Milton Keynes City Council-Written Evidence (NTP0017)

Summary

  1. There are a few key points we would like to draw out from this submission, as summarised below.
  2. The original New Towns received Treasury funding far in excess of what is likely to be achievable today.  But the most successful of those original New Towns, Milton Keynes, was able to more than re-pay those Treasury-backed loans – some years ahead of schedule – which in large part was due to the economic success of the place that the funding was able to create.  Milton Keynes continues to be an economic powerhouse within the region, delivering many more homes than its Local Plan requires and providing an excellent quality of life for its expanding population.  In the case of investing in New Towns and planning at scale, it is a matter of ‘you get out what you put in’.
  3. We strongly believe that any new delivery arrangements need to have significant local involvement, including leadership by someone who is a champion of the locality, and the planning and delivery of a New Town needs to involve much greater community and stakeholder engagement than was characterised by the original programme.
  4. It is essential that New Towns are not solely focussed on delivering large numbers of homes, quickly.  To be truly successful as places where people will always want to live, the New Town programme also needs to deliver jobs, infrastructure and facilities, green spaces, transport connectivity and all of the other things that thriving towns and cities do well.  They will require levels of investment and support beyond that which would be appropriate for urban extensions.  Thinking about this next phase of New Towns as urban extensions rather than the major expansion of those towns will undermine the scale of the benefits they can achieve.
  5. The level of capacity, knowledge and experience and ability to drive forward the planning and delivery of New Towns is far beyond the resources that will be available within local authorities.  To be able to make the New Town programme a reality and for it to deliver a meaningful step-change in housing delivery and placemaking, there needs to be very significant capacity funding and additional support from MHCLG, Homes England and other partners, as well as a more joined-up approach across government departments.  The level of effort required cannot be underestimated.

 

Introduction

  1. Milton Keynes (MK) is the last, largest and most ambitious of all the settlements to be created under the 1946 New Towns Act.  The New City – as Milton Keynes was labelled from the very beginning – was the pinnacle of the post-war New Towns programme aimed at dispersing London’s overcrowded population and creating better places to live.  Designated more than twenty years after the start of the New Town programme, MK is very different in character and scale and success from its predecessors and offers many lessons for how to deliver New and Expanded Towns today. 
  2. Founded in the 1960s, Milton Keynes and the work of the Development Corporation responsible for delivery through its first decades, was driven by the ambition and imagination of that decade, through the 1970s and 1980s and beyond.  After the winding up of the Milton Keynes Development Corporation, the Commission for the New Towns and later English Partnerships/Homes and Communities Agency and its locally focussed sub-committee, Milton Keynes Partnership, took on responsibility for the strategic direction and delivery of the city’s growth. 
  3. The Localism Act in 2011 brought a shift of power away from central government to give local councils greater control in their areas.  It was this agenda that led Milton Keynes Council – now the City Council – to seek the transfer of powers so that by 2013 and for the first time in the area’s history, a single, locally accountable authority had control over planning and the capability to drive social and commercial development in Milton Keynes.
  4. The long history of different delivery bodies being active in Milton Keynes has created a complex backdrop for how the city views the opportunities that new governance and delivery arrangements could once again bring in achieving our major long-term growth ambitions, which have regional if not national benefits.  Our response to this Call for Evidence unpacks some of these views.  The City Council would be very keen to discuss this further with the Built Environment Committee as it explores this important topic and it would seem fitting that the most ambitious and successful of the previous New Towns forma a core part of the Inquiry. We will also continue to engage fully with the New Towns Taskforce and MHCLG in relation to the opportunity for Milton Keynes to again be recognised as a New Town and a project of national significance.

General

Q1.              What do you anticipate will be most significant impact(s) of the Government’s proposed new towns?
a. Over what timescale do you expect this(/these) to be realised?

