DOCSLIB.ORG

Home Builders Federation (HBF) on the Draft Islington Local Plan Regulation 19 Consultation Version

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Home Builders Federation (HBF) on the Draft Islington Local Plan Regulation 19 Consultation Version R19.0106 Freepost RTXU-ETKU-KECB Planning Policy Islington Council Town Hall Upper Street London N1 2UD 17 October 2019 [email protected] ISLINGTON COUNCIL LOCAL PLAN: REGULATION 19 CONSULTATION Thank you for consulting the Home Builders Federation (HBF) on the draft Islington Local Plan Regulation 19 consultation version. James Stevens, the HBF’s Director for Cities, has prepared this response and he is the lead contact for all things in relation to the Islington Local Plan. The Home Builders Federation (HBF) is the principal representative body of the house building industry in England and Wales and our representations reflect the views of discussions with our membership of national and multinational plc’s, through regional developers to small, local builders. Our members account for over 80% of all new housing built in England and Wales in any one year. Recent research by the Government has estimated that housebuilders have made a significant contribution to the nation’s infrastructure, providing some £21 billion towards infrastructure of all types including affordable housing since 2005. We would like to submit the following comments on the draft Plan and we would like to be involved in the examination-in-public on those matters relevant to these representations. 1. What is the role of the local plan The plan period Para. 1.2 states that the Local Plan will cover the period 2020/21 to 2035/36. Policy H2: New and Existing Conventional Housing provides a housing target that runs only to 2028/29. We acknowledge that the Draft London Plan is only able to identify a housing land supply up to 2028/29 (thereafter London’s capacity is more uncertain and will need to be reassessed) and we acknowledge that footnote 8 to the Draft Islington Local Plan (DILP) refers to the annual target that is set by the DLP being rolled forward for the period post 2028/29. However, if the DILP is unable to identify a land supply that last beyond 2028/29 then the Plan should terminate then. Conversely, if the Council is able to identify a land supply to sustain output beyond 2028/29 then it should reflect this in its targets. Home Builders Federation HBF House, 27 Broadwall, London SE1 9PL Tel: 0207 960 1600 Email: [email protected] Website: www.hbf.co.uk Twitter: @HomeBuildersFed Secondly, the DLP applies from the year 2019/20 – a year earlier than the commencement of the DILP. This indicates that the Mayor has assessed that there is capacity in Islington to begin delivering 775dpa for at least ten years. Therefore, the DILP should be extended by at least another year to carry the plan period up to 2029/30. Policy PLAN1: Site appraisal, design principles and process The policy is unsound because it is unjustified. We question whether it is justified to require schemes of all sizes to comply with the requirements of Part C in view of other policy objectives set by the Draft London Plan (DLP). While the HBF acknowledges the importance attached to good residential design by national and regional policy. The industry recognises that it needs to do more to improve the design of residential schemes. However, in line with national policy (NPPF, para. 68) and the DLP (Policy H2), Islington needs to encourage the construction of more homes on small sites of 0.25 hectares in size or lower. At the moment, according to the DLP, this requires a total of 484 homes a year on small sites, or about two thirds of its overall annual need (775dpa). The DLP, however, has not identified these sites, so Policy H2 of the DLP is drafted in a way that is meant to incentivise small site delivery. While we agree that design quality should not be compromised in small schemes, we do think that Part C of the policy needs to acknowledge the resource constraints that confront many small developers. While many established housebuilding companies have the resources and staff that allows them to comply with policy, most small builders do not. Few small housebuilders operate within London owing to the complex planning policy environment. The HBF has nearly one hundred small house builder members (SMEs) but none operate within London. This is something that Government and the Mayor of London is keen to change. The Mayor wishes to significantly increase the contribution of small sites to help meet London’s housing needs (Policy H2, Part A 1)). Paragraph 4.2.1 of the DLP observes that achieving this change will require positive and proactive planning by boroughs through plan-making a decision-taking. It would be helpful if the policy acknowledged the challenge of encouraging more housing through small site delivery. We are not seeking a dilution of design expectations for small developers, more a recognition in the policy that it may be difficult for all scheme to comply