7th September 2002: Welcome to our provisional website. Please watch for the official launch early next year. Until then we will post occasional topics for discussion.

To receive our monthly update send an email to info@townplan.org with the subject "Update please".

Editorial Board: We are in the process of forming an editorial board. Please forward recommendations for additional members. The current members are:

• Professor Phil Ineson, Stockholm Institute, University of York
• Professor Ted Kitchen, Sheffield Hallam University
• Dick Moran, Chief Executive, The Caterham Barracks Community Trust
• John Oxley, Archaeologist, City of York Council
• Professor Kim Swales, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde
• Dennis Martin, Yorkshire and Humberside Fabian Society
• Dr John Barratt, Stockholm Institute, University of York

Editorial Advisors: We are also compiling a list of editorial advisors. The current list is:

• Pippa Langford, Director, The Wildlife and Countryside Link

Links : These websites represent some of the organisations giving help or advice in our startup:

The Caterham Barracks Trust.
Fax From Nowhere: FaxFn
Wildlife and Countryside Link

September 2002: Topic for discussion.

Data for this graph comes from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center cdiac.esd.ornl.gov.

1. Historical CO2 Record from the Vostok Ice Core (414085BP to 2342BP), J.M. Barnola et al, Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Geophysique de l'Environnement, France and N. I. Barkov, Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia, August 1999
2. Historical CO2 Record from the Siple Station Ice Core (1663AD to 1891AD), A. Neftel et al, Physics Institute, University of Bern, September 1994
3. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations (ppmv) derived from in situ air samples collected at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii (1958AD to 2000AD), C.D. Keeling, T.P. Whorf, and the Carbon Dioxide Research Group, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, USA

CO2 concentration and temperature

To see the correlation between CO2 concentration and average surface temperature at Vostok over the past 450,000 years see

1. Historical Isotopic Temperature Record from the Vostok Ice Core
2. Historical Carbon Dioxide Record from the Vostok Ice Core

Challenges of a Changing Earth Conference

For more background on this see Challenges of a Changing Earth Conference. There is an excellent Powerpoint presentation by Berrien Moore III.

October 2002: Topic for discussion.

UK Law on the Environmental Impact Assessment of Climate Change

The European Commission's "Guidance on EIA" (June 2001, ISBN 92-894-1336-0) says

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a key instrument of European Union environmental policy. Since passage of the first EIA Directive in 1985 (Directive 85/337/EEC) both the law and the practice of EIA have evolved. An amending Directive was published in 1997 (Directive 97/11/EC) and the European Commission is now pleased to publish three guidance documents reflecting current EU legislation and the current state of good practice.

Are impacts on issues such as biodiversity, global climate change and sustainable development discussed where appropriate?

October's topic for discussion asks these questions

1. Does UK law now require that an assesment of biodiversity, global climate change and sustainable development should be part of certain EIAs?.
2. If so, does the UK Government enforce this aspect of the law?
3. If they do not, are there other legal mechanisms that would ensure compliance?

November 2002: Topic for discussion.

Land Value and the Community - Dick Moran, Chief Executive, The Caterham Barracks Community Trust

The key to the success of the Caterham Barracks experiment was the way in which the community managed to distort land values by making it less attractive as a development proposition. There are several different factors which determine land value but, for most local authorities, it is a specific designation within a local plan which determines the market value of land. When an area is designated for housing (particularly but not exclusively, in the South East), the key factor determining the development value of the land is the proportion of affordable housing which is required and any infrastructure costs which arise as a direct consequence of the development e.g. new roads.

These elements constitute the prime gains which local authorities seek in Section 106 agreements (the agreements between developers and local authorities which produce 'planning gain' and many, if not most, are satisfied with those. Relatively few local authorities consider the social and environmental infrastructure, both of which can suffer significant distortion as a result of a large scale development. The calculations used by developers as to the 'worth' of a particular development is for the most part unsophisticated. The Barracks had a development brief which did appear to be viable for a developer but here Linden Homes looked at what might be achieved through negotiation with the local authority (rather than appeal) and identified the benefits that the community needed to be able to 'live with' another development. He also hired a 'community' architectural practice (John Thompson) to negotiate the community benefits and the required increase in housing to make it viable, through a planning weekend.