  1. Milton Keynes serves as a compelling case study demonstrating how building at scale, with the right level of upfront and ongoing investment, can create a place that is both an economic success and offers a high quality of life for its residents, whilst rapidly delivering very significant numbers of homes.[1]  The city's landscape-led design and delivery of infrastructure have been key factors in its success as a popular place to live, an approach which has continued beyond the end of the Development Corporation era of growth.
  2. Milton Keynes was able to repay – earlier than planned – the Government loans that were essential in kickstarting its growth and enabling development at both scale and pace. The city continues to deliver significant positive impacts both locally and nationally, as it has done since the start of its growth programme.  These benefits can be directly attributed to the investment made in the city’s development.
  3. Examples of these benefits include the strategic approach to landscape and water/flood management, which has been crucial for sustainability. Additionally, the resources focussed on inward investment attracted many companies to the area, setting the stage for continued economic success. The spirit of innovation in Milton Keynes has positioned it at the forefront of technology and policy development, setting a new standard for other places to follow.  The size of the Milton Keynes economy is comparable to that of Oxford and Cambridge combined.  This long-term strategic commitment to growth and a can-do mindset has put the city in a positive position for ongoing success.

Q2.               How do the proposed new towns and expanded settlements differ from previous initiatives over the last 80 years?

  1. Today, the role of public engagement and democratic involvement in the development process is seen much more positively and should play a greater part than in the past.  We believe it is appropriate and important that a greater level of local control is retained as part of any New Towns programme, rather than Development Corporations centrally led with limited local involvement.
  2. We consider a next phase of New Towns is likely to require a greater level of private sector investment than in the past.  While the public sector bore a large part of the financial burden of the previous New Towns, it is unlikely to be able to do so now even though places like Milton Keynes have shown that such investments were financially beneficial to the Treasury in the long term.
  3. It is apparent that this new wave also has a greater focus on expanding existing places rather than creating standalone settlements.  This approach allows for quicker delivery compared to establishing new places and should also provide an opportunity for investment into existing areas.  There will be learning to be gained from the Expanded Towns programme which was also delivered using New Town powers. However, it is important to avoid creating a 'two-speed' situation where investment is concentrated only on the edges of places in new development areas.  Investment must also be directed towards city and town centres, as well as regeneration areas.
  4. It is therefore crucial to ensure that a new programme of New Towns is properly funded. In the case of Milton Keynes and its growth since designation in 1967, the Department for Environment effectively took on the investment risk through what was originally a 60-year fixed rate loan.  The total capital cost of the New City was estimated to be £700 million over 25 years. Adjusted for inflation since 1967, this is equivalent to around £11 billion today.[2] Of this, almost half was borrowed from the Treasury, with the remaining cost shared by local authorities, other public bodies and the private sector. In return for taking on the risk via the Development Corporation, the Treasury gained long-term 'profits' from receipts that continued long after the loans were repaid. By 1997, during the life of the Commission for the New Towns, the Treasury was fully reimbursed for its investments in Milton Keynes through development income receipts. A mechanism of clawback payments means that millions of pounds are still being paid back to Treasury when land previously owned by the Development Corporation and Commission for the New Towns comes forward for development in Milton Keynes.
  5. Research by the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) shows that the total £4.75 billion loan made to the New Town Development Corporations by the Treasury was repaid in early 1999, with later land sales generating a further £600 million.[3]   The value created from the investment in the New Towns has been profitable for the Treasury. However, given the current fiscal situation facing the country, we recognise it will be extremely challenging to commit such levels of funding today. As a result, there is a risk that the quality and scale of development achieved through a new programme will not match that of the original New Towns.

Q3.               What, if any, are the barriers to the development of good quality new towns?

  1. Maintaining quality while still achieving scale and pace is critical but will be a challenge, and it is essential to ensure sufficient investment in the many infrastructure, placemaking and city-building projects that need to be delivered alongside homes to create truly successful and sustainable places. We know this also needs to include making a similar commitment to delivering jobs growth and inward investment, not just building new homes.
  2. The delivery of affordable homes and ensuring the viability and deliverability of development is likely to be manageable on greenfield sites, particularly in the South East of England. However, this will be a significant challenge in some areas, including in our city centre where recent development proposals have not been able to deliver the proportion of affordable housing and other development contributions needed to be policy compliant.
  3. It is important to consider whether key partners, such as Homes England, are equipped to provide the necessary support to help deliver quality places across a national programme, whilst sustaining their existing housing programmes.

