Health and Planning
Why considering health with local planning is important
Local planning plays an important role in shaping the health and wellbeing of communities, not only through housing, transport, green spaces and access to healthcare but also by influencing wider determinants such as food access, gambling outlet density and opportunities for healthy lifestyles. By embedding health considerations into planning policy and decision-making, local authorities can create environments that support healthier lifestyles and reduce health inequalities.
There is evidence to show that certain uses of land or property can harm residents’ health and well-being, both directly and indirectly. This can be exacerbated where residents are experiencing deprivation or health inequalities. Certain types of uses can also cause detrimental cumulative impacts because of their concentration or location. The following sets of data provide baseline evidence that assist in identifying where sensitive and vulnerable population are located.
Mapping food deserts
Food desert mapping highlights areas where residents lack reasonable access to affordable fresh food. For this analysis, the location of each supermarket was plotted, and an 800-metre buffer was applied to represent a reasonable catchment area. Areas lying outside these buffers, shown in the shaded area, are identified as food deserts, indicating communities where access to healthy and affordable food is limited and where proposals for the provision of a new convenience store would be particularly supported.
Food desert mapping provides information that could also be used to evidence the need to seek grant funding or target other opportunities and initiatives to promote additional provision, for example mobile greengrocers or the location of food banks.
Households with multiple needs (Census 2021)
Key: Proportion of households affected by deprivation in four dimensions
| Area | Value (%) | Number of households |
|---|---|---|
| Milton Keynes City | 0.23% | 264 |
| England | 0.23% | 54,970 |
| CIPFA Statistical Neighbours | 0.22% | 3,373 |
In Milton Keynes, 0.23% of households (264 in total) were classed as multiply deprived across all four deprivation dimensions defined in the 2021 Census: employment, education, health and disability, and housing. This rate was identical to the national average for England (0.23%) and slightly higher than the average across Milton Keynes’ CIPFA statistical neighbours (0.22%).
At a local level, there was a clear variation across wards. Woughton & Fishermead (0.75%) and Central Milton Keynes (0.50%) recorded the highest proportions of multiply deprived households, with rates more than double the city average. By contrast, Olney and Newport Pagnell North & Hanslope reported only two households meeting all four deprivation criteria, as well as several other areas having low numbers of households with multiple needs.
This pattern suggests that while overall levels of multiple deprivation in Milton Keynes align closely with national and comparator averages, pockets of concentrated deprivation exist within specific wards.
Source: https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2021/data_finder
Index of Multiple Deprivation 2025 (IMD) Score
Key: Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Score (the higher the score the more deprived)
| Area | Average IMD Score |
|---|---|
| Milton Keynes City | 18.50 |
| England | 21.81 |
| CIPFA Statistical Neighbours | 20.41 |
Overall, Milton Keynes ranked 102 out of 153 local authorities measured, putting it in the fourth least deprived decile. The average score for Milton Keynes (18.5) was slightly better than the CIPFA statistical neighbour average (20.4) and the national average (21.8). This suggests that, overall, deprivation levels in Milton Keynes were slightly lower than England as a whole and than comparable areas.
However, within Milton Keynes there were sharp contrasts between wards. Woughton & Fishermead (40.5), Bletchley East (28.6), Central Milton Keynes (25.7), Stantonbury (23.8), Bradwell (23.7) and Wolverton (23.3) are above both the local and national averages, indicating concentrations of relatively high deprivation. In contrast, wards such as Tattenhoe (9.8), Lougthon & Shenley (10.4), Olney (10.5) and Broughton (10.8) have areas with lower levels of deprivation, with average scores far below both local and national comparators.
Source; https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2025
More on deprivation can be found in the full IMD report, which is in the Indices of Deprivation section
Households receiving universal credit, August 2025
Key: Proportion of households receiving universal credit
| Area | Value (%) | Number of households |
|---|---|---|
| Milton Keynes City | 26.12% | 29,545 |
| England | 25.25% | 5,918,626 |
| CIPFA Statistical Neighbours | 25.84% | 400,667 |
In Milton Keynes, 26.1% of households (29,545) were receiving Universal Credit in August 2025. This was slightly above both the national average for England (25.3%) and the CIPFA statistical neighbour average (25.8%), suggesting that overall reliance on Universal Credit in the city is marginally higher than elsewhere.
