New Towns - not seen much on this

[Terminator X]

What do you all think of the proposals?

Brand new settlements
Adlington, Cheshire East: a standalone settlement to serve the growing industries in Greater Manchester and Cheshire, as identified in the government’s industrial strategy.

Marlcombe, East Devon: a standalone settlement bolstering the region’s labour supply and support the Exeter and East Devon Enterprise Zone.

Tempsford, Central Bedfordshire: a new settlement to maximise the benefits of East-West Rail, by building a well-connected new town in the heart of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor.

Already promoted new settlements
Heyford Park, Oxfordshire: redevelopment of the former US Air Force base near Bicester - this scheme has already started.

Worcestershire Parkway: expanded development at Wychavon, accelerating delivery around the existing train station to meet regional housing need and act as a model for sustainable, carbon neutral development.

Sustainable urban extensions and city centre regeneration new communities
Brabazon and West Innovation Arc, Bristol/South Gloucestershire: a corridor of connected development building in one of the highest productivity areas in the country with a high value research, advanced engineering and technology economy. The Brabazon scheme at Filton has already started.

Chase Park and Crews Hill, Enfield: an expanded development which would deliver green development and helping address London’s acute housing need.

Thamesmead, Greenwich: the creation of a riverside settlement, unlocking inaccessible land in London and improving connectivity if the proposed extension of the Docklands Light Railway can be achieved.

South Bank, Leeds: urban development in Leeds, capturing the benefits of the government’s £2.1 billion local transport funding allocation for the region by delivering well-connected, high-quality homes to support the city centre.

Victoria North, Manchester: inner-city development and densification around Collyhurst and north Manchester, supporting continued growth and attracting high-skilled workers to service the city’s diverse industries

Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire: a ‘renewed town’ proposal, reinvigorating the city centre and expanding to the city periphery whilst reshaping the way people travel, by delivering a mass rapid transit system

Plymouth, Devon: densified development in Plymouth, evolving Britain’s Ocean City and capitalising on the £4.4 billion investment in HMNB Devonport, western Europe’s largest naval base.

TX.

[OutInTheShed]

Lots of development around Plymouth, much of it the wrong side of various bits of water from where people need to be.
Transport links a bit of a joke and getting worse, with the Railway falling into the sea at Dawlish, and no airport these days.

[Huzzah]

If it goes according to plan that's the tip of the iceberg, what is it around 300,000 homes? We've been promised 1500000. Expect a new housing estate nearby soon.

[borcy]

I doubt many will actually happen.

[Huzzah]

borcy said:

I doubt many will actually happen.

World population has increased 30% since the 90s, UK is similar. ONS report the UK need 4.5 million homes, population increase is starting to slow, but expected to keep rising until the end of the century.

No, I've no idea how realistic or sustainable this is either

[Cow Corner]

Clearly it’s quite location specific, but we have one not far from us (Otterpool Park, Kent) which is inching painfully towards getting built.

Personally I think it’s a sensible idea - currently underused land (former Folkestone race course), direct access to mainline train line to London, next to an existing M20 junction, close to Channel Tunnel etc etc. it would allow the local authority to get a big chunk of their housing allocation built in a genuinely sustainable location. Much better than endless pressure for all the surrounding towns and villages to be expanded without adequate infrastructure.

More generally, I think it’s healthy to see some (admittedly limited) ambition - we can’t complain about the UK’s decline and then at the same time moan and see people try to endlessly block every bit of long term investment.

[ozzuk]

Hopefully they will be building with sustainability in mind and something interesting with good landscaping - not your average timber frame or rendered box (that always seems to leech colour). Doubtful though, lowest cost will win.

[Condi]

Cow Corner said:

More generally, I think it s healthy to see some (admittedly limited) ambition - we can t complain about the UK s decline and then at the same time moan and see people try to endlessly block every bit of long term investment.

Schroding's growth.

People want it. But nobody wants to see it. Or live near it. Or even be aware that building things involves removing some countryside.

But growth is important.