Q4.               What current policy channels exist to deliver new towns, and are they sufficient? If insufficient, what policy changes would facilitate their development?

  1. New Towns could be delivered through existing policy approaches, however this may not be the most expedient and appropriate route given the potential scale and complexity of the task and the risk that the planning process may cause delays.  We consider there is likely to be a continued role for a centrally-driven approach to New Towns beyond them being identified by the New Towns Taskforce.  For government to formally designate New Towns in some way through a national level policy, statutory instrument or other means could help smooth the journey at a local level and enable faster delivery on the ground. Relying solely on allocation through Local Plans risks emerging proposals being held up during the examination process.  This may also serve to slow down the adoption of other planning policies and interventions for an area if the plan-making and examination process is delayed by such strategic and transformational allocations and policies.  Similarly, approval through the normal planning process for what will be major applications may also slow things down, especially in places which are not accustomed to dealing with such large development proposals.
  2. However, it is important that developing the details of any proposals involves significant local democratic involvement and that decisions are not taken solely at a more strategic or national level.
  3. We believe there may be potential for other policy tools and levers to be used, such as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects or Local Development Orders.  It is worth exploring whether these tools have been tested and if they would require new or updated legislation to be suitable for the purpose of delivering New Town proposals. 

Q5.              What do you think future modules in our inquiry should examine when considering what makes a successful new town?

  1. We support the Inquiry’s intention to look further at what makes a successful New Town.  We think further modules should include consideration of the following points:
  1. exploring lessons learnt from existing New Towns, including international examples and any best practice;
  2. investigating the process and implications of winding up a Development Corporation including ongoing stewardship of assets;
  3. examining the relationship between local (planning) authority and a Development Corporation or other delivery arrangement, including the process of developing shadow arrangements, relationship with other governance arrangements (e.g. Mayoral Strategic Authorities) and understanding responsibilities for various aspects of development and joint-working arrangements.

 

 

The Role of Government

Q6.               What should be the respective roles and responsibilities of local and regional government in the delivery of new towns?

  1. We believe this is indeed an issue that needs further consideration given that the approach taken now would differ from how things were managed under the earlier New Town programmes.
  2. Local Authorities, with a deep understanding of their respective areas, should play a much greater role in the planning, design and delivery activities of any Development Corporation or other mechanism, in contrast to the first waves of New Towns, which were far more centrally-led. While it should not mean that every decision needs to be signed off by the Local Authority, there should be greater collaboration and engagement than in previous iterations.  We also want to understand better how relationships would work with other devolved governance arrangements including Strategic Mayoral Authorities or existing delivery structures within a locality.
  3. We also believe that new delivery arrangements would benefit from being chaired by someone with a strong local connection to help foster a more collaborative approach that takes fully account of the needs and ambitions of the locality. 
  4. From a financial perspective, we believe it would be necessary and help to better share the risk and reward of the New Town agenda for any financial transactions to feature on the Treasury balance sheet rather than that of the Local Authority.

Q7.               How can central Government support the planning and delivery of new towns?

  1. All partners will need to work together in full collaboration and over a sustained period for New Towns to be successful, so a long-term commitment to funding is crucial for providing certainty about delivery. This is important for securing stakeholder buy-in, phasing development and ensuring timely infrastructure delivery. 
  2. In Milton Keynes, there were examples where some infrastructure projects, including putting in place large parts of the grid road network, was implemented before it was strictly needed due to concerns that the New Towns programme, and its associated funding, might be discontinued. This proactive approach ensured that the planned developments were delivered as intended in the overall city masterplan, but did mean that costs were incurred ahead of schedule in some cases. 
  3. While Development Corporations were always meant to be temporary, it could be argued that in Milton Keynes—and perhaps in other later New Towns including Telford – they were wound up prematurely, leaving substantial work unfinished.  The scale of the task should not be underestimated and the vision for the New Towns needs to go far beyond the term of this Parliament.
  4. We also firmly believe that stronger collaboration and better joint-working across government departments and agencies is also essential to the successful delivery of New Towns. The programme needs to be a shared initiative across Whitehall, recognising that it will need to involve a range of departments including health, transport, education, business and culture, as well as any associated agencies and other public bodies, including Homes England.