with every consideration listed in Part C. There are many other policies in the DILP that will place demands on the developers of small sites (such as the 50% affordable housing requirement), therefore it would be helpful if the Council provided more support in other areas, such as compliance with its design requirements. For example, a small infill scheme involving the construction of one-to- five new dwellings will probably have a negligible impact on traffic (item xiv), trees (item v), visual context (item vi), entertainment and community activities (item ix) etc. Therefore, we request that Part C is amended to read (additional text in italics): “All development proposals must submit a site appraisal comprising the information below, commensurate with the scale, location and potential impact of the proposal. Mayor development proposals and smaller developments on sites in prominent or sensitive locations will likely be required to address many, if not all, of the criteria. Developers of small schemes that are not in prominent of sensitive locations should agree with the council, through pre-application discussion, those elements of the list below that it is necessary and feasible to address through the site appraisal.” Policy H1: Thriving Communities Parts of the policy are unsound because it conflicts with national policy. Part E Part E seeks 50% of all new housing to be ‘genuinely affordable’. We will consider this policy in more detail under Policy H3. However, the term ‘genuinely affordable’ could provide misleading to the general public as many might think this refers to affordable home ownership. It would be better if this policy was recast to reflect the detailed requirements of policy H3, part H, which specifies a tenure split of 70% social rent and 30% intermediate housing. The extent to which this is viable and deliverable we will address further under policy H3. Notwithstanding this, we consider that the policy should be re-drafted allow for the full range of affordable housing types to be provided in line with those specified in annex 2 of the NPPF. National planning policy at paragraph 64 now encourages the supply of homes for home ownership. It specifies that at least 10% of the affordable housing component to be provided as affordable home ownership. Therefore, to discount these other types of affordable homes would be contrary to national policy and would prevent more affordable routes to home ownership. Recent research by the Affordable Housing Commission has revealed that, when surveyed, most people consider that the term affordable housing refers to affordable housing for ownership, rather than renting. The Council’s own survey of housing preferences (Islington SHMA Household Survey Results, July 2017) reveals that 67% of respondents would rather own than rent. The next question in the survey shows that 66% of respondents expected their next residence to be either owned with a mortgage or loan and another 7% expected to access homeownership through intermediate products (see pages 37-38). Question C5 then explores the realism of this being achieved. In answer to this, 6% expected to own outright, 32% of respondents expected to purchase with a mortgage or a loan, and 4% expected to acquire through an intermediate product (part rent/part buy). Further survey questions explore the ability of households to access home ownership. Question D9 asks whether respondents consider that they could afford the payments associated with home ownership and 16% thought they could do it comfortably, 24% thought the costs were manageable, and 41% considered the costs just about manageable. The remainder of respondents indicated that it would be strain. These results do indicate that there is an appetite for home ownership and an ability to afford low-cost home ownership products. We should also consider the work of the Affordable Housing Commission, led by Lord Best, on this question. The Commission, looking at surveys, recognises that many people currently renting want to become owner-occupiers but are thwarted from doing so. As an early report to the work of the Commission concluded (AHC Chair’s summary: Measuring housing affordability in England – an alternative approach (April 2019) concluded. Meanwhile, as our focus groups have expressed so clearly, many people are very frustrated at their inability to move into home ownership. Our calculations suggest 1.6m renting households have the means to buy. This suggests that for hundreds of thousands of households currently renting – the vast majority in the PRS – the aspiration of home ownership need not be thwarted simply by the problem of affordability. Later reports to the AHC have explored options to assist households into home- ownership such as deposit schemes, restrictions on buy-to-let, taxes imposed on existing owners but ring-fenced to support home-ownership products for first-time buyers etc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Analysis of Leed and Breeam Assessment Methods for Educational Institutions