[TooLateForAName]

I would rather see decently planned new settlements with suitable infrastructure and facilities than the endless bolt on housing estates that omit such fripperies.

[Jamescrs]

The one in Leeds was and is already happening but it's got nothing to do with government policy, the city has been spreading out in to that area for years now with I suppose you could call a gentrification of the area, it was typically a very run down area and still is when you get deep into it including the red light district but slowly old buildings have been getting bought up and demolished as new tower blocks are built full of new offices and apartments and in fairness some nice bars.

They are just trying to push Leeds South Bank as a new name for the area which has always been Holbeck.

[Ziplobb]

Its unlikely to happen
round here (isle of wight) you cant even get permission for a single house let alone deal with the concept of a rising population, homelessness and out of control immigration. I think less than half a dozen houses built in our parish in the last 20 years

[Lotobear]

Ebeneezer Howard got there first.

[John D.]

Cow Corner said:

Clearly it s quite location specific, but we have one not far from us (Otterpool Park, Kent) which is inching painfully towards getting built.

Personally I think it s a sensible idea - currently underused land (former Folkestone race course), direct access to mainline train line to London, next to an existing M20 junction, close to Channel Tunnel etc etc. it would allow the local authority to get a big chunk of their housing allocation built in a genuinely sustainable location. Much better than endless pressure for all the surrounding towns and villages to be expanded without adequate infrastructure.

More generally, I think it s healthy to see some (admittedly limited) ambition - we can t complain about the UK s decline and then at the same time moan and see people try to endlessly block every bit of long term investment.

Good idea overall in my opinion.

This topic is more NPE than DIY to me

[Venom]

Most of them will happen in some form - but large scale schemes like these take years to come out of the ground, even with government intervention.

Before these proposals we have had various proposals over the years. This government does seem to be slowly making improvements in removing red tape to get development (particularly housing) moving, but there are a lot of headwinds - build cost, lack of materials and labour being just some.

Personally I think these are a good idea generally, but part of a range of solutions, which will still include smaller infill and piecemeal urban extensions. Sorry folks - these aren't a magic bullet!

[Simpo Two]

Huzzah said:

World population has increased 30% since the 90s, UK is similar. ONS report the UK need 4.5 million homes, population increase is starting to slow, but expected to keep rising until the end of the century.

No, I've no idea how realistic or sustainable this is either

Most of our 30% is due to immigration, therefore largely optional. We got in the mess entirely by ourselves. The population is going up by 500,000 a year and either nobody cares or wants to face the facts on how to stop it.

[wiggy001]

As already said, this is much better than what they are trying to do near me, which is to build housing on farmland in an area that is already gridlocked on a daily basis and desperately short of doctors, hospital beds, school places and other services.

In fact, I would like to see it put into law that there must be n GPs, school places, hospital beds etc per 1000 people/houses so we don't end up with small villages turned into large villages/small towns without the supporting infrastructure.

[Panamax]

Don't forget UK needs a new town every year just to accomodate people arriving on small boats across the channel. Then there's net immigration of 400,000 to deal with as well.

How many new towns can be built each year? The numbers simply don't stack up.

[Huzzah]

wiggy001 said:

In fact, I would like to see it put into law that there must be n GPs, school places, hospital beds etc per 1000 people/houses so we don't end up with small villages turned into large villages/small towns without the supporting infrastructure.

I think it is, just not very well implemented by local authorities.

[borcy]

Huzzah said:

wiggy001 said:

In fact, I would like to see it put into law that there must be n GPs, school places, hospital beds etc per 1000 people/houses so we don't end up with small villages turned into large villages/small towns without the supporting infrastructure.

I think it is, just not very well implemented by local authorities.

Do they have powers to enforce that?

[Huzzah]

borcy said:

Huzzah said:

wiggy001 said:

In fact, I would like to see it put into law that there must be n GPs, school places, hospital beds etc per 1000 people/houses so we don't end up with small villages turned into large villages/small towns without the supporting infrastructure.

I think it is, just not very well implemented by local authorities.

Do they have powers to enforce that?

I believe so.