“The advantage that Basingstoke has over schemes like Ebbsfleet, or even large-scale regeneration sites, is there is an already established community and business area,” says John Izett, Basingstoke Council’s cabinet member for property and development.

A development partner will help to bring forward the infrastructure and first 3,400 homes, with the potential, though not guarantee, to build the remaining 4,600 homes in phase two.

According to project director Richard Bayley, the partner and council will jointly develop and provide the infrastructure. “Our involvement is not just putting the land in,” he says. “It is a lot more than that: using the land and investing in the infrastructure and the development of the place.”

It is a grand plan, and one that the South East needs more of to address its housing requirements, but you do not have to look far to find similar schemes that have stalled.

An hour south in Hampshire is Fareham, which planned to deliver 6,500 homes through a similar arrangement. After seven years, no homes have been built, with particular problems around land assembly, infrastructure provision and community consultation.

Robin Shepherd, planning partner at Barton Wilmore, warns that every problem that can beset a development is compounded in schemes of this scale.

He says: “The challenge is to make it happen in the time available. They have said [Manydown] will span two local plan periods [usually a local plans spans 15 years]. Well, too right it will. They always take longer to deliver than anticipated.”

Finance, infrastructure, timescale, legislation, and a skills shortage are issues, according to Shepherd.

The advantage for Manydown is that the councils own the land – having acquired it for around £10m in 1996. This means many of the issues surrounding site assembly can be bypassed.

As well as being development partners, the two councils are also willing to act as financiers, providing around 50% of the funding to get it started, though Bayfield says this will be subject to dialogue with interested parties.

Izett adds: “There are so many examples of where things have been done badly in post-war communities. We have a responsibility to ensure if we are building on this land that it’s done well. Also, we see it as an opportunity to get future capital and investment returns.” 

This is a big help in the search for a partner: few housebuilders would be willing to take on the risk of an 8,000-home scheme delivered over a 25-year timeframe. But the council involvement can also bring problems.

When keeping control of the design process, councils often add extra policy requirements and restrictions, says Shepherd. “Sometimes it just wraps a developer in knots,” he adds.

For Basingstoke, while moving on from the mistakes made in the 1960s is important, this must be tempered with considerations around viability.

The key, says Shepherd, is for the councils to create as much certainty as possible, and for this the council joint venture has already assembled a team of more than 70 people to ensure it has the expertise and know-how.

“We do not have all the expertise, but we do have the capacity for investing in infrastructure for the long term, and we are able to borrow money that allows investment into the community,” says Bayley.

“We want a role in how the long-term management will work.  We are not just building and then forgetting about it.”

When many councils are pulling back and de-risking, Manydown is an example of authorities showing a willingness to get their hands dirty.