Beorn
07-20-2009, 03:14 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01444/artist_1444896c.jpg
Four developments of more than 5,000 homes each are proposed for a former RAF base near Norwich in Norfolk; at an old army barracks in East Hampshire; on the outskirts of Bicester in Oxfordshire; and on the site of an old china clay mine near St Austell in Cornwall.
The Prime Minister hailed the "revolutionary" developments but the Government's own documents detail continuing concerns over whether the sites are 'green' enough, with the potential that they may actually damage the environment in building access to water sources and new roads.
Campaigners, backed by celebrities like Tim Henman's father Tony and Judi Dench, said they were relieved that only four sites were going ahead but remained concerned about the millions of pounds spent developing a scheme for as few as 20,000 homes.
The new towns will now have to go through the planning process. If they are successful it will result in the first Government-backed green new towns in the world. The developments will be made up of 40 per cent green space like parks and less than 50 per cent of travel will be by car. Wind turbines and woodchip boilers will power homes. Residents will heat water for showers with solar panels and reuse the water for plants, collect food scraps for burning to generate electricity and use sewage to heat homes.
A further two towns in Rossington in South Yorkshire and North-East Elsenham in Essex also have Government support in developing bids for eco-town status.
Gordon Brown said the "revolutionary" eco-towns will transform how people live. Eco-towns will be made up of 30 per cent affordable housing. Schoolchildren will not have to walk more than 800 million to the nearest "zero carbon school", commuters will be alerted to when the next bus is arriving via an electronic indicator in the home and cycle paths will make it easier to bike to work.
"Eco-towns will help to relieve the shortage of affordable homes to rent and buy and to minimise the effects of climate change on a major scale," he said. "They will provide modern homes with lower energy bills, energy efficient offices and brand new schools, community centres and services."
The four eco-towns could be built by 2016 with a further 6 in place by 2020.
However there are already problems with each of the four sites. North west Bicester is in area susceptible to flooding and there are issues around dealing with more sewage in the system, Rackheath in Norfolk has raised concerns about more congestion around Norwich, the China Clay Community in St Austell will need transport links and Whitehill Borden in East Hampshire could impact on important areas for wildlife nearby.
Kate Gordon, senior planner at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: "They will have a devastating impact on the countryside if they are built in the wrong place. Eco-towns are major developments that require infrastructure. They should not generally be built on greenfield sites."
Grant Shapps, the Tory shadow housing minister, also described the eco towns scheme as a “complete farce” because the houses in the new settlements would not have to be as green as all other new properties built after 2016.
Mr Shapps said: “Buried away in the statement is a line that says these homes can be built to a lower level of greenness and sustainability than all other homes built at the same time that these eco towns will come online.”
He said that while all homes from 2016 will have to be built to the government’s zero-carbon level of six, the eco town houses constructed before that date will only have to meet the lower level of four.
Mr Shapps added: “So, these eco towns are less eco-friendly than all other homes that will be built at the same time.”
John Healey, the housing minister, acknowledged the point but said the eco town houses would be more green than most newbuild homes at present.
He added that the environmental friendliness of the houses only formed part of the broader range of benefits offered by the eco towns.
A spokesman for the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) said: “Eco-towns will also have to achieve zero-carbon status across the entire development, which includes shops, offices and schools as well as housing.”
It cost the DCLG £3 million to bring together the case for eco-towns. The four sites that have been given the go-ahead have access to £60 million as well as further funds to build schools and public infrastructure. The rest of the money needed to build the houses will come from developers.
Stephen Joseph, executive director of the pressure group Campaign for Better Transport, said: “Whether these eco-towns will be sustainable is down to the detail on transport provision.
“If built around major new roads – as the local council wants the Rackheath scheme to be – and without good public transport, local services, car-free areas and convenient cycling routes at their heart, these schemes will not deserve the eco-towns brand.
“It should be possible for people to live in these places without having to own a car.”
Friends of the Earth executive director Andy Atkins said: “Government is starting to put the ‘eco’ back into eco-towns – plans now include plenty of open space and access to decent public transport.
“But the bigger challenge is to ensure that all new housing is built to the highest environmental standards.”
Source (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5846493/Eco-towns-approved-despite-country-devastation-fears.html)
Gordon Brown said the "revolutionary" eco-towns will transform how people liveIt certainly will. When's the new towns planned for the Scottish countryside? :)
"Eco-towns will help to relieve the shortage of affordable homes to rent and buyHere's a cheaper solution, and one which doesn't involve destroying English and Cornish countryside.
How about you don't allocate council/social housing to every Mr. Umbutu and family of 12 and stop selling off houses to Mr.Patel and his family of one thousand?
