Developers (with the exception of a few mavericks) unfortunately will not do any of this unless forced by a strong planning system. We all know that the technical solutions are well developed. The issue is lack of political will. People must recognise that the economic system ensures that many of the environmental and social issues referred to on this site only impact upon development decisions when regulations ensure that developers take them into account.

See this example of a Local London Policy http://www.themertonrule.org/ now being taken up through the UK. The London Plan has taken a follow up lead and will soon require 20% renewable provision for major developments (at the moment its 10%). This incentivises energy efficiency because developers get into a horse trading situation where they offer energy efficiency measures to reduce their obligation to provide the more expensive option of on-site renewables. So the policy internalises some of the environmental costs of development and focuses developers on energy efficiency, creates a micro-renewable energy industry encouraging economies of scale. As economies of scale increase, and developers become better at energy efficiency, the provision required can increase steadily to 100% of projected on-site provision, i.e. carbon neutral development.

Also: This from an earlier post, showing the policies that force developers in the UK towards sustainable forms of development. And no, there is no conflict between garden space for families and high density development so long as policies encourage family sized units, because most space in low density developments is given up to roads, verges and less used front gardens. The Victorian Terrace provides huge gardens and can be between 100 and 400 dwellings/hectare, we are talking about moving from 15-20 dwellings/hectare to something closer to between 35 and 60 dwellings/hectare (More in cities) to produce walkable, serviceable places.

Here again are the main relevant policy guidance documents that UK planning authorities use to make decisions on developments to ensure the type of benefits explored in the film:

Sustainable Development: http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolic...

Housing: http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolic...

Town Centres: http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolic...

Sustainable development in rural areas: http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolic...

Another requirement which may help in the long run, Design and Access Statements, which need to provide thorough analysis of the urban design of a site. http://www.cabe.org.uk/default.aspx?contentitemid=1334

Note: developers get refused permission to build unless they , to the satisfaction of the local planning authority, meet these planning requirements. Builders balk at the idea, but the alternative is for voters to subsidise developers by having to put up with horrid places to live in and the resultant social problems, which cost money to solve, more expensively in the case of retro-fitting, if indeed they can be solved at that time at all.

Here's some guidance with examples of how its done from English Partnerships. Clearly, the Scandinavians and Germans are often ahead of the game, but this stuff is at least a step in the right direction:

Look down the page for the Urban Design Compendium: http://www.englishpartnerships.co.uk/publications.htm#bestpractice