From the developer's perspective this development has proved far more profitable than he anticipated at the outset because, by including a substantial social infrastructure, the property has acquired a premium value far higher than equivalent local properties. Even within the context of the continuing housing 'boom', that premium value has produced an increase in the purchase price of the landmark buildings, the Barracks blocks, of 100% in two years. Whilst such huge increases could not be expected everywhere, it is apparent that many of the residents of this urban village have moved here because of the quality of life which is offered by a development which has thought about what can improve the quality of life. Even, the integration of a large proportion of social housing into the development has had no material impact on prices. Another phenomenon which confirms this analysis is the fact that, even though the development is not yet complete a significant number of people are 'trading up' i.e. moving within the development which is itself unusual and suggests that it is a good place to live.

The opportunity for community aspirations to be met was provided the distortion in the land value caused by creating a conservation area of 70% of the site. The cost of refurbishment is frequently much higher than new build and profitability can be significantly affected. Likewise, the restrictions imposed by a conservation area would mean an increase in development costs through use of specialised materials and increased architectural and professional fees. The land value of an ordinary 'brownfield site would have been substantially higher and would have provided no real incentive for a developer to provide any social infrastructure because it would normally be seen simply as a drain on profits. Other sites developed by this developer have not produce anything like the same scale of identifiable community benefits, though it is true that the perceived benefit of transport, schooling or environmental benefits are frequently seen by local authorities as more important than specific local facilities.

The principle of determining or distorting land value, whilst not universally applicable, has the merit of permitting communities to lay claim to a social infrastructure which is as important and, in some cases more important, than the quality of housing. Though this should not be seen as a licence to produce inferior housing. The notion of creating 'premium value' can actually apply to a very wide range of locations but it requires a degree of imagination and lateral thinking to identify the value components of any particular area, and they vary enormously, to be articulated within development plans.

One of the key criteria which should be considered is sustainable housing. This clearly has to look at a wide range of environmental factors but it is no accident that one of the benefits within the Barracks development is a covenanted restriction on car ownership and the provision of a community bus which links with local stations, an important feature of urban and suburban areas. Whilst larger developments are now required to produce environmental impact assessments, if we were being much more creative we might contemplate developing models for housing within Green Belt and environmentally sensitive areas which actually improves the sustainability of those areas. If local authorities, anticipating having to create substantial new areas of housing were to buy up agricultural and Green Belt land using compulsory purchase powers, at the current price of agricultural land, it would allow them to determine the nature and form of development retaining key environments without having to compete with developers and pay disproportionate prices arising from their own designations. If such land, once acquired was not needed for housing, it would be available to the local authority to determine how it might be best used. The vagaries of a market are not the best for providing community needs though sustainability clearly needs to play a part in the construction of a wide range of community facilities.

Organisations such as development trusts (and Caterham Barracks Community Trust is one), are the kinds of vehicles which could be the recipients of local development plans and possibly even land and other assets. The issues associated with good models for development are complex but it is clear that social and environmental infrastructure is affected and commonly destroyed by the distortions in land value which actually determines the nature and form of development. Before local authorities offer developers the opportunity to make money, they should first review the nature of the commitment they should be making to the communities they purport to serve. Whilst this proposal will be seen by many as interventionism at its most extreme, the duty of care which a local authority has cannot be abdicated in favour of private profit.

Your greenfootprint is the size of land needed to supply you with all your needs, including absorbing the carbon dioxide you and your activities produce, and also including absorbing all your waste products. So your green foot print represents the area required to grow your food, wood for your furniture and paper, cotton and wool for your clothes and all the other many products you buy, use and throw away. It also includes the space you occupy for your house and garden.

