Open consultation

Annex C: Locations Methodology - New Towns Draft Programme

Published 23 March 2026

Applies to England

Overview

The New Towns Taskforce was tasked by the government to independently recommend locations for new towns. The Taskforce’s approach to selecting locations to recommend developed over time but mainly focused on assessing places’ economic potential and contribution to meeting housing need. Following these assessments, the Taskforce produced a shortlist of 12 recommended locations, which it included in its final report to the government.

Building on the work of the Taskforce, this section sets out the methodology that the New Towns Unit has followed to perform its own assessment of potential locations for new towns against the draft programme objectives, to ascertain which locations will be taken forward through the necessary impact assessments and programme consultation, including the Strategic Environmental Assessment. Subject to the outcomes of these assessments, these locations will ultimately form the shortlist from which Ministers will select the places constituting the New Towns Programme. Final decisions on which locations will be taken forward as new towns will not be made until the relevant statutory assessments have been completed.

The Taskforce’s report is just one of the inputs Ministers are considering when selecting locations for new towns. To further support Ministers’ decision-making, we have carried out our own separate process to identify potential locations for new towns. To do this, we began with a longlist of locations to which we then applied the below methodology for assessment. This longlist was compiled from:

1. submissions to the New Towns Taskforce’s Call for Evidence (an information gathering exercise for the Taskforce),

2. sites already in Homes England’s pipeline for support, and

3. other existing sites known to MHCLG.

Methodology for assessment

We assessed every location in the longlist against three of the five proposed objectives of the New Towns Programme. For each of the three objectives, we developed a set of sub-criteria to help us both define that objective and determine whether locations could meet that objective. Table 3 below sets out the Objectives and any sub-criteria that forms part of them, as well as guidance for those considering how the stated Objectives and sub-criteria should be applied in practise to consistently consider locations against them.

We did not assess locations against Objectives 3 and 5. This is because:

a. we determined that Objective 3 (Spread) could only be assessed at programme-level once we had identified the locations that met the other objectives, and

b. we have assumed a significant number of the proposals could meet Objective 5 (Placemaking) but the extent to which they do will depend on implementation at a local level. We therefore have not excluded any locations on this basis.

The objectives and sub-criteria used against which locations were assessed are:

Objective 1 - Scale: New towns will be at least 10,000 homes in scale, and either significantly more or with the opportunity for further expansion.

Sub-criteria:

• New towns will comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.
• New towns will either provide significantly more homes beyond 10,000 or have scope for delivery of more homes over time.

Objective 2 - Economic growth: New towns will be strategically located to unlock high levels of national economic growth, in places that could foster high productivity and can provide appropriate housing at all levels of affordability, boosting the scale and ambition of planned development.

Sub-criteria:

• New towns will be situated in areas which either:
  • are ‘overheating’, i.e. there is already high productivity, but housing shortages are restricting labour mobility and therefore preventing the country from capitalising on existing areas of economic strength,
  • can attract investment and talent to places already growing but not overheating,
  • can support strategic transport improvement and higher productivity through agglomeration in places outside London and the South East, or
  • are in reasonable proximity to priority areas in the government’s Industrial Strategy.
• New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.

Objective 4 - Deliverability: New towns will be delivered in an ambitious, innovative way over many years, overseen by an appropriate delivery vehicle. Their promoter will have identified any significant barriers to delivery and measures to overcome these.

Sub-criteria:

• New towns will be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints.
• New towns will have identified a robust funding, leadership and governance structure.
• New towns will enable adequate infrastructure provision.

Outcome

Through applying this methodology to the longlist of locations, we identified that thirteen of the 127 locations could meet Objectives 1, 2 and 4:

• Adlington
• Brabazon and the West Innovation Arc
• Crews Hill and Chase Park, Enfield
• Heyford Park
• Leeds South Bank
• Manchester Victoria North
• Marlcombe, East Devon
• Plymouth
• South Barking
• Tempsford
• Thamesmead
• Wychavon, Worcestershire

Table 1: Objectives, sub-criteria and guidance for application

Objective 1 - Scale: New towns will be at least 10,000 homes in scale, and either significantly more or with the opportunity for further expansion.