    AN ANALYSIS OF LEED AND BREEAM ASSESSMENT METHODS FOR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Tracie J. Reed, M.St. IDBE, LEED AP,1 Peggi L. Clouston, P.Eng., Ph.D.,2 Simi Hoque, Ph.D.,3 and Paul R. Fisette4 ABSTRACT This study examines the differences between two environmental assessment methods for the K-12 education sector: the United States Green Building Council’s (USGBC) LEED Schools Version 3.0 and the British Research Estab- lishment’s (BRE) BREEAM Education issue 2.0. Credit requirements are compared side-by-side and against recom- mendations from researchers in areas such as acoustics, lighting and indoor environment quality. Strengths in the two schemes and areas for improvement are highlighted, with acknowledgement that each scheme offers components and techniques from which the other could benefit. KEY WORDS LEED, BREEAM, Environmental Assessment Methods, High Performance Schools INTRODUCTION The United Kingdom is credited with developing In the United States there are approximately 49 the first environmental assessment method in 1990, million students in the K-12 education system (US the British Research Establishment’s Environmental Dept. of Education 2006-07). A mid-1990’s report Assessment Method (BREEAM) (Howard, 2005). by the United States General Accounting Office This system was used by many countries, includ- found 14 million students attend roughly 25,000 ing the US in developing their assessment methods schools with substandard conditions (1995). Thus, (Scheuer, 2002). BREEAM’s latest version Issue improving the quality of schools has the ability to 2.0 was introduced in summer 2008. In the United have a real and lasting impact on our communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Construct Zero: the Performance Framework
    Performance Framework Version 1 Foreword As Co-Chair of the Construction Leadership The Prime Minister has been clear on the Council, I’m delighted to welcome you to importance of the built environment sector in ‘Construct Zero: The Performance Framework. meeting his target for the UK to reduce its carbon The Prime Minister has set out the global emissions by 78% compared to 1900 levels by importance of climate change, and the need for 2035. Put simply, the built environment accounts for collective action from firms and individuals 43% of UK emissions, without its contribution- we across the UK, to address the challenge of will not meet this target, and support the creation of climate change and achieve net zero carbon 250,000 green jobs. emissions in the UK by 2050. Therefore, I’m delighted the Construction Never before has there been such a strong Leadership Council (CLC) is leading the sector’s collective desire across the political spectrum, response to this challenge, through the Construct society, and businesses for us to step up to the Zero change programme. Building on the success challenge. We all have a responsibility to step of the sector’s collaborations during COVID, the up and take action now to protect the next CLC has engaged the industry to develop the generation, our children’s children. It is our Performance Framework, which sets out how the duty to do so, as citizens, parents, and leaders sector will commit to, and measure it’s progress to enable and provide a better world for our towards, Net Zero.
    [Show full text]
  • 8347 Interserve AR 2011 Introduction 4 Ifc-P1 Tp.Indd
    Interserve Plc 2011 Annual Report and Financial Statements Interserve Plc Every day, we’re planning, creating and managing the world around you. 2011 Annual Report and Financial2011 Statements INTERSERVE ANNUAL REPORT 2011 OVERVIEW HIGHLIGHTS Across the world, people wake to a new day. We help make it a great day. PROUD OF THE Every day people wake to put We help build and look after this their plans, dreams and goals world and we do this through the VALUE WE CREATE IN into action. lasting relationships our people have built with a range of partners PLANNING, CREATING, To make this happen they need the and clients worldwide to ensure we places around them – their schools, AND MANAGING THE create value for everyone involved. their workplace, hospitals, shops WORLD AROUND YOU and infrastructure – to function well, to support, inspire and add value to their lives. FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS HEADLINE EPS* PROFIT BEFORE TAX FULL-YEAR DIVIDEND 49.3p £ 67.1m 19.0p + 15% + 5% + 6% VIEW 2011 ANNUAL REPORT ONLINE: HTTP://AR2011.INTERSERVE.COM INTERSERVE ANNUAL REPORT 2011 OVERVIEW HIGHLIGHTS Across the world, people wake to a new day. We help make it a great day. PROUD OF THE Every day people wake to put We help build and look after this their plans, dreams and goals world and we do this through the VALUE WE CREATE IN into action. lasting relationships our people have built with a range of partners PLANNING, CREATING, To make this happen they need the and clients worldwide to ensure we places around them – their schools, AND MANAGING THE create value for everyone involved.
