- The government has proposed 10 new towns in England of between 5,000 and 20,000 homes each
- They are zero-carbon developments and an exemplar in at least one area of environment technology with facilities including a secondary school, shopping, business space and leisure plus 30-50% affordable housing
- Settlements will be designed through a two-stage competition run by the RIBA, Cabe and the Prince’s Foundation involving “citizens’ juries”.
Skip to [ Story Content and jump story attachments ]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Most Read
Comments
Resource
Junkie
Advertisement
Advertisement
Main Page Content:
Urban expert attacks eco-towns concept
7 December 2007
Fears grow over 'recycling' of sites previously rejected for housing
The government’s flagship eco-towns initiative is intrinsically flawed, a leading urbanist will tell a national conference on the programme next week.
Nicholas Falk
Set to raise questions over whether the concept of eco-towns is relevant
Nicholas Falk — founder director of not-for-profit urban regeneration consultancy Urbed and a speaker at next Friday’s Town & Country Planning Association conference in London — is set to question whether the eco-towns concept is relevant and raise fears it could lead to unsustainable development.
Falk joins a growing number of critics of the scheme, including former chancellor of the exchequer Kenneth Clarke, who claim developers are using the eco-town initiative to “recycle” sites that have previously been rejected for housing.
BD has established that at least four of the 57 proposed eco-town sites have been put forward by developers which have had previous housing plans at the same locations either rejected or mothballed following public opposition.
Housing settlements at Micheldever Station in Hampshire, Great Glen outside Leicester and two rival applications for Ford Airfield in West Sussex were all drawn up by developers before the eco-town initiative was announced, and these have been reworked and submitted to the DCLG as potential eco-towns.
Falk said: “The danger here is that schemes that wouldn’t otherwise be considered acceptable because they are in the wrong location will be masked as eco-towns. Eco-towns are extremely difficult from scratch — eco-villages and suburbs are often more relevant and appropriate.
“Britain is trying to do something that represents a step-change. [Government adviser] Callcutt talks about leap-frogging other countries without… understanding all we have to do to fund sustainable infrastructure.”
Clarke told BD the eco-towns programme was folly and would lead to development in locations where this had previously been considered “ridiculous”.
He added: “It’s extremely important that we improve the thermal efficiency of housing and I’d like to see raised design standards. But I’m not quite sure why that means we should be looking at applications to build thousands of houses in towns in the middle of unspoilt rural countryside.”
But a DCLG spokeswoman said the policy would encourage “well planned sustainable growth” on brownfield and greenfield land.
“The statutory planning process will ensure that areas will be protected from inappropriate development,” she added. “These settlements will be designed to the highest standards, make the most efficient use of land, and be designed sustainably and to zero-carbon objectives”
The 10 successful eco-town bids will be announced by the end of March.
what are eco-towns?
-
 Get the latest stories first with BD newsletters. Click to signup |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We want to hear from you
You can be as critical or controversial as you like, but please don't get personal or offensive, and do keep it brief and relevant. Remember this is for feedback and constructive discussion!
Comments may be edited if they do not meet these guidelines.
Readers' comments
Nicholas Falk is right Also in Bergamo (Italy), wonderful little town near Milan, new "eco-villages" are raising in wrong localisations. These new "eco-village" ricycle sites that have previously been rejected for housing by actual master-plan.
The 'eco town' concept should provide well designed development. That does not justify building in inappropriate areas ie. greenbelt. Is this not just the latest 'trojan horse' to make it acceptable to develop on greenfield / sensitive sites? The principal is admirable but the real message is, as usual, hidden behind the political smokescreen of 'green'. The Prime Minister instructed the audience of Thames Gateway Forum that 10 new eco towns are going to be built. The 'eco' factor is surely expected in any new development. The prime minister is implementing his debatable social engineering policy and opening a 'free-for-all' on applications to develop on greenbelt.
The concept of putting 10 pins on a map to decide where ECO Towns are put is about as misplaced as the concept of briging reform to planning Law and regulations to speed major infrastructure development for the expansion of major industry's, airports, etc. Democracy is being failed at all levels by the dictatorship of the UK Government Cabinet Members who want unscrutinised governorship of the UK, all from the secret Cabinet office of No 10. There are no published minutes for Cabinet Meetings, why? Appointing a Quango to decide the communities fate with regard to ECO Town placement will not move the finger of guilt for poor management and ill conceived ideas. If we are going to have ECO Towns we need well placed ideas, massive consulation with residents,exhaustive forward planning and placement on true brownfield sites and not green belts.
I agree with every sentiment expressed by Kenneth Clarke, who has a habit of telling it as it is and hitting the nail on the head.