Sub-criteria	Guidance for assessing locations against objectives and sub-criteria
Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether proposals comprise a minimum of 10,000 new homes. This criterion is in line with the remit / threshold for scale recommended by the Taskforce. This minimum size threshold ensures new towns will deliver beyond what is currently being provided by the market and planning system as it stands. However, as reflected in the objective itself, it is expected and preferred for locations to significantly exceed this target, or have the potential for further expansion beyond this minimum threshold. It is a core objective of this programme to provide a substantial number of homes in the right locations, and therefore locations that are able to deliver at this scale can play a pivotal role in improving housing affordability over time, and in turn support growth and productivity across the country. Locations will be assessed as not meeting this criterion if their proposal or plan indicates they will deliver fewer than 10,000 new homes. This is because they cannot meet the minimum scale of ambition for a ‘new town’ as defined by this programme. As above, this scale is seen as a minimum ambition beyond what is currently able to be delivered by the market.
Either provide significantly more homes beyond 10,000 or have scope for delivery of more homes over time.	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered in relation to scope for the delivery of more homes, and should assess whether locations: Are encumbered by unreasonable spatial or other constraints that prevent them from delivering at least 10,000 new homes with the potential to deliver significantly more. Spatial constraints are likely to include: - Wildlife sites, such as Special Protection Areas (SPA), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Ramsar sites, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), national and local nature reserves; - Irreplaceable priority habitats and ancient woodlands; - Protected landscapes, such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and heritage coasts; - Flood Risk Zone 3 land; - Heritage sites, such as scheduled monuments, World Heritage Sites, registered parks and gardens, registered battlefields and listed buildings; - Certain types of built-up areas, such as high-density development and extensive residential development; - Incompatible land uses, such as prisons, industrial facilities, active Ministry of Defence sites and railway yards; and - Intractable infrastructure. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if their proposal or plan indicates they can deliver a maximum of 10,000 homes only (with restricted opportunity for expansion beyond this), as there are unreasonable identified constraints. This is because unreasonable constraints mean there will be no potential for future growth in this location following the initial build out, and achieving this is critical for sustainable population growth in line with the aims of a growing and productive local economy.

Objective 2 - Economic growth: New towns will be strategically located to unlock high levels of national economic growth, in places that could foster high productivity and can provide appropriate housing at all levels of affordability, boosting the scale and ambition of planned development.

Sub-criteria	Guidance for assessing locations against objectives and sub-criteria
Be situated in ‘overheating’ areas.	An ‘overheating’ area is here defined as somewhere where there is already high productivity, but housing shortages are restricting labour mobility and therefore preventing the country from capitalising on existing areas of economic strength. When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether locations are situated in areas that: - Have a median housing affordability ratio higher than the England average; and - Have quality/availability of housing that has been identified within the location’s plan or proposal (supported by evidence from Local Growth Plans where applicable) as a barrier to productivity growth. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if they are situated in areas with a median housing affordability ratio lower than the England average and where quality/availability of housing has not been identified as a barrier to productivity growth. This is because the area is not considered ‘overheating’.
Be situated in areas which can attract investment and talent to places already growing but not overheating, or which can support strategic transport improvement and higher productivity through agglomeration in places outside London and the South East.	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether locations are situated in areas that either: - Have GVA and employment higher than the England average, or have seen a sustained increase in GVA and employment in recent years; - Have quality/availability of housing that has been identified within the location’s plan or proposal (supported by evidence from Local Growth Plans where applicable) as a barrier to productivity growth; - Have existing or proposed transport investment which could support agglomeration and productivity improvement when paired with a tailored housing intervention; or - Are in or in within a 60-minute commute of a Primary Urban Area (PUA). Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if they are situated in areas where GVA and employment are lower than the England average, where there has not been a sustained increase in GVA and employment in recent years, where quality/availability of housing has not been identified as a barrier to productivity growth, where existing or proposed transport investment could not support agglomeration and productivity improvement when paired with a tailored housing intervention, and are situated more than a 60-minute commute from a PUA. This is because the area is not considered as somewhere that is growing rapidly or where strategic transport improvement could increase productivity and agglomeration.
Be situated in priority areas in the Industrial Strategy, or within reasonable proximity to them.	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether locations are situated in areas that are either in or within an approximate 60-minute commute (according to Office for National Statistic Travel Isochrones) of the priority areas named in the Government’s Industrial Strategy. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if they are situated in areas less than a 60-minute commute from an Industrial Strategy priority area.
New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	Evidence should show that New Town designation and the delivery model are, compared to a robust reference case, necessary to achieve, at minimum, one or more of: - delivery of a material uplift in total homes; - an acceleration of build‑out; - a step‑change in quality/affordability and - infrastructure provision. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this sub-criterion if there is insufficient evidence they meet net additional outcomes, including in the case of an existing business as usual development demonstrably already being delivered, or planned to be delivered, through other government-funded programmes, such as the Garden Communities Programme, where these programmes already deliver net additional outcomes.

Objective 4 - Deliverability: New towns will be delivered in an ambitious, innovative way over many years, overseen by an appropriate delivery vehicle. Their promoter will have identified any significant barriers to delivery and measures to overcome these.

Sub-criteria	Guidance for assessing locations against objectives and sub-criteria
Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints.	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether locations are encumbered by spatial or other constraints that would reasonably prevent the minimum number of proposed houses from being delivered. These may include, but should not be restricted to: - Wildlife sites, such as Special Protection Areas (SPA), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Ramsar sites, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), national and local nature reserves; - Irreplaceable priority habitats and ancient woodlands; - Protected landscapes, such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and heritage coasts; - Flood Risk Zone 3 land; - Heritage sites, such as scheduled monuments, World Heritage Sites, registered parks and gardens, registered battlefields and listed buildings; - Certain types of built-up areas, such as high-density development and extensive residential development; - Incompatible land uses, such as prisons, industrial facilities, active Ministry of Defence sites and railway yards; - Intractable infrastructure; or - Utilities that are already at or close to full capacity, such as water, waste treatment and electricity supply. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if their proposal or plan indicates they are likely to face one or more unreasonable spatial or other constraints, such as those listed above. This is because delivery of a new town on the site may face barriers that could mean the number of proposed homes cannot be realised.
Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether locations have the backing of a: - Local Authority (LA), - Mayoral Combined Authority (MCA), and/or - developer. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if their proposal or plan does not clearly identify an LA, MCA or developer who is committed to taking forward the development. This is because the development would lack the necessary foundation to meet the elevated aims for a new town that distinguish it from regular market activity, such as a higher standard of placemaking and delivery of affordable housing.
Enable adequate infrastructure provision	When assessing this criterion, it should be considered whether locations will: - Have required infrastructure expansion included in local investment strategy, or expansion that can be funded through the new town development with no or minimal public sector support; - Be situated within a 5-mile straight line measurement of an existing or planned train station; and - Not be reliant on car travel for access to PUAs, services and amenities. Locations may be assessed as not meeting this criterion if their proposal or plan indicates their infrastructure requirements are not included in local investment strategy or are reliant solely on additional public sector funding, they are not situated within a 5-mile straight line measurement of an existing or planned train station, and are likely to be overly reliant on car travel due to a lack of existing public transport links. This is because an aim of new towns (as set out in placemaking principles) is to limit reliance on car travel in accordance with environmental goals, whilst ensuring access to services and amenities.

