The New Town Opportunity and Challenge

The case for new towns

The case for new towns has returned firmly to the national agenda, and for good reason. England is facing a persistent and deepening housing shortfall, and recent delivery figures underline just how far we are from meeting demand.

Nationally, we are failing to build enough homes. Annual net additional housing delivery in 2024/25 fell to a nine-year low, continuing a downward trend that has been in place since the peak of 2019/20. Even at its peak, delivery reached around 248,000 homes – still well short of the annual average of 300,000 required to meet the Government’s original target of 1.5 million new homes by 2029.

To put this into context, the last time we built homes at the scale now required was during the 1960s, often described as the “golden age” of housebuilding. That period coincided with the second and third waves of new towns, including places such as Telford, Redditch, Milton Keynes and Peterborough. The lesson from history is a simple but important one: we have only achieved sustained high levels of housing delivery when we have planned and delivered new towns at scale.

The 32 new towns developed to date are now home to around 5% of England’s population and include some of the fastest-growing local economies in the country. This underlines a critical point. New towns are not just about housing numbers; they are about economic growth, productivity and long-term place-making. That wider purpose must remain central to the new towns agenda this time around.

Different places, different roles

There is no single model for a new town, and the current shortlist of 12 locations reflects significant variation in opportunity, geography and delivery status, spanning areas from Leeds to Plymouth.

Broadly, these locations can be grouped into three categories. Some are urban infill or inner-city densification projects, such as Victoria North in Manchester or the Leeds South Bank, where development is already well underway. Others are city extensions or overspill locations, like Bristol Brabazon, designed to accommodate growth beyond existing urban boundaries. A third group comprises new, standalone settlements in greenfield locations, such as Tempsford and Adlington.

These differences matter. Some locations benefit from land already being largely under developer control, while others will require significant third-party land assembly. Most have political support locally, but not all, and that will influence both pace and certainty of delivery.

There is also clear variation in economic purpose. Some new towns are intended to support growth corridors and high-productivity sectors, while others are more focused on addressing housing supply pressures. Some will inevitably be residential-led; others will need to be genuinely mixed-use to succeed.

Importantly, a number of schemes, particularly urban infill projects, are already delivering early phases. This raises a critical question about additionality: what does new town designation genuinely unlock in places where development is already happening, and how does that designation accelerate or improve outcomes?

What does success look like?

Ultimately, the success of new towns will not be measured solely in housing numbers. These must be places where people want to live and work in the long term: well connected, inclusive, safe and sustainable.

Some new settlements will take time to find their identity and reach maturity, but that makes holistic planning from day one all the more important. There is a potential tension between the political desire to see “spades in the ground” quickly, particularly in the run-up to a General Election, and the careful, long-term planning required to create genuinely attractive places. Rushing early delivery at the expense of quality risks storing up problems for decades to come.

Social infrastructure will be fundamental to success. Schools, health facilities, community spaces and green infrastructure are not optional extras; they sit at the heart of how places function and feel. These elements need to be planned and delivered from the outset and at the right scale. Experience elsewhere shows that spillover benefits into surrounding areas cannot be assumed and need to be actively planned for, often beyond the traditional “red line” of development site boundaries.

There is also a real opportunity for innovation. Many earlier new towns are associated with a legacy of grids, roundabouts and concrete. A new generation of settlements could instead become test beds for new ways of living and working, stronger community integration and more sustainable lifestyles. There is scope to think of new towns as living laboratories, where success is judged not just on viability and delivery speed, but on liveability.

Finally, success should be measured against international benchmarks, not just domestic precedent. Places such as Almere in the Netherlands demonstrate how experimental settlements can evolve into successful, distinctive cities. If we are serious about addressing the housing challenge, the ambition for new towns needs to be equally bold.

By Ben Pretty – Partner, Development & Strategic Advisory, Cushman & Wakefield, and iED Board Director

Would you like to write for the iED? As part of iED individual and organisation membership, ALL members have the opportunity to publish articles on our website. We are now seeking ideas for contributions from members, including those in our Early Career Network. These can be around any aspect of economic development, insights on work you are undertaking and project successes you would like to share, or any viewpoint you would like to express. If you have an article proposal please contact: Jac Jordan, Institute of Economic Development PR consultant, Tel: 01706 214 340/  07887 416 182, email: jac@vivapr.co.uk