The
Royal Town Planning Institute (25,000 professional practitioners) and the Town
and Country Planning Association have unusually cooperated in producing Planning
for Climate Change http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/505555/planning_for_climate_change-guidance_for_local_authorities___rtpi_endorsed_l_2012.pdf
(does the title sound as if they want to bring it on?), and the following
thoughts have been sent to them. It is intended to be a ‘living document’ where
amendments would keep it up to date.
At
p38 and Box 5 there is what appears to be a mistake. Unless cynicism
has
got the better of the authors the ‘presumption’ in the NPPF is said to be in favour
of 'sustainable development'. The
problem has been that 'sustainable' has not been applied as it should have been
could have been and this should be a main platform for campaigning by both
organization.
No
reference has been made to the National Infrastructure Commission (and
specifically Congestion, Capacity and Carbon that explains why road building
does not relieve congestion), the National Policy Statements and the RICS
publication at
http://www.rics.org/Global/Whole_life_carbon_assessment_for_the_BE_PGguidance_2017.pdf. This fantastic research actually makes the
point that regulations (ie planning) has not caught up.
There
does not appear to be reference refers to the 1.5 degree ambition? If the
suggested lower traffic speeds are introduced to encourage cyclists then this would increase
emissions and should be linked to a recommendation to reduce the national speed
limit to stimulate demand for cars more efficient and less polluting at lower
speeds.
Having
looked back at Planning to Reduce Carbon Emissions (the title
works
because there is nothing about adaptation)
revealed
that food/agriculture is an important sector, post-occupancy evaluations
are necessary to reduce the performance gap in
current
building, and trees could also be important. Under-occupancy needs to be
addressed (green custom-splitting is starting to be discussed) ie the balancing
of the size of dwelling and households, and the energy efficiency of bungalows
(being touted as suitable for the elderly) can be 5x less efficient than
terraced housing.
Planning to Reduce Carbon Emissions makes the claim that 50%
of emissions could be eliminated through the control over the use of land and
buildings. It is unlikely that Planning
for Climate Change would get to that target.