Table 2: Longlist locations and rationale

Location	Objective(s) not met	Sub-criteria on which the location was assessed as not meeting this objective	Rationale
Albion Forest City	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	Large scale proposal of 400,000 homes submitted by a campaign group. There is no clear route to delivery, with no evidence of local political or landowner support, in addition to no developer interest to date.
Alconbury	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes. Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	6,680 homes that form part of this proposal have planning permission and are allocated in the Huntingdonshire Local Plan. There is no clear route to delivery due to a combination of lack of clear agent, no evidence of ability to overcome infrastructure constraints for the remaining homes that make up the proposal (and take it up to 15,000 homes). Therefore, there is no certainty that the proposal could meet the minimum number of homes to constitute a new town.
Arden Cross	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes. Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	No clear route for delivery and no clear agent for the site. To reach the 10,000 homes threshold, requires the combination of two separate proposals by two separate agents, the second of which, for 8,000 homes, has significant viability and infrastructure constraints.
Ashbrook Meadows	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	Insufficient evidence to overcome identified significant infrastructure constraints. Development is dependent on transport infrastructure that is currently not planned or supported by key stakeholders.
Ashchurch Garden Village	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Ashford Garden City	Objective 2 – Economic Growth Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure. Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints.	No clear route to delivery. The submitter for the site has proposed development across an area where they do not own all the land, with there being no evidence of engagement or support from the landowners. The proposal therefore does not have the necessary backing and faces barriers to unlocking the necessary land for development. Furthermore, the proposal indicates that the development would be located near Ashford in Kent, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Ashwell and Morden Rail Station	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal is within the Cambridge water resource zone, an area that experiences significant water scarcity and relies on rare and protected chalk aquifers. These conditions present a major constraint on the ability to provide the infrastructure required to support development at this location.
Aylesbury	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Bailrigg Garden Village	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by urban areas, flood risk land and the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Barrow-in-Furness	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Westmorland and Furness, Cumbria. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Bicester	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Birkenhead Town Centre	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes, and scope for further expansion over time is restricted by the River Mersey and Birkenhead Park.
Birmingham (various)	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal comprised multiple individual developments across Birmingham. Of these, Arden Cross was investigated separately as a potentially promising site. An assessment of Arden Cross is provided in this table. The remaining sites in the proposal could not deliver the required minimum of 10,000 homes.
Brackley	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in West Northamptonshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Bradford City Centre, Southern Gateway and New Bolton Woods	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes. Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	Insufficient certainty or evidence that minimum 10,000 homes and/or scope for more will be met as there are significant challenges to providing the necessary additional infrastructure, such as a lack of existing transport connectivity and spatial barriers due to surrounding urban areas.
Brampton Valley	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Northamptonshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Bristol Central	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver 11,000 new homes, and scope for further expansion over time is restricted by flood risk land and surrounding urban areas.
Bristol Temple Quarter	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes, and scope for further expansion over time is restricted by flood risk land and surrounding urban areas.
Cambourne Urban Extension	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without insurmountable spatial constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal is located in the Cambridge water resource zone, which is acutely water constrained as it is one of the dryest parts of the country and is reliant on rare, protected chalk aquifers. This is likely to be a substantial barrier to providing the necessary infrastructure for the proposed site and no sufficient measures have been identified to overcome that barrier.
Charlton Riverside	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver 12,000 new homes, and scope for further expansion over time is restricted by protected wharves and strategic industrial land.
Chatham Green	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Chelmsford, Essex, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Cheltenham Garden Community	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Chilmington Green New Town	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal is located in Ashford, Kent, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area. Furthermore, this site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Chippenham	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Coxford Garden Village	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal is expected to deliver around 3,000 homes, which is below the minimum level of 10,000 needed for a new town.
Crewe East	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Crewe, Cheshire. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Cullompton	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal is located in Mid Devon. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area. The site is part of the Garden Communities Programme and is already receiving targeted government support, including design and masterplanning assistance, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of necessary infrastructure and a strong placemaking approach. As a result, new town designation is unlikely to provide additional benefits beyond existing plans and could create uncertainty for ongoing development.
Damyns Park	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery; no evidence of local political support and no developer interest to date.
Didcot	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	The Didcot site is already part of the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement of over 10,000 homes with all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New Town designation unlikely to provide additional benefit and could disrupt existing progress.
Down Ampney	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal can only deliver 11,000 new homes, and scope for further expansion over time is restricted by flood risk land.  Development is dependent on transport infrastructure that is currently not planned
Durham	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can only deliver 5,000 homes, which is below the required minimum of 10,000.
East Biggleswade	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can only deliver 6,500 homes, which is below the required minimum of 10,000.
Easton Park	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by Stansted Airport, ancient woodland and flood risk land.
Elvington Airfield	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal is located in York, North Yorkshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area. Furthermore, this site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Exning Estate	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal is within the Cambridge water resource zone, an area that experiences significant water scarcity and relies on rare and protected chalk aquifers. These conditions present a major constraint on the ability to provide the infrastructure required to support development at this location, and insufficient measures to overcome these barriers have been identified.