A few simple steps can help you reduce your footprint, these steps should also make you healthier, fitter and save you money!

If you've got one, Use your car less. Car share, combine journeys, use a bus or train, or better still cycle or walk. Lots of journeys we make are quite short, and can be quicker by bike.

(It is also cheaper and quicker to go to London from York by GNER than it is by car)

Waste less, follow the "waste hierarchy": Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Reclaim, Dispose.

Reduce - If you don't buy stuff you don't need, you'll never need to throw it away.

Reuse – Either by yourself or someone else, for instance take your old clothes to a charity shop.

Recycle – Paper, glass, plastic, wood, metal, computers, lots of things are being designed so that they are easier to recycle

Reclaim – reclaiming the energy in products is best done by local authorities on a bigger scale, but you can save the nutrients in food waste by composting and using this on your garden.

Dispose – hopefully your bin should be emptier, so you won't have to do much of this.

Take your old stuff to a car boot sale, sell it or even give it away. If someone else can use something you don't need anymore, then that is better than taking it to the tip.

Turn off lights and electrical appliances such as TVs, CD players, radios, computers and microwave ovens, when you are not using them. This especially includes turning off the TV, don't leave it on standby, it's using loads of electricity. If you've always left your TV on standby, and you start turning if off every time you are not watching it, you will notice the difference on your electricity bill at the end of the year.

Buy low energy light bulbs for the places where you have a light on all the time. For instance in your sitting room or lounge.

If you have a computer, install a computer screen saver that shuts off the screen completely when you are not using it ( and not a screen saver that makes patterns or pictures) – and get them to install them at work too! Computer screens use energy, and if you're not using it why leave it on?

Have a look at what's in your bin. Is there any food wasted? If so, why? buy less, cook less, waste less and save money.

Get a compost bin going – you'll never have to buy fertiliser again!

Buy organic food, or better still grow your own. Organic food may be better for you, it is a lot better for the environment. Artificial fertilisers use lots of energy in their manufacture, use manure instead.

If you have to buy a new washing machine, fridge or any other electrical appliances look for the energy saving model, it will save you money in the long run, and use less energy too.

Use less water, put a brick in your toilet cistern so that it uses less water every time you flush.

Take an ordinary shower, not a bath or a power shower, it uses less water.

Measure the amount of washing powder you use, and only use the minimum you need to get your clothes clean.

Don't buy furniture, wood or charcoal from unsustainable sources, look for the FSC logo.

Don't tip oil or white spirit down the drain, take it to your local tip for proper disposal

Don't wash out your bottles and tins with fresh water, use the dirty stuff at the end of the washing up bowl, using fresh clean hot water wastes energy.

Don't leave the tap running when you clean your teeth.

Don't fill your kettle to the brim every time, just boil the amount of water you need, it saves energy and your drinks taste better with fresh water.

The Town Plan can make a difference by reducing the need to travel by car. If services and facilities are provided close to where people live and work, then there is less need to travel.

The local authority could provide more good cycleways and footpaths and pavements, with good lighting so that people feel safe cycling or walking.

There need to be safe (and preferably dry) places for bicycles, how many local shopping areas are there which have car parking facilities, but nowhere to leave your bike which is safe.

Roads through housing estates could be altered so that pedestrians and cyclists have priority over cars. Streets could be safe again for children to play in if cars had to travel at 5mph in "home zones". (It has been done in other countries, so we could do it here)

Keep green areas, especially allotments and encourage people to use them.

Set up community composting schemes where people don't have room for composing in their own garden.

Many people think they do their bit for the environment by buying organic food and taking their bottles, paper and cans for recycling but beware! Not buying the stuff in the first place is much more environmentally friendly. So drink water rather than a fizzy drink in a can, it's better for you and the environment. Don't have a car – it will probably save you money and your waistline. Grow your own food, it tastes better, and doesn't need transport to your home.