The government launched a consultation on the New Towns Draft Programme, which sets out proposals to deliver a new generation of large-scale new towns across England. It was open from 23 March to 19 May 2026.
The LGA seeks to reach decisions by consensus, however, on this occasion the Conservative Group has objected to the proposed response for the following reasons:
- Ongoing concerns about the limited engagement with local communities during the development of the proposed new towns.
- Potential implications for the Green Belt arising from the scale and location of the proposals.
- Persistent concerns that the plans do not guarantee the necessary upfront infrastructure to support new development.
Introduction
The LGA Supports the Government’s ambition to address England’s chronic housing shortage and the New Towns Programme as a potentially transformative response to that challenge. However, the long-term success of the programme will depend above all on councils. Local authorities must be central partners in the governance, design and delivery of new towns.
Assessment of proposed new town locations
The LGA has chosen not to respond to questions in relation to the specific locations of the New Towns and has encouraged councils and combined authorities to respond. Local and combined authorities must play a key role in the decision making and governance structures of new towns and sustainable urban extensions, using their local knowledge, data and expertise to inform delivery of the New Towns programme. Councils must be given the opportunity to influence what is most appropriate for local needs. The LGA urges the Government to take local expertise into account.
Government offer
The LGA welcomes the provision of funding for the development of the New Towns, subject to the needs of each location. The Government should provide significant upfront funding as well as long-term financial certainty for new towns, to ensure that housebuilding can be delivered at pace and additional burden does not fall on local authorities.
The programme outlines a range of potential funding mechanisms and support for the delivery of these new town sites. Whilst support from government in delivering these new towns is welcome, it is essential that local authorities are not sidelined in favour of centrally directed bodies. Local authorities must hold substantive roles within the governance structures of all new town delivery vehicles to ensure they remain accountable to the new communities they serve and provide long-term public stewardship of greenspaces and strategic infrastructure. The LGA further notes that, in response to Recommendation 18 from the Taskforce, councils must be permitted a role in the delivery of the New Towns programme regardless of previous delivery records.
The LGA urges the Government to strengthen Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers to de-risk land assembly for new towns. As outlined in our response to the CPO consultation, removing 'hope value' and allowing councils to confirm their own non-controversial CPOs would significantly accelerate the delivery of new settlements.
The LGA supports the New Towns Unit’s proposed ‘single front door’ function and recognises the value that councils may be able to obtain from extra support and capacity from a range of government bodies. However, the New Towns Unit must operate in genuine partnership with local government, supporting local leadership, rather than acting as a mechanism for centralising control.
New Towns Planning Policy
The success of the New Towns programme hinges on the timely provision of appropriate and sufficient local and strategic infrastructure to service and support existing and future residents’ needs. The programme should enable flexibility for delivery of new infrastructure on a timeline that is appropriate for the area, including prior to housebuilding.
The placemaking principles put forward in the consultation document reflect the need for new towns to have the full range of social infrastructure. Keeping these principles at the heart of proposed planning policies regarding new towns should help to make sure that new towns are developed as high-quality, liveable neighbourhoods with the community facilities and public spaces that allow communities to thrive over the long term. The local community must be engaged in codesigning the vision and proposals for each new town though, ensuring local people are included and empowered in defining the town's identity.
The delivery of affordable and social housing is critical to the success of new towns. The number of households in temporary accommodation now exceeds 134,000 - the highest level since records began - while 8,010 people are estimated to be sleeping on the streets. The New Towns programme must deliver a diverse range of high-quality housing, which must include a sufficient level of affordable housing and housing for social rent determined using councils' knowledge and expertise of their areas. Additionally, the number of homes delivered through the programme must contribute to meeting councils’ mandatory housebuilding targets set by the Government.
The 40 per cent affordable housing requirement currently appears in ‘Appendix A’ rather than the main section of the draft policy paper. We strongly encourage Government to make sure this requirement is central to legislation surrounding New Towns in order to make sure these projects provide wider social benefit. Furthermore, the ambition to make half of the affordable housing available for social rent is an admirable commitment but requires more clarification in terms of funding. The provision of grant funding or cross-subsidy for these types of housing could make this ambition more realistic.
There is also a significant risk that affordable housing targets are eroded through viability negotiations as schemes progress. Developers frequently use viability assessments at the application stage to negotiate down affordable housing and infrastructure contributions, undermining the planning system and the ambitions it is meant to deliver. New Towns are rightly expected to deliver substantial upfront infrastructure, but these early costs should not become a justification for diluting affordable housing obligations. The Government must put stronger safeguards in place to prevent this, and ideally viability should be removed from the planning application stage altogether. Without such protections, there is a danger that the high infrastructure burden of New Towns undermines the social benefits they were designed to deliver.
For New Towns to be meaningfully distinguished from large-scale urban extensions or super-strategic sites, the Government must make a clear and substantial commitment to public investment. Early ring-fenced funding must be made available from the outset, allowing the government to take an active role in the projects. Without this commitment, New Towns risk becoming indistinguishable in ambition and delivery from the other types of large housing schemes that they are intended to surpass, undermining both their potential and their purpose.
Green Belt
The government needs to offer more clarity over their proposed changes to Green Belt development in New Towns. If New Towns are to automatically constitute very special circumstances (VSC), then this could create a democratic deficit by bypassing local consultation and undermine the rigour that the VSC framework was designed to produce.
This approach also gives rise to several potential practical and legal concerns. Firstly, many of the proposed New Towns do not have defined boundaries. In the absence of clear spatial limits, any applicant could claim that their site falls within a New Town and use this to argue for automatic VSC status, creating a significant loophole that could be exploited. Secondly, it is not clear from the policy whether the intention is for this approach to operate as an alternative to removing land from the Green Belt through the local plan review process, or as a supplement to it. These are fundamentally different processes with distinct procedural requirements and legal implications, and the policy must be explicit on this point. Finally, where VSC have not been properly demonstrated through the normal process, third parties could reasonably contest any grant of permission, creating uncertainty for applicants, local authorities, and communities alike. The government must address these concerns with clarity and ensure that local authorities retain meaningful control over their own planning decisions.
Where local councils have decided to release Green Belt land for new town development though, it is essential that this delivers genuine public benefit for local communities through meaningful levels of affordable housing. As outlined in our response to the NPPF reforms consultation, setting an affordable housing ‘floor’ so that developers have to provide a given amount of affordable housing is a minimum. We support the option to allow local planning authorities to set their own 'floor' to better reflect local circumstances.
Conclusion
The LGA welcomes the ambition behind the New Towns Programme and recognises its potential to deliver much needed homes on a substantial scale. Its success, however, depends on meaningful partnership with local government, adequate long‑term funding, and planning policies that prioritise infrastructure, affordability, and community involvement. By embedding strong placemaking principles, ensuring at least 40 per cent affordable housing, and securing genuine public benefit where Green Belt land is released through local decision-making processes, the programme can create sustainable new communities that deliver lasting social and economic value.