCPA.
We expect a new generation of New Towns to be exemplars of 21st century living reflecting the ideals of the Garden Cities and the vitally important learning of the post-war New Towns programme. Landing such an outcome in the highly contested politics of England with sufficient Treasury backing to be credible is an enormous task that deserves our sympathy and encouragement.
If the commitment to new New Towns is to be successful, it is essential that proposed approaches learn from previous attempts at strategic growth. This spans from the foundation of Letchworth Garden City in 1903, to the current work by the TCPA’s New Communities Group.
The ingredients for successful new communities
While our analysis indicates that highly sustainable new communities can provide opportunities for lasting success, seizing these opportunities depends on a number of factors, including:
- Using New Town Development Corporations to manage the long-term delivery of places in ways which transform our current dysfunctional housing model in order achieve all of the Garden City Principles.
- The need to deliver, and then nurture, high quality design through effective stewardship of green infrastructure and community assets.
Past experience has also demonstrated how new towns could diversify delivery with community-led cooperative housing and self-build. All of these aspirations must be reflected in an ambitious vision from government for 21st century living which is backed by clear national standards to create the foundation of new communities.
Eco towns: what went wrong?
But with opportunities there are always risks. Perhaps the most obvious is the way the government chooses to handle the selection and designation of New Town locations.
The new programme must be informed by the important lessons of the eco towns programme where designations were based on an opaque process of asking for bids from public and private sector, followed by national announcements of favoured locations. The sites did not flow from local plan designations nor was there any requirement for a public inquiry to provide communities with a formal voice.
The political backlash was immense, and opposition politicians were able to exploit the fact that no one had asked communities on the ground about their views or given them any formal opportunity to object or make representations.
In the end, the eco towns programme lasted less than two years and its legacy shows how a sensible idea for strategic growth accompanied by cutting edge standards can fail spectacularly because of a failure to pay attention to good governance in the designation process.
The eco towns programme shows how a sensible idea can fail spectacularly because of a failure to pay attention to good governance in the designation process.
In stark contrast, the post war New Towns were based on regional studies prepared at least a decade before designations took place. These regional studies were accompanied by a much wider public discourse, based on the advocacy of the Garden City movement, for the decentralisation of populations into highly sustainable new communities.
The designation of New Towns was, in most cases, supported and even lobbied for by local authorities as part of carefully negotiated deals to wrap up housing growth pressures strategically and prevent urban sprawl. Milton Keynes provides the ultimate expression of this negotiated settlement.
But, significantly, the 1946 Act also required that the designation of New Towns involved a public inquiry initiated by the Secretary of State where local communities could raise objections and present evidence. This was accompanied by an informal and intense series of ministerial visits to the potential locations to sell the message and listen to concerns.
Credible public participation
In an era when there is so much mistrust of planning and with the corrosive impact of social media, if we are to see the successful delivery of new communities, we will need to innovate above the minimum participation requirements of the past New Town designations. Anything less risks leaving the programme exposed to the easy political criticism of top down ‘Stalinism’, which will no doubt be exploited by the current array of populist political parties. It also increases the potential opposition from stakeholders who believe that public participation in planning and placemaking is fundamentally important to creating thriving places.
While the Taskforce represents an expert body providing detailed advice to government in a way which was absent in the eco towns programme, it is nonetheless clear that in relation to the governance of the designation process the political risks are largely the same. The governance question should be seen as the single most significant factor in defining the success or otherwise of any new programme of New Towns.
The governance question should be seen as the single most significant factor in defining the success or otherwise of any new programme of New Towns.
Once again, we recognise the constraints placed on the Taskforce by its Terms of Reference, but how the government takes forward those recommendations will be critically important. The time needed to carry out credible public participation is well spent if the alternative is the political failure of the programme. That would be tragic outcome given our vital collective need for healthy, affordable homes in communities which nurture people’s wellbeing.
Other blogs in this series:
New Towns: the need for a strong vision – Town and Country Planning Association
