New towns update: Adlington ditched as Manchester’s Victoria North makes the cut
Leaving the controversial Green Belt Cheshire East development behind, housing secretary Steve Reed has unveiled the latest list of seven new settlements and urban extensions proposed to receive government backing to deliver between 15,000 and 40,000 homes.
A final decision on the government’s New Towns programme will be made this summer.
Of the seven still in the running, only one is a true new town: Tempsford, which would see the delivery of up to 40,000 homes and an East West Rail station connecting new residents to the Golden Triangle and Milton Keynes.
The others are urban extensions, with work already underway on the two Northern proposals: Victoria North in Manchester and Leeds South Bank.
The New Towns programme contenders are:
- Tempsford, Bedfordshire
- Crews Hill and Chase Park, Enfield
- Leeds South Bank, West Yorkshire
- Manchester Victoria North, Greater Manchester
- Thamesmead, Greenwich
- Brabazon and the West Innovation Arc, South Gloucestershire
- Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire
“Our next generation of new towns marks a turning point in how we build for the future,” Reed said.
“From the ground up, we’re planning whole communities with homes, jobs, transport links, and green spaces designed together — so we can give families the security and opportunities they deserve.”
Reed and his team had whittled down the list of new towns from 12 to seven. Adlington, the proposed Green Belt settlement with up to 20,000 homes in Cheshire East, was among those that lost out.
Adlington
Adlington had been met with fierce local opposition when it was announced in September as a new town contender. Covering 2,400 acres of greenfield land by the existing Adlington train station.
The scheme had been put forward for new town consideration by investor and asset manager Belport, which owns the site. Those working on drafting proposals for Adlington included Studio Partington, LUC, Cavendish, CBRE, PJA, Revcap, The Growth Company, and Parkinson.
In its assessment of Adlington, government noted that it was “unlikely to offer the same degree of national significant economic growth” as other new town contenders, particularly its Northern counterparts of Leeds South Bank and Victoria North.
While this may be the end of Adlington’s official “new town” journey, the government noted that the Cheshire East proposal alongside the other shortlisted communities that were not chosen, still presented “credible development opportunities” and could receive support for delivery through existing housing programmes.
A Belport spokesperson hinted that there may be more news to come about Adlington.
“Adlington remains a viable proposition that can deliver new homes for Cheshire alongside the infrastructure needed for a thriving community that is fit for the twenty-first century,” they said. “We look forward to further engagement and stand ready to assist government in delivering new homes within the current parliament.”
Victoria North
Homes have already begun to be handed over at Victoria North in Manchester, a project being delivered in partnership between the city council and FEC. There are 15,000 homes that make up the project, with 430 completed, 550 on site, more than 4,800 with planning permission, and another 550 due to be submitted for planning this autumn.
The 370-acre Victoria North will also include a health centre, primary school, secondary school, a 99-acre park, and Metrolink station when it completes.
Speaking to Place North West in September, Manchester City Council Leader Cllr Bev Craig had said government support would see the project fast tracked and delivered within 10 years rather than the 20 it had initially been projected for.
FEC strategic partnerships director Tom Fenton said: “Victoria North represents the kind of ambitious, long-term regeneration the UK needs.
“Its recognition as a potential new town reflects not only the scale of opportunity in Manchester, but also the critical role of well-planned, infrastructure-led development in creating sustainable communities that public/private sector partnerships can bring forward when they work together,” he continued.
“In conjunction with our partners Manchester City Council, we’re proud to support the delivery of a project that will have a lasting impact on the city and its residents.”
What’s next
Consultation has begun on the seven new towns, as well as the new planning policy that will support their delivery. The consultation is due to end on 18 May and can be accessed at gov.uk/government/consultations/new-towns-draft-programme/new-towns-draft-programme.
The new towns programme will be supported by a team of four interim advisers: British Land chief operating officer Emma Cariaga, government’s National Model Design Code principal author David Rudlin, former London Legacy Development Corporation chief executive Lyn Garner, and former Ebbsfleet Development Corporation chief executive Ian Piper.
This New Towns Unit will be the single point of contact for those developing the new communities to reach government, capable of escalating issues if need be.
A New Towns Place Review Panel will be established that will be able to advise on placemaking for the communities.
The government had previously confirmed there would be no new funding pot for new towns to access. Instead, the developments will be able to secure financial support from existing programmes like the £16bn National Housing Bank.
While there will be no new money for new towns, the government did pledge support, stating in a press release that it will undertake a “cross-government approach to ensure the utilities, health, education, and digital infrastructure to underpin new towns from the outset.”
This will look like a mix of resource and capital funding support to develop masterplans and design codes, craft business cases, conduct technical studies, establish governance structures, remediate land, acquire land, and begin site enabling works.
