We are seeking views on the draft New Towns Programme, preferred locations and the government’s proposed offer to potential new towns locations.
The government wants to build a new generation of new towns to tackle England's housing shortage, and is asking what you think before it commits. Subject to this consultation, it proposes to take forward 7 locations — each at least 10,000 homes — backed by funding, dedicated delivery bodies and a new planning policy. It also publishes a full environmental assessment of the programme and wants views on it.
Why it matters. This decides where hundreds of thousands of new homes could be built over the coming decades, how they'll be paid for and planned, and how the environmental impact will be managed. If you live near one of the proposed sites, work in housing, planning or construction, or care about Green Belt, affordable housing or the environment, your response shapes the final programme the government adopts later this year.
From 100+ sites submitted and 13 assessed, the government proposes taking forward 7 — split into 3 'priority' sites for immediate focus and 4 given targeted support. It wants spades in the ground on at least three this Parliament.
Five categories of support for selected locations: funding (grants, loans, equity, guarantees), help setting up delivery vehicles like development corporations, a 'single front door' New Towns Unit, a new planning policy, and a design/placemaking review panel.
A proposed planning policy (Annex A) that gives substantial weight to new towns in planning decisions, treats their strategic importance as 'very special circumstances' for Green Belt release, supports land assembly (incl. compulsory purchase) and land-value capture, and embeds 10 placemaking principles including a 40% affordable-housing target.
A full Strategic Environmental Assessment (Annex B) evaluates the programme against 11 environmental objectives — air quality, biodiversity, climate, flood risk, heritage and more — with proposed mitigation. The consultation specifically asks whether it has the environmental issues right.
Selected from the sites assessed. Priority sites get immediate government focus; the rest get targeted support.
Oxford–Cambridge corridor
40,000+ homes
New East West Rail / East Coast Mainline station; standalone settlement on greenfield.
Enfield, outer London
up to 21,000 homes
Green Belt release with high land-value-capture potential in a high-demand area.
Leeds city centre
~20,000 homes
Brownfield city-centre site; capitalises on West Yorkshire Mass Transit.
Manchester
15,000+ homes
Mature joint venture; dense urban quarter regenerating industrial land.
Greenwich, London
up to 15,000 homes
Riverside site unlocked by the planned DLR extension; flood risk to mitigate.
South Gloucestershire
up to 40,000 homes
High-productivity area; mostly brownfield, scalable in phases.
Oxford–Cambridge corridor
~40,000 homes
'Renewed Town' expanding the city; near the planned Universal Studios park.
Cheshire East
14,000–20,000 homes
Reasonable alternative — strong site but less national growth than Leeds/Manchester.
Cherwell, nr Oxford
13,000+ homes
Reasonable alternative — willing developer, but smaller scale for the corridor.
East Devon
10,000–14,000 homes
Reasonable alternative — would raise ambition on a scheme likely to come anyway.
Devon
10,000–14,000 homes
Reasonable alternative — unique defence links (HMNB Devonport); bespoke support being designed.
Barking & Dagenham
48,000+ homes
Reasonable alternative — large inner-London site but fragmented across stages.
Worcestershire
10,000–15,000 homes
Reasonable alternative — mature, near a transport hub, but moderate additionality.
Where your view actually changes the outcome.
The draft policy proposes that a new town's strategic importance would normally count as the 'very special circumstances' needed to build on Green Belt land. Q21 asks if you agree.
Placemaking principles set a 40% affordable-housing minimum, half of it for social rent. Q19 asks whether this is an effective way to deliver affordable homes.
Q13 asks directly whether the 7 proposed sites are the ones most likely to meet the programme's objectives — and Q7–8 invite views on all 13 assessed locations.
Q9–12 ask whether the SEA identifies the main environmental issues, what's missing, and what practical mitigation should be considered.
The full questionnaire, grouped. Expand a section to see the questions your response will answer.
This summary distils 1,865,184 characters (~622 pages) of official source material:
Respond in writing, or by talking to our voice agent. Your answers save as you go.
Experimental summary view · generated from the official consultation documents.