Milton Keynes is thriving, but the landscape of Britain has changed dramatically since it was built. Photo: CHUNYIP WONG/iStockphoto
There is less available land in Britain compared to the 1960s, and what is available is much more difficult to build.
The economy has also changed significantly – building a new city is unlikely today will attract businesses looking for manufacturing and office space, as it would have done decades ago. Our post-industrial economy means that people need homes in cities where there are jobs.
Labour's affordable housing policy is also likely to blow a hole in the new towns funding model.
The party has tried to revive its new towns policy before, with little success. In 2009, Gordon Brown proposed building 10 “eco-cities”, but the plans were met with protests and lawsuits.
“Is this just a knee-jerk religious return to the idea that we need new cities? asks Paul Cheshire, emeritus professor at the London School of Economics and former government adviser.
The biggest problem facing the deputy leader is the issue of land: there is not enough for construction.
“ The low hanging fruit has been harvested,” says Anthony Breech, deputy director of the Center for Cities. “In terms of road junctions and the obvious places you would choose for a new urban expansion that could come out of nowhere, there aren't that many.”
It's important to note that while there is land on which new cities could theoretically be built, many more people are opposed to building on it than in previous years. People don't want to see major changes to their homes because they reduce value or put a strain on local amenities.
“Homes are becoming an increasingly important asset, especially for older people. Older people tend to move from London to their home counties and then become Nimbys,” says Cheshire.
Planning rules were also changed in Nimby's favour. In 1969 the government published the Skeffington Committee report, which made new recommendations for encouraging public participation in local planning decisions.
“This provided some impetus towards questioning professional planners and empowering major local constituencies . lobby,” says Cheshire.
Scarcity creates value and speculators have flooded British land as the availability of viable building sites has declined.
“There is a whole market of completely invisible assets that are not just options, but options on options,” says Cheshire. . “This is one of the reasons why our system is so expensive and dysfunctional, because all of this in itself is a deadweight loss. These are just people creating paper assets out of potential land value capture.”
In short, acquiring land for development has become an extremely expensive legal mess. Breech says: “Our planning system in the developed world is ineffective.”
Labour could, of course, try to hack through this thicket of rules and complexity with an ax to make it easier to build. Sir Keir Starmer has promised to reform the system to favor “builders over blockers”.
But Labour's new town dreams will still be hampered by its own political details, argues Breach.
< p>Rayner says 40% of the homes built in new towns will be “affordable”. But such a high percentage of homes priced below market will raise doubts about how the projects will be financed, Breech said.
New cities require large upfront costs to build infrastructure, ranging from roads and sewers to schools and doctors' offices. All of this is typically financed by debt, secured by proceeds from future home sales.
If most of those homes are sold below market price, developers will be able to borrow less. Taxpayers will either have to step in to make up the difference, or the city's new residents will have to put up with less infrastructure.
Despite these concerns, Breech believes new towns are the wrong solution to Britain's current housing crisis.
Despite these concerns, Breech believes new towns are the wrong solution to Britain's current housing crisis.
Despite these concerns, Breech believes new towns are the wrong solution to Britain's current housing crisis.
Milton Keynes is considered a success story, but many other post-war new towns are outdated.
After the 1970s, the British economy changed, beginning a shift from industrial manufacturing to services. This made the country more London-centric.
“Industrial jobs have become less important to the national economy, making it more difficult for the government to move jobs, businesses and firms around the country,” says Breech.
New towns near the capital such as Milton Keynes and Crowley continued to perform well. However, many people in the north, such as Peterlee and Washington, have begun to struggle with unemployment and deprivation.
“You need to build on the geography of Britain's economy. You can't create a completely separate, isolated new city and expect it to work well,” says Breech.
New cities work best when they reduce pressure on areas with development bottlenecks. A much more effective way to ease the housing crisis and fight the planning system is to expand existing cities rather than build new ones.
The Labor Party seems to know this too. Sir Keir's housing plans include a strategic review of the green belt, opening up opportunities for development on land on the immediate outskirts of towns. Analysts say these are the policies that could radically change Britain's housing quagmire.
However, this will ultimately mean building near London. The Southeast is, in other words, the place with the highest property prices and the toughest land value claims. That's easier said than done.
Meanwhile, Rayner's chances of filling the UK with a new generation of Milton Keynes look slim. Breech predicts that the plans will “sink into the sand”, as happened with Brown's eco-city scheme.
Recent Comments