    [Show full text]
  • 87198 Construction 2025 V2.Indd
    www.bre.co.uk Meeting Construction 2025 Targets The positive impact of BRE Group products and services Construction 2025 is the joint strategy from government and industry for the future of the UK construction industry This document summarises the positive impacts in respect of these targets, Lower costs of a selection of products Industrial Strategy: government and industry in partnership BREEAM CLIP and services developed by the BRE Group. Brief average saved 150 descriptions of the projected companies a total products – BREEAM, savings of of £56 million Construction 2025 CALIBRE, CLIP and 22.56% SMARTWaste – and of BRE are also included. July 2013 Buildings assessed under Since 2003 BRE’s Construction BREEAM 2011 New Lean Improvement Construction enjoy average Programme (CLIP) has projected savings of 22.56% saved 150 companies a on their energy bills.1 total of £56 million. Construction 2025 sets out challenging construction targets for 2025 that include: CALIBRE SMARTWaste improvement in 50% exports 10% cost saving savings could equates to be £1.4 million 33% lower costs £1,144 2 per in 2015 and £1.7 house million in 20166 50% lower emissions A 10% cost saving can be Companies have saved around achieved by using CALIBRE 20% of waste going to landfill to identify non-value added by using SMARTWaste. This faster delivery activities on housing projects. is the equivalent to £1.2 50% 7 This equates to savings million a year. If this level of of around £1,1442 per waste diversion continued, house. Savings for housing then future cost savings projects using CALIBRE in could be £1.4 million in 2015 Improvement in 2013 are estimated to be and £1.7 million in 20166.
    [Show full text]
  • Housebuilder & Developer
    Housebuilder HbD & Developer August 2016 EDI’s Edinburgh mixed use scheme reinvents former brewery site Croydon MP takes on Housing and Planning Call for more creativity from centre on housing Features in this issue Supplement Plus the latest Eco & Green Products Doors, Windows & Conservatories news, events and Interiors products Landscaping & External Finishes Also this month Rainwater & Greywater Products HBD speaks to HBF’s John Stewart Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) Exclusive column from Brian Berry www.hbdonline.co.uk Reader Enquiry 401 HbD Contents August 2016 23 HEADLINES Gavin Barwell appointed as 5 Housing and Planning Minister Brian Berry discusses an 7 SME housebuilding renaissance Government quality push backed 9 by LABC ALSO IN THIS ISSUE... Industry news 4 - 27 Events 19 Industry Movers 22 Product Focus 26 Doors, Windows & Conservatories Supplement 29 - 39 41 Choose high efficiency insulation, naturally Duncan Voice from Insulation Superstore looks at the reasons why construction specifiers are increasingly investing in the benefits of eco PRODUCTS insulation products. Appointments & News 26 Building Products & Services 28 Eco & Green Products 40 - 42 45 Smart looks, smart operation Finance & Insurance 42 - 43 Fires & Fireplaces 43 The ‘wow’ factor can be achieved in new homes combined with cost- Floors & Floor Coverings 43 effective smart lighting and audio control to provide the best of both worlds Glass & Glazing 44 for developers. One company is realising the benefits in several new schemes. Interiors 45 - 46 Kitchens & Appliances 46 - 47 Landscaping & External Finishes 46 - 50 Rainwater & Greywater Products 51 - 53 48 Roofing 53 - 54 Safe, secure and sustainable Smoke & Fire Protection 54 Paul Garlick of green wall systems company Mobilane looks at the challenge Stairs, Balustrades & Balconies 57 of installing boundaries that satisfy safety and security requirements, as well Stonework & Masonry 57 as being eco-friendly.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Homes, Building Value Where Experience Drives Innovation
    OUR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACT 2018-2019 Building homes, Building value Where experience drives innovation. With over 70 years of housebuilding experience, Bellway has grown from a small local business in North East England into one of the largest housebuilding groups in the UK. Our activities not only contribute to the provision We place a high importance on investing in of quality new homes across the UK, but also to employee skill development, and this year, on the transformation of local communities and to average, we allocated five training days per levels of employment in sectors like building trades employee, up 8.5% from 2018. and sales. This added up to over 90,000 total training hours, 1 In the last year alone, we sold 10,892 homes (2018 up 30% from 2018, while the number of graduates – 10,307) in a range of styles and sizes that answer and apprentices we employ has risen by 9.2% to both local demands and buyer needs — up 25% in 155. This focus on grassroots training has also seen the last three years and 59% in the last five years. a £1.7m contribution to both the CITB Levy and Thirty percent of these homes were sold to first-time Apprenticeship Levy, up 6% from 2018. buyers, while 22% were delivered as affordable homes. We directly employ over 2,900 people and also hold the coveted Home Builders Federation (HBF) 5 star rating, an indication of our commitment to quality and customer service. Shaping a future of opportunity. Investment in new homes plays a vital, long-term role in the economy, both on a regional and a national scale.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultees for the Implementation of the Sustainable Drainage
    Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs December 2011 Consultees list for the consultation on national build standards and automatic adoption arrangements for gravity foul sewers and lateral drains Contents About this document ................................................................................................................. 1 Our consultees ......................................................................................................................... 1 About this document The consultation describes how Government proposes to implement the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (the Act) for the construction standards and automatic adoption of new- build sewers England. It should be noted that this list of consultees is not exhaustive. We welcome views from anyone expressing an interest in the consultation. Although not specified on the list, some individuals and all the local authorities in England have been contacted. These authorities include borough, district, city and county councils. It should be noted that the Welsh Government is consulting separately on this subject. Our consultees 2B Landscape Consultancy 365 Environmental Services 3e Consulting Engineers Ltd A.L.H. Environmental Services Aberyswyth University ACO Technologies plc Alde and Ore Association Allen Pyke Association Albion Water Allianz Insurance All Internal Drainage Boards All Local Authorities All Parliamentary Group on sewers and sewerage All Parliamentary Group on Water Amey Anglian (Central) Regional Flood Defence Committee Anglian
    [Show full text]
  • BREEAM Case Study 2013
    Library of Birmingham The Library of Birmingham Carillion Construction Services BREEAM Sustainability Case Study Author: Marcelle Hornshaw April 2013 Library of Birmingham Table of Contents 1.0 Description of the project and building 1.1 Background to the project 1.2 How it fits into the Big City Plan 1.3 Funding Sources 1.4 Drivers 1.5 Sustainability 2.0 BREEAM rating and score 3.0 Construction management techniques to reduce environmental impact 4.0 Conclusion Library of Birmingham Section 1 – Description of the project and building 1.1 Background to the project The Library of Birmingham is a world-class centre for knowledge, leisure, learning and innovation on a single site that benefits all the people of Birmingham. Library, information, and archive services play a vital role in society, by helping citizens to learn, to develop skills and knowledge for life, and to gain an understanding of our shared heritage. Designed by international architects Mecanoo, the Library of Birmingham is located in the city’s Centenary Square. The building is comprise a spacious entrance and foyer with mezzanine, lower ground level with indoor terraces, four further public levels and two outdoor garden terraces, a 'golden box' of secure archive storage occupying two levels, provision for staff offices and service plant on a further two levels and at the very top of the building a rotunda feature housing the Shakespeare Memorial Room. In all, the facilities are spread over 10 levels of varying size and usage. The new library is physically connected to Birmingham Repertory Theatre (The REP) and the two organisations work in partnership, bringing together the written and spoken word through drama, poetry and performance.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 National Brownfield Forum Meeting Notes 4Th July 2019
    National Brownfield Forum Meeting Notes 4th July 2019, 11.00am – 4.00pm Location: WSP House, Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1AF FINAL Present: Lucy Thomas Chair Nicola Harries (Secretariat) CL:AIRE Paul Nathanail Geological Society & Deputy Chair Angela Haslam Environment Agency (EA) Ben Million & Malaika Babar Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) Richard Puttock Environmental Industries Commission (EIC) Frank Evans Soil and Groundwater Technology Association (SAGTA) Robin Lancefield Environmental Protection UK Seamus Lefroy Brooks Chair of NQMS Steering Group Richard Boyle Homes England Lisa Hathway National House Building Council (NHBC) Alex Lee Society of Brownfield Risk Assessment (SoBRA) Rob Ivens Mole Valley Council Paul Sheehan Chair of Land Stewardship/Natural Capital Working Group (morning only) By telephone: Matthew Llewhellin & Trystan James Natural Resources Wales Stella Keenan Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Pollution Advisory Group (YALPAG) Corresponding Members: Fiona Mannix Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) (corresponding) Julia Thrift Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) Philip Ridley Planning Officers Society Euan Hall Land Trust Apologies: Vivien Dent Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (AGS) Mark Edwards Lancaster City Council Caroline Thornton Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) Emma Tattersdill UK Environmental Law Association (UKELA) Paul Burden Specialist in Land Condition (SiLC) David Middleton DEFRA Soils Team Andrew Williams Welsh Government Hallan Sambrooke Newcastle under Lyme Council, Staffordshire Contaminated Land Working Group Rachael Davies Flintshire Council & Welsh Contaminated Land Working Group 1 Theresa Kearney Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) Steve Manning Wiltshire Council Peter Witherington Home Builders Federation (HBF) Agenda 1. Welcome and Apologies 2. Introductions of represented organisations 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Collaboration in the Homebuilding Supply Chain