Fenland New Town	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal is for 12,000 new homes initially, with potential to deliver up to 15,000. Delivering the additional 3,000 homes would require overcoming several challenges, including infrastructure improvements such as upgrades to the A10 and spatial constraints linked to surrounding flood‑risk land.
Greatmoor	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is partially restricted by flood risk land, ancient woodland and railway lines. Furthermore, the proposed site is situated more than a 5-mile straight line measurement from the nearest train station and is reliant on car travel, therefore there are challenges to delivering adequate infrastructure.
Harlow and Gilston	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement of over 10,000 homes with all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Hatfield Broad Oak	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is partially restricted by Stansted Airport, Hatfield Forest and the town of Bishop’s Stortford.
Haverhill	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in West Suffolk, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Hemel Garden Community	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement of over 10,000 homes with all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Hethel New Town	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Norfolk, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Heydon Grange Golf Club	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery; no evidence of local political support and no confirmed  developer interest to date.
Highsted Park	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can only deliver 8,400 homes, which is below the required minimum of 10,000.
Hoo Rural Town	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Medway, Kent, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Huntingdon New Town	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Iver	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Kingston Parkway	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes, but scope for further expansion over time is restricted by flood risk land and a significant lack of transport infrastructure.
Ladywood	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver 12,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by surrounding urban areas.
Land at Hulam	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in County Durham, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Land East of M1 in periphery of Milton Keynes	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can only deliver 5,000 homes, which is below the required minimum of 10,000.
Land North of Southend and East of Rochford	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in South East Essex, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Land surrounding Marks Tey Train Station	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Colchester, Essex, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Land West of Wyboston and St Neots	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by surrounding residential areas.
Lincoln Urban Expansion	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Lincoln, Lincolnshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Linton-on-Ouse	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in North Yorkshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Liverpool North	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes, and scope for further expansion over time is restricted by built-up areas.
Liverpool Street Growth Area	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. New towns will enable adequate infrastructure provision	The proposal identifies barriers to delivery, including large scale infrastructure such as utilities, highways and transport across the site but without sufficient measures identified to mitigate or overcome these.
Long Marston, Cheddington and Mentmore	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver 12,000 new homes, but scope for further expansion over time is restricted by flood risk land, Mentmore Towers country house, and the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Manydown	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement of over 10,000 homes with all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Merstham Manor Estate	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver 10,500 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by the surrounding Surrey Hills National Landscape.
Micheldever Station	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints.	The Environment Agency has identified significant water supply issues within this area which will greatly constrain large-scale housing development.
Monks Wood	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Braintree, Essex, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
New Parks Estate	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in North Yorkshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Newton Bewley	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	This proposal has been submitted by a landowner but does not currently have an identified development partner or formal support from the local authority.
North Barnes Farm	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can only deliver 3,250 homes, which is below the required minimum of 10,000.
North East Chelmsford	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement of over 10,000 homes with all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
North East Growth Corridor	Objective 4 – Deliverability	New towns will enable adequate infrastructure provision.	The proposal identified infrastructure challenges which would impact delivery but without sufficient evidence of measures to overcome these barriers.
Northfold (Wigan-Bolton Growth Corridor)	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver 11,456 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by surround built-up areas.
North Northants	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement of over 10,000 homes with all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
North Reading Urban Extension	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by the built-up area of Reading, the Chilterns Area of Outstanding National Beauty and flood risk land.
North of Southend	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in South East Essex, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
North Somerset	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal comprises three individual sites which collectively can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted across the three sites by surrounding urban areas, flood risk land, ancient woodland and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Furthermore, none of the sites have strong existing transport links and are reliant on car travel, therefore there are likely challenges to delivering adequate infrastructure.
North Telford Garden Community	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is restricted by flood risk land.
Old Kent Road	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes. Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal’s ability to meet the minimum required 10,000 new homes is dependent on a significant extension to transport infrastructure which is not currently planned
Old Stratford, West Northamptonshire	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes. Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal’s ability to meet the minimum required 10,000 new homes is dependent on a significant extension to transport infrastructure which is not currently planned
Otterpool Park	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal is located in South East Kent, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area. Furthermore, this site is in the Garden Communities Programme and is therefore already receiving a package of targeted government intervention, including support with design and masterplanning, to deliver a settlement with the timely provision of all necessary infrastructure, following a vision-led approach and high standard of placemaking. New town designation is therefore unlikely to provide net additional outcomes compared to the existing development, and would potentially introduce uncertainty to or undo existing development progress being made at this location.
Ouston Farms, Whickam Team Valley and Dunston Hill	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 4 – Deliverability	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal can only deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes. Scope for further expansion over time is potentially restricted by infrastructure and land use challenges.