Q8.               What is the most effective economic model for building and managing a new town?

  1. The development of New Towns needs to be approached as a long-term project to ensure that economic and other benefits can be calculated and delivered over an extended horizon.  They should not be thought of in the same terms as major urban extensions or as a quick fix to boost housing supply in the short-term.
  2. The model must facilitate effective leverage of private investment into the development of New Towns, through a shared risk and reward arrangement and strong partnership working. The nature of the sites and proposals likely to emerge from the New Towns programme may be well suited to this approach, particularly if they are strategic development areas owned by a limited number of landowners.  However, the model may be more complex in city or town centres or other locations with more intricate ownership situations. Therefore, a model that allows for land assembly, including through compulsory purchase, will be important. 
  3. Allied to this, the economic model must enable the very significant uplift in land value that will be created by New Town developments to be captured for investment in infrastructure and the facilities that will make such places truly successful over their lifetime.  Whatever model is in place must have the ability to recycle its investment in the New Town—either within any designated area or outside it as appropriate—to ensure the ongoing success of the place.

Q9.               What role should community engagement play in developing and planning new towns?

  1. The original New Towns paid relatively little attention to the views of local residents, in part because the existing populations in their designated areas were generally small but also because the national need for new homes and post-war restructuring was given great priority.  By contrast, the new phase of New Towns is more likely to involve the expansion of existing places, making collaboration and engagement far more central to the approach. It is crucial to demonstrate the benefits that a New Town can bring to existing residents, extending beyond the delivery of new homes on the outskirts of their town.
  2. This thinking has been integral to the New Town proposition that Milton Keynes is developing. By including city-building, placemaking and economic development projects alongside the delivery of thousands of new homes, we aim to ensure that growth benefits all residents by creating an even more pleasant and successful place for everyone to enjoy.
  3. Communities should be involved in the design proposals for major developments in their area as standard, and the planning and development of New Towns should be no exception. This involvement needs to be maintained throughout the entire plan-making, design, delivery and community development process; it is a long-term endeavour.  As an example, the original New Town Development Corporations employed community development workers to help new residents feel at home and establish roots, especially since many had moved away from their friends and family in other cities. It is important not to underestimate the resources required to manage and deliver this effectively.

Strategic Master Planning

Q10.               What elements should be prioritised in the strategic master planning of new towns?
a. In what ways can master plans support the long-term economic viability of new towns?

  1. There is a risk that New Towns could be seen as the latest iteration of attempts to drive up housing delivery by badging major housing developments under a different programme name, for example Eco-Towns, Garden Towns, Millennium Communities, the Sustainable Communities Plan or Healthy New Towns.  In reality, the name used to describe the programme is not important; what is important is the intention and ability to deliver well-planned, sustainable places that have the commitment of proper investment – and the ability to leverage additional private sector funding – to be able balance the timely delivery of significant numbers of good quality homes, with the jobs, facilities and infrastructure needed to make them economically successful and provide a good quality of life. 
  2. The master planning and wider development approach ought not prioritise rapid delivery of homes without taking proper account of the many other aspects needed to create a good place to live. Such a single-minded approach that focusses on housing delivery alone would also undermine the long-term economic viability of a New Town, which needs all of the other elements that make up a successful place to be delivered alongside homes.

Q11.               On what basis, and using what metrics, should the location and size of new towns be decided? 
a. In which types of locations and in which parts of the country would you prioritise the development of new towns and why?