    The Case for Collaboration in the Homebuilding Supply Chain A Research Report to Highlight the Challenges and Opportunities for Driving Positive Workforce Development Investment amongst Subcontractors that supply the Homebuilding Market in the UK Joint Foreword Home Builders Federation We look forward to working together to tackle the issues raised by the report and to take Home building faces major challenges in the forward its recommendations. coming years - to build more homes, maintain and further improve quality and to do all this John Slaughter, Director of External Affairs, more sustainably and efficiently. This report Home Builders Federation and Steve Radley, makes a compelling case that we will need to Director of Policy and Partnerships, CITB. do things differently if we are to be successful in meeting these challenges. In particular, it Acknowledgements highlights the need to tackle the constraints to Skyblue Research Ltd would like to thank all growth faced by many existing sub-contractors the contributors to this study since September and the implied barriers for new entrants to 2015. We hope we have managed to capture come in to the supply chain. your voice in an honest and balanced way that Having enough people with the right skills for can help create the case for more workforce today’s and tomorrow’s industry is critical to development collaboration in future. Our supply chain growth. This report identifies thanks to representatives from the 20 that the confidence of subcontractors in their Homebuilders, 204 subcontractor businesses, ability to attract the right people and to invest 5 Federations and 14 staff at CITB, personnel at in training for them is comparatively low and HBF, their Careers Committee and Qualifying needs to be improved to sustain the growth the Workforce Group that have helped shape that is needed.
    [Show full text]
  • More Homes, Fewer Complaints
    All Party Parliamentary Group for Excellence in the Built Environment HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON SW1A 0AA More homes, fewer complaints Report from the Commission of Inquiry into the quality and workmanship of new housing in England July 2016 2 Acknowledgement We would like to thank the witnesses who gave oral evidence and the organisations that provided written submissions to the Inquiry, as well as those that took seats on the panel. This is not an official publication of the House of Commons or the House of Lords. It has not been approved by either House or its committees. All-Party Parliamentary Groups are informal groups of Members of both Houses with a common interest in particular issues. The views expressed in this report are those of the groups. This report may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium without specific permission, providing that it is not reproduced for profit, material or financial gain. It must be reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. If republishing the report or referring it to others, its source and date of publication must be acknowledged. More homes, fewer complaints Report from the Commission of Inquiry into the quality and workmanship of new housing in England Contents 4 Chairman’s foreword 21 Section 4: 3 5 Executive summary and What is going wrong and how recommendations does the industry start getting it right? 10 Section 1: 4.1 Improving workmanship and The Inquiry inspection • 1.1 About the Inquiry • Box 5 NHBC to tackle • 1.2 Members of the Commission construction quality
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Responsibility
    Bellway4Good Corporate Responsibility 2016/2017 CONTENTS 1. VISION Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................3 Executive Chairman’s Statement ................................................................................................3 Performance against 2016/17 CR Targets ...............................................................................4 2017/18 CR Targets ..................................................................................................................................5 5 Year CR Data .........................................................................................................................................6 2. ENVIRONMENT Biodiversity and Ecology..................................................................................................................7 Energy ............................................................................................................................................................7 Water ...............................................................................................................................................................7 Domestic Waste ......................................................................................................................................8 Transport and Connectivity ...........................................................................................................8 Climate
    [Show full text]