Oxford Garden City	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Penrith	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Westmorland and Furness, Cumbria, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
RAF Northolt	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of landowner support, and is incompatible with existing and planned use.
RAF Wethersfield	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Braintree, Essex, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Ringmer and Broyle Side	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can deliver the minimum of 10,000 new homes, but scope for further expansion over time is restricted by ancient woodland and flood risk land.
Rodbaston, Gailey and Penkridge	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery  as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or conformed developer backing to date
Salfords	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Shelton	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in North Bedfordshire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Sheffield Metroland	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Sherford	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can only deliver 5,550 homes, which is below the required minimum of 10,000.
Shipton	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	No clear route to delivery as the proposal lacks evidence of local political support or confirmed developer backing to date.
Silfield	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Norfolk, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Six Hills Golf Course	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Melton, Leicestershire, which is not in an ‘overheating’ area, cannot support agglomeration outside London and the South East, nor is it within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Six Mile Bottom	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	Delivery of this proposal relies on securing a connection to East West Rail, whether through a new station, new public transport links or an extension of the railway. This connection is not currently supported by the local authority, and funding for it has not been secured.
Slough	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can deliver the minimum 10,000 homes, but further expansion is limited by surrounding flood risk land, Heathrow Airport, the M25, two large water bodies, and the urban areas of Slough and London.
South and East of Wymondham	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in South Norfolk. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
South Essex	Objective 1 – Scale Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal can deliver the minimum 10,000 homes, but further expansion is limited by surrounding flood risk land and the urban area of Basildon. The Dunton Hills part of the site is already supported through the Garden Communities Programme, so new town designation is unlikely to provide additional benefit and could disrupt existing progress.
South Yorkshire	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Enable early infrastructure provision.	This proposal can deliver the minimum 10,000 homes, but further expansion is constrained by the need for significant additional infrastructure, including limited transport connectivity between the development sites, and by surrounding urban, industrial and commercial land.
St Cuthberts Garden Village	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal is located in Carlisle, Cumbria, which is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not close to an Industrial Strategy priority area. The site is already part of the Garden Communities Programme and is receiving targeted government support. New town designation is therefore unlikely to add further benefit and could disrupt existing progress.
Stotfold Garden Village	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Central Bedfordshire. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Tatton	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure. Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints.	The proposal is not supported by the local planning authority, there is no supportive local agent to take the site forward as a New Town, and faces significant barriers to unlocking the land for development.
Taunton	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2. New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	This proposal is in Somerset, an area that is not considered to be overheating and is not close to an Industrial Strategy priority area. Part of the site is already supported through the Garden Communities Programme, so new town designation is unlikely to add further benefit and could disrupt existing progress.
Taunton Estate	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Somerset. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Tey Green	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Braintree, Essex. The area is not considered to be overheating, does not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and is not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Toton and Chetwynd	Objective 1 – Scale	Comprise, or form part of, a new place comprising at least 10,000 new homes.	This proposal can deliver 5,550 homes, which is below the minimum requirement of 10,000.
Trent Arc	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Be situated in one of the three types of economic growth areas outlined in the sub-criteria for Objective 2.	This proposal is located in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. These areas are not considered to be overheating, do not support agglomeration outside London and the South East, and are not within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.
Wellington	Objective 1 – Scale	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	This proposal can deliver up to 12,000 homes. Further expansion is limited by nearby flood risk land and the Blackdown Hills National Landscape.
Western Gateway	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	The proposal identifies barriers to development, including transport infrastructure and utilities but without sufficient measures identified to mitigate or overcome these.
West Oxfordshire	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	Delivery of this proposal would require the construction of a new rail line to link the development sites. There is currently no plan to deliver such a rail connection, and funding for this infrastructure has not been secured.
Wetherbrook	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Be able to deliver the planned number of homes without unreasonable spatial or other constraints. Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	This proposal is within the Cambridge water resource zone, an area that experiences significant water scarcity and relies on rare and protected chalk aquifers. These conditions present a major constraint on the ability to provide the infrastructure required to support development at this location.
Whalebone Lane North	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	This proposal does not have a confirmed development partner and it has not been endorsed by the local authority.
Whetstone Magna	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	New towns will deliver net additional outcomes relative to a defined business-as-usual reference case, by materially increasing the number of homes, accelerating delivery, and/or raising quality and affordability to programme standards that would not be achieved without New Town designation.	Whetstone Pastures is already part of the Garden Communities Programme and is receiving government support to progress design, masterplanning, and infrastructure delivery. As a result, new town designation is unlikely to add materially to what is already being pursued and could risk introducing uncertainty to ongoing work.
Winkleigh	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Enable adequate infrastructure provision.	Given its rural location, the proposal has limited existing transport connectivity. As a result, additional assessment and investment would be required to support a shift away from car‑based travel and ensure appropriate infrastructure provision.
Winslow	Objective 4 – Deliverability	Have identified a robust funding, leadership, and governance structure.	This proposal does not currently have an identified development partner or formal support from the local authority.
Woolfox	Objective 2 – Economic Growth	Either have scope for delivery of more homes and other facilities over time, or be significantly more than 10,000 homes in scale.	The proposal is an area not considered to be overheating, unlikely to support agglomeration or within reasonable proximity of an Industrial Strategy priority area.