Development corporations are also due to be created to help support the delivery of some of the new towns as well.
Victoria North will need grant from Homes England / GMCA / Government not “patient capital” from the National Housing Bank – it has to deal with the legacy of 200 years of industry in the Irk Valley and a massive flood risk challenge.
By Anonymous
Yeah got the impression that it was a case of two lists, these are the ones that got minimal pushback so they will be the ones receiving the official promotion while these others will still proceed just less publicly being supported behind the scenes.
Comparing the Irk Valley flood risk map to the proposals the majority of the flood risk areas are allocated as green spaces/wetland not buildings. There are a couple of exceptions though the Red Bank area adjacent to the rail lines close to Victoria and Dantzic Street where you’ve already got tall buildings going up.
By WatcherZero
It would have been criminal to concrete over all that greenbelt. Just glad it’s safe – for now. But given a foreign investment fund has purchased all that land already, it might not be safe for long…
By Anonymous
Still a terrible shame the government chose not to work with LCR and give new town status to north Liverpool. This could have been a huge step change in an area which has suffered from lack of jobs, investment, infrastructure and regeneration since the 70s. We need to address these areas in UK cities otherwise the cycle deprivation will continue.
By GetItBuilt!
North Liverpool desperately needed this but once again the local leadership couldn’t even convince a Labour Government. They cant blame tories anymore for the cities stagnation what have they actually accomplished apart from “Masterplans” and “Consultations” that go on for years.
By Tim
The difference with North Liverpool and Victoria North are clear. One requires a long term land assembly programme, the other has land ownership in place in a strong market and just needs the supporting infrastructure and new transport links to make it work. There’s loads of opportunities in North Liverpool but it requires the public sector to stop working in their solos.
By Anonymous
The government has just released its reasoning for why it chose not to pursue options like North Liverpool. In that instance, it was because the proposal was for the minimum 10,000 homes and would have difficulty expanding further.
By Julia Hatmaker
What does new town mean? Would it be granted more resources?
By Martina
Adlington ‘lost out’ Lmao. A huge win for Adlington. It would have been criminal to destroy that area. Seems like those who care only about profit will keep trying though, sadly
By Phil H
Good choice from the government. We don’t have infinite resources so we should avoid chanelling it into places that don’t want development (councils over-run by NIMBYs). Just channel it all into major cities that actually want the investment. That way we don’t waste even more money into the subsidy drain that is suburbs/rural areas.
By Anonymous
I know I speak on behalf of the local community, when I say I am absolutely delighted that Adlington will not be a focus for future development. Indeed, ALL areas should be considered with great care as once these green areas are gone, they are gone forever.
By Dawn Welsford
Liverpool a staunch Labour red city..no investment in my home city yet again I’ll no longer support Labour.
By Mark
The notion of north Liverpool being limited to 10k homes and struggling to expand is as ridiculous as the then governments lies as to why the city was excluded from HS2. There are literally square miles of space for various densities of development. What happens when all the space around “Victoria north” is used up? Or, just like HS2, does the no room for expansion argument only apply to liverpool
By John
Labour’s new housing policy – “build build build, unless it threatens a Labour seat”
By 3, 2. 1...
It seems Nimby power works, at least the Adlington house prices will remain buoyant
By Nimby power
@John HS2 and Liverpool is very interesting – the modelling used was questionable, Liverpool should have been on the network and certain cities not based on the rail industries own numbers and key figures at the top had very interesting bias towards certain areas. All this is in the public domain but you have to dig deep.
By Anon
Or why not build them all seeing as there is such a housing crisis? I’m sorry but Adlington was a perfect sight for spacious family homes, on a railline into Manchester. The green belt has been holding this country back for decades. Bunch of NIMBYs of a certain generation preventing younger people owning family homes. Less houses = more expensive houses = young couples not buying houses = less space for couples = less couples deciding to have children = lower fertility rate = population decline = less people to pay for your retirement. When will the older generation realise when they stop family homes being built they’re contributing to there own demise?
By MC
Shame there is only one true “new town” being pushed forwards. This lack of vision from labour shows they will never meet their housing goals during this parliament.
By Heaton Chapel
Hopefully the Adlington development comes good eventually, as there is a desperate shortage of good-quality housing in the area. We don’t just need flats and urban infill in areas that already have very little green space available.
By Anonymous
How is Victoria North a new town? It is an extension of Central Manchester. This has nothing to do with this government Victoria North, was in process way before Starmer came to power.
By Elephant
Victoria North getting a new tramstop is no good unless there are also more trams, more frequently. Having previously lived near Queens Road I know trams were often packed with it being the last stop before Victoria.
By Anonymous