The Liberal Democrats, in a conference totally marginalised by the unfolding collapse of major financial institutions, have backed eco-towns, but under strict conditions.
The key part of the resoution debated and passed* last Monday (15th) argued that new homes should use locally available materials with low embedded energy, be constructed to high standards of insulation and with the most energy-efficient appliances, and with consideration to the impact of water demand, and incorporating low water use options and water recycling to the fullest extent possible.
Supporting the the motion, Lib.Dem housing spokesman Lembit Öpik told the conference in Bournemouth that many eco-towns were being “foisted on local communities who don’t want them.”
The whole process was being driven by “Whitehall whim” and many of the proposed homes were less environmentally sustainable than those planned for under other schemes, he asserted
The motion also calls for a “master planning” process – as adopted in some other European countries – with prior agreement of developers, communities and local authorities on sustainability objectives and their application in all stages of the development in ways which respect the needs and aspirations of new and emerging communities, who – the LibDems insist “ should be fully involved in the decision making process.”
They further call for all new developments to be dependent to a much higher level on locally generated and renewable sources of both heat and electricity, with the necessary infrastructure (including district heating) to be “provided for at design stage.”
Cllr Sebastian Kindersley from South Cambridgeshire, the location of some proposed eco-developments, in moving the conference motion, said: “We understand the desperate need for affordable housing, especially in rural areas. But it’s not rocket science to argue and reaffirm our belief that it should be on brownfield land linked to existing settlements.”
Why build on thousands of acres of useful agricultural land when Britain had thousands of sites in towns and cities crying out for proper regeneration, he asked.
After the debate, Lembit Öpik added: “Instead of ensuring all our towns and cities are sustainable, the Government is using the green facade of eco-towns to bypass the planning system and ignore local needs and concerns. By presenting these developments as eco-friendly when they are only required to meet moderate environmental standards, ministers are misleading the public in order to force through these often unwanted towns.”
The motion also asserts that the “focus should be on making already planned and approved developments more environmentally and socially sustainable, rather than on superimposing new settlements in rural areas, “ and that new housing in all settlements should be built: “with full regard to the impact of additional house-building on flood plains and on other housing.”
In a fringe meeting on ecotowns, Sunad Prasad, president of RIBA (Royal Institute of British Architects), which sponsored the event, argued eco-towns were useful as building laboratories, in which greener ways of living, and the community planning and building technology needed to deliver it, could be refined. Shaun Spiers, director of CPRE (Council for the Protection of Rural England) – which released a 10 point test for eco-towns – said while it was difficult to disagree with ground breaking community projects in zero or very low carbon development, CPRE prefered they were developed as eco-quarters within existing urban areas, or as urban extensions at the edge of towns or cities.
Liberal Democrats: www.libdems.org.uk