Just a thought. :)
I can well imagine these never crossed your mind as you were discussing them. I am absolutely amazed that the British people who voted on this policy would actually allow this to happen.....you did ask the public what they thought, didn't you, you smelly, one-eyed, illegally elected throwback to the stone age???? :mad:
Four developments of more than 5,000 homes each are proposed for a former RAF base near Norwich in Norfolk; at an old army barracks in East Hampshire; on the outskirts of Bicester in Oxfordshire; and on the site of an old china clay mine near St Austell in Cornwall.
The Prime Minister hailed the "revolutionary" developments but the Government's own documents detail continuing concerns over whether the sites are 'green' enough, with the potential that they may actually damage the environment in building access to water sources and new roads.
Campaigners, backed by celebrities like Tim Henman's father Tony and Judi Dench, said they were relieved that only four sites were going ahead but remained concerned about the millions of pounds spent developing a scheme for as few as 20,000 homes.
The new towns will now have to go through the planning process. If they are successful it will result in the first Government-backed green new towns in the world. The developments will be made up of 40 per cent green space like parks and less than 50 per cent of travel will be by car. Wind turbines and woodchip boilers will power homes. Residents will heat water for showers with solar panels and reuse the water for plants, collect food scraps for burning to generate electricity and use sewage to heat homes.
A further two towns in Rossington in South Yorkshire and North-East Elsenham in Essex also have Government support in developing bids for eco-town status.
Gordon Brown said the "revolutionary" eco-towns will transform how people live. Eco-towns will be made up of 30 per cent affordable housing. Schoolchildren will not have to walk more than 800 million to the nearest "zero carbon school", commuters will be alerted to when the next bus is arriving via an electronic indicator in the home and cycle paths will make it easier to bike to work.
"Eco-towns will help to relieve the shortage of affordable homes to rent and buy and to minimise the effects of climate change on a major scale," he said. "They will provide modern homes with lower energy bills, energy efficient offices and brand new schools, community centres and services."
The four eco-towns could be built by 2016 with a further 6 in place by 2020.
However there are already problems with each of the four sites. North west Bicester is in area susceptible to flooding and there are issues around dealing with more sewage in the system, Rackheath in Norfolk has raised concerns about more congestion around Norwich, the China Clay Community in St Austell will need transport links and Whitehill Borden in East Hampshire could impact on important areas for wildlife nearby.
Kate Gordon, senior planner at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: "They will have a devastating impact on the countryside if they are built in the wrong place. Eco-towns are major developments that require infrastructure. They should not generally be built on greenfield sites."
Grant Shapps, the Tory shadow housing minister, also described the eco towns scheme as a “complete farce” because the houses in the new settlements would not have to be as green as all other new properties built after 2016.
Mr Shapps said: “Buried away in the statement is a line that says these homes can be built to a lower level of greenness and sustainability than all other homes built at the same time that these eco towns will come online.”
He said that while all homes from 2016 will have to be built to the government’s zero-carbon level of six, the eco town houses constructed before that date will only have to meet the lower level of four.
Mr Shapps added: “So, these eco towns are less eco-friendly than all other homes that will be built at the same time.”
John Healey, the housing minister, acknowledged the point but said the eco town houses would be more green than most newbuild homes at present.
He added that the environmental friendliness of the houses only formed part of the broader range of benefits offered by the eco towns.
A spokesman for the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) said: “Eco-towns will also have to achieve zero-carbon status across the entire development, which includes shops, offices and schools as well as housing.”
It cost the DCLG £3 million to bring together the case for eco-towns. The four sites that have been given the go-ahead have access to £60 million as well as further funds to build schools and public infrastructure. The rest of the money needed to build the houses will come from developers.
Stephen Joseph, executive director of the pressure group Campaign for Better Transport, said: “Whether these eco-towns will be sustainable is down to the detail on transport provision.
“If built around major new roads – as the local council wants the Rackheath scheme to be – and without good public transport, local services, car-free areas and convenient cycling routes at their heart, these schemes will not deserve the eco-towns brand.
“It should be possible for people to live in these places without having to own a car.”
Friends of the Earth executive director Andy Atkins said: “Government is starting to put the ‘eco’ back into eco-towns – plans now include plenty of open space and access to decent public transport.
“But the bigger challenge is to ensure that all new housing is built to the highest environmental standards.”
Source (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5846493/Eco-towns-approved-despite-country-devastation-fears.html)
Gordon Brown said the "revolutionary" eco-towns will transform how people liveIt certainly will. When's the new towns planned for the Scottish countryside? :)
"Eco-towns will help to relieve the shortage of affordable homes to rent and buyHere's a cheaper solution, and one which doesn't involve destroying English and Cornish countryside.
How about you don't allocate council/social housing to every Mr. Umbutu and family of 12 and stop selling off houses to Mr.Patel and his family of one thousand?
Just a thought. :)
I can well imagine these never crossed your mind as you were discussing them. I am absolutely amazed that the British people who voted on this policy would actually allow this to happen.....you did ask the public what they thought, didn't you, you smelly, one-eyed, illegally elected throwback to the stone age???? :mad: