Futures Forum: The semantics of sustainability: 'sustainable development'... or 'sustainable growth' ... or 'sustained economic growth'... or 'development for sustainability'...
In the UK it's all about developers leading 'development', where housing estates are the norm:
Futures Forum: Designing homes around people ... or cars >>> Planners allow edge-of-town housing estates where car travel is the only option
Whereas in the likes of Holland and Germany, new housing has to have facilities, services and infrastructure at its heart:
Futures Forum: A solution to our housing problems: inspiration from Holland and Bristol
Futures Forum: The £36-a-year utility bill >>> through ‘self-organized collaborative building’
Futures Forum: Retrofitting Suburbia > transforming urban life from within the urban boundary
It should be about 'building communities':
Futures Forum: A solution to our housing problems: build communities
We have a couple of examples in East Devon where the development cannot in any way be described as 'sustainable'.
In Axminster, a 20-minute walk (aka a 5-minute drive) to school is described as 'sustainable':
No new school for Axminster’s urban extension
Despite the site being earmarked for up to 850 more homes, children who live there will have to attend one of the town’s two existing primary existing schools – up to a 20 minute walk away - according to the latest draft masterplan.
And in Newton Poppleford new residents will also have to travel some distance to public services:
The council feels that it is disingenuous of the applicant, having been granted planning permission on the basis of the pledge of a doctor’s surgery, to now seek to walk away from their promises.