  1. We recognise the Government wants to expedite delivery of homes through the New Towns programme, so identifying places that are better geared up to get started quickly would be a positive approach.  This could include:
  1. Places with a strong ambition for significant growth.  Milton Keynes, as the country’s largest and most successful New Town is built for growth.  There is significant political support for ongoing major growth which will help to smooth the process.
  2. Places with space to grow, that aren’t tightly bound by Local Authority boundaries and the added complexity that working across boundaries can bring to plan-making, decision-making and delivery, and with minimal environmental constraints which could limit growth potential.
  3. Places with a strong economic base which can help to sustain significant jobs growth for the thousands of new residents expected to move to the New Town, to avoid creating a dormitory settlement which relies on out-commuting.
  4. Places where there is already a significant demand for new homes and a growing market to be able to sustain greater levels of housing delivery.  It is clear that the most successful New Towns from the first waves were those that where closest to existing big cities or that developed to such a scale that they could sustain their new and growing populations, with the South East of England generally delivering more homes.[4]

Q12.              To what extent can the proposed new towns act as a model for general housing development across the UK?

  1. There is a risk that this next wave of New Towns may resemble a series of urban extensions rather than true New Towns, both in terms of the development typology and the way they are considered for funding support from central government.  We recognise that New Towns that take the form of expanding existing successful settlements, which have the capacity and ambition for further growth, will be a far more cost-effective and expedient delivery model than creating standalone new settlements. However, these New Towns will still require substantial financial support from the government to be truly effective.
  2. Approaching New Towns as urban extensions instead of thinking about it – and resourcing it – as the major expansion of existing towns and cities may prevent the full realisation of their potential. A properly funded and supported programme could make a transformational contribution to meeting housing needs across the country, far beyond what could be achieved through urban extensions alone.

Legalities, Economics, & Skills

Q13.               What long-term support will new towns need to ensure that their delivery is efficient and successful?

  1. The Development Corporations had the ability to attract the best and brightest minds to design and deliver their plans.  They had a level of resources that far exceeds the capacity within local authorities today.  These bodies operated across a wide range of areas, including planning, architecture, urban design, landscape architecture, surveying, transport planning, highways, civil and drainage engineering, legal services, accounting, community development, public art, economics, and programme management.
  2. They built relationships with investors, attracted businesses to the area, collaborated with central government, other agencies and partners to make things happen, and provided strong leadership to keep everyone working towards a common goal.  Additionally, they were able to fund further work with consultants when additional expertise was needed.
  3. The scale of capacity funding required to bring development forward at a scale and pace through a New Towns programme should not be underestimated.

Q14.              Does the construction sector have sufficient capacity and skills to deliver new towns?
a. If not, what should be done to ensure that it is, and over what timeframe can capacity be made? 
b. Is there sufficient capacity in the English workforce?

  1. So far, we haven’t experienced any significant delays in delivery as a result of shortages of skills and capacity in the construction sector in Milton Keynes.  Moving forward, if identified as a New Town, we would like to see any new delivery model work closely with Milton Keynes College to help create a new generation of individuals with a wide range of construction skills. 
  2. The concern about the potential capacity issues to deliver the national New Towns programme however shouldn’t be just restricted to the construction industry.  All of the professions listed in response to Question 13 also need to be thought about and supported.  The national shortage of planners has been discussed for some years in the industry press, and Milton Keynes City Council is at the forefront of training up a new cohort of planning officers through our Planning Academy. We may need to consider similar schemes to develop home-grown talent across a much wider range of built environment and associated professions.

8 May 2025

 

[1] This article by Centre for Cities demonstrates how Milton Keynes was a relative outlier in comparison to the other new towns.  The average New Town Development Corporation built less than half the total Milton Keynes did, despite MK building its first house in 1970.  Are new towns the answer to the UK’s housebuilding crisis? | Centre for Cities

[2] Inflation calculator | Bank of England

[3] TCPA, ‘Celebrating 70 years of the New Towns Act’, January 2017 https://www.tcpa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/TCPA_TSP19_FINAL_VERSION.pdf

[4] The Centre for Cities confirms this, that of all the houses built by New Town Development Corporations, 60% were located in the greater South East.  Are new towns the answer to the UK’s housebuilding crisis? | Centre for Cities