Up until the current point in time, eco property was a known quantity. Whether a person agreed or disagreed with the construction of eco property, their reasons were the same because the pros and cons of eco property were all very well known.
However, two recent cases at opposite ends of the world that have both received international attention are challenging the underlying assumptions of the debate.
Willow Green in Yorkshire, England is one area where a proposed eco town is being challenged by local residents on the grounds that it will use greenbelt land in a way that increases the ecological footprint rather than decrease it. Furthermore, residents feel that it will actually create energy inefficiencies that will take the town a long time to compensate for, if ever.
Considering the general accepted merits of constructing eco property, this is quite an interesting and surprising objection. However, the contention of the residents is that using natural resources in order to construct an artificial structure on greenbelt land will only damage the environment, regardless of how ecologically friendly that property might be.
Elsewhere in the world, Perth's expansion in Australia is sparking a debate between the Property Council and the State Government.
In this particular case, the Property Council is making the argument that urban sprawl is healthier for the environment than the construction of towers and skyscrapers in the inner city. They are advancing a number of arguments as to why this is the case and in doing so are challenging the long-held belief that urban sprawl is not conducive with eco property – as one concept hurts the environment and the other helps it.
With the conventional wisdom of eco property being challenged on two very separate fronts, it will be interesting to see if either of these cases gain momentum and translate into a paradigm shift somewhere down the road.
