HOUSE OF COMMONS TRANSPORT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE REGIONS COMMITTEE REPORT ON NEW TOWNS: THEIR PROBLEMS AND FUTURE

 

Comment by the New Towns Special Interest Group

 

The review by Oxford Brookes University was comprehensive and focused on eight themes:

 

1. Delivery;

2. Finance;

3. Creating communities;

4. Governance;

5. Economic Achievement and Competitiveness;

6. Physical, environment and design;

7. End user experience;

8. Long term sustainability.

 

At the end of each theme a table on the lessons learned provides a useful summary. This spread of interest encompasses all the concerns of the New Towns SIG and demonstrates that the review has been extremely comprehensive. Interestingly, it notes significant early research into New Towns with a significant decline since the late 1970s. The research (Section 3.5) identifies some key points of similarity between New Towns and present day Growth Areas where there is a need to learn the lessons from the past. However, of this list of eight similarities, only one (6. "There are likely to be comparable problems of major infrastructure provision which will be critical before large scale development can proceed") picks up on a major point of concern expressed by the SIG and even then the issue is more concerned with initial provision than maintenance and dealing with infrastructure coming to the end of its useful life all at the same time. Revenue Budget considerations are flagged as an issue in itself in section 5.2.2. (4) and reference is made to the fact that "reinvestment needs of New Towns have not been addressed by government and that a significant policy change is needed to tackle issues of run-down public facilities, deteriorating public spaces and ageing housing estates". A suggestion is made that a way forward in financing maintenance and repair in the Growth Areas would be by way of capturing increased land values. However, disappointingly, the subsequent table 5.2 on the key lessons from the literature on finance does not identify this ongoing revenue issue as a "key lesson requiring action".

 

Of all the many issues facing local authorities with a legacy of a New Town this is perhaps the most important and yet it is consistently downplayed.

 

In the sixth theme, Physical environment and design/master-planning it is correctly noted that "extensive green spaces have sometimes created unsafe environments: footpaths between widely dispersed housing estates are perceived to be unsafe by residents. The use of extensive planting has in turn created unforeseen expenditure in both maintenance and landscape modification to overcome safety problems." This is picked up in the lessons table but only to the extent of noting that different types of landscaping can have different revenue effects. That is, large expanses of heavily planted land can require greater maintenance than other forms (e.g. restricting planting to private spaces). However, the need to ensure that successive maintenance bodies (in most cases the local authority) have sufficient resources available is not specifically highlighted.

 

The research concludes (Section 6.8) that sustainability of the New Towns has not been evaluated in any depth - whether this applies to economics, society or the environment - and suggests further research is needed in a number of areas. This conclusion can be supported if this includes an assessment of revenue budget considerations. The New Towns were built in an era when capital costs were carefully assessed but sometimes cheap and not particularly long lived solutions were erroneously promoted. Today, it is essential that any long term planning must take account of whole life costs. At the same time as a scheme is being promoted the long term asset management plan must be completed.

 

The second piece of research specifically referenced is the IPPR report from 2005 "From New Towns to Growth Areas; learning from the past" which seeks to apply key lessons learned from the New Towns experience to new Growth Areas. As with the Oxford Brookes University report, the IPPR review comprehensively covers the subject. The split of lessons into six themes is helpful. Again, however, whilst in the chapter of Delivery, it is recognised that "a mechanism for financing up-front capital investment in infrastructure which does not create unsustainable long term financial burdens on delivery agents is essential" there is no acknowledgement of the long term financial burden that has to be borne in maintaining extensive infrastructure. The eleven lessons grouped under headings of Community, Economy and Delivery, identified in the conclusion provide a useful summary and point of reference for those involved in the new Growth Areas.

 

Jointly these two pieces of work comprehensively review the areas identified by the TLGR Committee but the question of re-investment in the New Towns is somewhat glossed over. It is not suggested that further extensive research is required but a recognition (i) that infrastructure ageing at the same time and needing replacement; (ii) the fact that some early social provision, e.g. local centres, are no longer fit for purpose and need replacing; and (iii) the fact that some New Town estates which suffer from serious deprivation need intervention in terms of community engagement and addressing the problems of worklessness as well as through physical development are not particularly strongly emphasised.

 

Given the overall scale of the New Towns Programme, it is perhaps somewhat surprising that the research has been substantially desk based. It is also surprising that there does not seem to be much recognition that the origins of the New Towns is very varied. Some New Towns start from Greenfield sites, others are based on town expansion, in some the focus was on regeneration and in the case of Central Lancashire, there is the single examples of a polycentric New Town. The New Towns also show enormous variety in size and in the timescales for their development. if lessons are to be learned from the New Town experience, it is important that this variety is recognised.

 

If the lessons to be learned from the New Towns are to be applied to the new Growth Areas, it is suggested that the following should be given a high priority:

 

1. The Growth Areas and subsidiary neighbourhoods within them, need to comprise mixed communities with a range of housing types and tenure providing accommodation for a cross section of society;

 

2. The IPPR study suggests that "unlike the New Towns, in the Growth Areas, the goal is not to create self-contained new communities. Indeed, much of the debate about the Growth Areas has focused on whether the proposed investment in transport infrastructure will be adequate to support the level of commuting anticipated from the Growth Areas to regional economic centres." In fact, to fail to provide employment opportunities and even more importantly opportunities for training and skills development within the Growth Areas could continue a failing manifested in some New Town neighbourhoods and needs to be avoided at all costs;

 

3. It seems from looking back at the review that securing capital for necessary investment has been achieved without a clear understanding of the long term funding implications. In Runcorn, for example, (i) the dedicated bus way runs parallel to some relatively quiet roads and significantly increases highway maintenance budgets whilst bringing very marginal benefits; (ii) the independent footpath network brings with it problems of security and perceptions, if not actual problems, of crime and disorder and high maintenance costs; (iii) the extensive areas of public open space and the complex road systems are not only in some cases extremely wasteful of land, they bring with them significant problems of funding necessary maintenance.

 

4. Again, using the example of Runcorn, the Award winning residential development of Southgate had to be demolished over a decade ago, whilst in Castlefields there is an on-going programme of regeneration involving the demolition of significant numbers of the balcony access flats which proved both hard to maintain and unpopular with tenants. Innovative design and building techniques are to be encouraged and applauded but the clear lesson to be learned is that very careful consideration needs to be given to whole life costs, problems of maintenance and changes in society's needs and aspirations before capital expenditure is committed.

 

5. There is a tendency for the research to try to draw general conclusions and if lessons are to be learned, there is a need to also look at specific examples. For example, there is a danger in developing New Towns where the focus has been on a very narrow economic base. The dangers of large scale problems if that employment base is adversely affected are, perhaps, exemplified by Corby. Whereas in Milton Keynes, the lessons had been learned and a broader economic base established. Over time employment needs have changed radically since the first New Towns were built and in many cases the economic rationale behind their implementation is no longer valid. Local Authorities need the potential for both investment and flexibility in land use allocations to deal with significant changes in employment structure in their areas.

 

The Government Memorandum highlights a number of positive actions that have been taken which cover the main concerns of the New Town SIG in terms of planning powers. The SIG has long argued that any residual powers or land holdings should be transferred to local authorities to further effect a "normalisation" of the New Towns. It is noted that the extent of the new Homes and Communities Agency's powers will be subject to the legislative process and the SIG would wish to reserve its right to comment on proposals as the Government's wishes become more clear.