Although the government is using the phrase “new towns”, most of them likely won’t be: they’ll instead be extensions of existing settlements, not so much new towns as new suburbs.
Ah, so we won’t be building more actually livable spaces, just tacking on house building to already stressed developments. Gotcha.
I’m all for more home building, but this isn’t the answer, at least not without sensible planning (which doesn’t exist because “it takes too long”).
What would actually make sense would be to build actual new towns which can be done, and done well, but it’s obviously a bigger commitment. It seems like they’re taking the wrong lessons from Milton Keynes. As much as it pains me to admit, Price Charles’ new town is a great example of what can be done if the will is there to do it.
Ah, so we won’t be building more actually livable spaces, just tacking on house building to already stressed developments. Gotcha.
I’m all for more home building, but this isn’t the answer, at least not without sensible planning (which doesn’t exist because “it takes too long”).
What would actually make sense would be to build actual new towns which can be done, and done well, but it’s obviously a bigger commitment. It seems like they’re taking the wrong lessons from Milton Keynes. As much as it pains me to admit, Price Charles’ new town is a great example of what can be done if the will is there to do it.