At ward level, the picture was more varied. Woughton & Fishermead (51.9%), Central Milton Keynes (38.9%) and Bletchley East (36.9%) had rates more than 10 percentage points higher than both the local and national averages. This means that just over half of households in Woughton & Fishermead, and around one in three households in Central Milton Keynes and Bletchley East, were receiving Universal Credit. In contrast, wards such as Olney (11.4%), Newport Pagnell North & Hanslope (14.1%) and Loughton & Shenley (16.8%) recorded much lower levels of reliance on benefits.
These disparities highlight a clear concentration of financial vulnerability in specific parts of Milton Keynes, particularly in inner-urban areas and those with higher levels of deprivation.
Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/universal-credit-statistics
Access to Healthy Assets and Hazards Index – Gambling Outlets, 2024
Key: Number of minutes’ drive from a gambling outlet
| Area | Number of Minutes |
|---|---|
| Milton Keynes City | 3.75 |
| England | 4.32 |
| CIPFA Statistical Neighbours | 3.86 |
On average, residents in Milton Keynes were a 3.75-minute drive from a gambling outlet in 2024. This was slightly below the CIPFA statistical neighbour average (3.86 minutes) and notably below the England average (4.32 minutes), indicating that gambling outlets are relatively more accessible in Milton Keynes.
Within the city, there were wide variations between wards. Wolverton (1.65 minutes), Bletchley Park (2.06 minutes) and Broughton (2.15 minutes) had the shortest travel times, reflecting a higher local density of outlets and easier access. In contrast, wards on the periphery, such as Newport Pagnell North & Hanslope (9.21 minutes) and Olney (15.03 minutes), are much further from gambling facilities, suggesting lower accessibility in more rural or semi-rural areas.
While average accessibility is broadly comparable to similar areas, some wards (particularly central areas and those with higher levels of deprivation) have significantly greater exposure, which may increase the risk of gambling-related harm. Residents in outlying wards experience much lower immediate access to gambling outlets.
Source: https://data.geods.ac.uk/dataset/access-to-healthy-assets-hazards-ahah
More on Gambling in Milton Keynes can be found in the 2020 Gambling and Problem Gambling Health Needs Assessment
Year 6 prevalence of obesity (including severe obesity), 3 years data combined (2022 to 2025)
Key: Proportion of Year 6 pupils with obesity (including severe obesity)
| Area | Proportion of pupils |
|---|---|
| Milton Keynes City | 22.23% |
| England | 22.33% |
| CIPFA Statistical Neighbours | 22.51% |
Between 2022 and 2025, 22.2% of children in Year 6 in Milton Keynes were classified as living with obesity (including severe obesity). This was similar to both the national average for England (22.3%) and the CIPFA statistical neighbour average (22.5%).
While the local authority average suggests that childhood obesity in Milton Keynes is broadly in line with national levels, ward-level data reveals clear inequalities across the city. Woughton & Fishermead (30.5%), Central Milton Keynes (29.9%) and Stantonbury (29.3%) recorded the highest prevalence, with nearly one in three children affected. In addition, Bletchley Park (27.5%), Bletchley East (26.5%) and four more wards exceeded both local and national averages. In contrast, the lowest prevalence was observed in Newport Pagnell North & Hanslope (15.2%), Loughton & Shenley (15.2%) and Tattenhoe (16.9%), where rates were considerably below the city average.
These findings indicate that while Milton Keynes broadly aligns with national patterns of childhood obesity, significant variation exists at a local level. Higher prevalence in urban wards with higher levels of deprivation highlights the influence of social and environmental factors, reinforcing the need for targeted interventions to reduce inequalities and promote healthier environments for children.
More on childhood obesity and healthy weight can be found in the School-Age Years section of the Children and Young People JSNA and in the Children and Young People Dashboard