Zero carbon and planning policy - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

What do you mean by current hiatus? I understood that building regs would be revised this year and then again in 2016 to make the government's "zero carbon home" pledge. Have you seen anything that suggests that this isn't the case? Regarding setting your own local standards, NPPF seems far more supportive than the previous PPS1 supplement. I suggesting ignoring older guidance documents and focusing on what it actually says in NPPF. So long as you follow para 95 it seems that the only evidence you need to justify such policies is proof of viability -- see paras 173 and 174. The key phrase is "cumulative impact", i.e. considering all requirements together to ensure that they won't prevent development that is needed from coming forward. Given the tough economic climate and the poor performance of the property market, applying ambitious sustainability standards may not be possible for many authority areas. In which case, it can be hoped that building regs are improved as originally promised. At Hull we combined the viability assessment of our proposed local standards with a consideration of future CIL tariffs. This practice is also recommended by NPPF.

>I understood that building regs would be revised this year and then again in 2016 to make the government's "zero carbon home" pledge I also understood this, and practically every source on the internet repeats this. However our Building Control people are adamant that the timetable is as follows: Buildings occupied by public authorities in 2019, all buildings 2020. 'Zero carbon' has also been reduced to 'nearly zero carbon' which will be broadly equivalent to Code for Sustainable Homes level 5 (not 6). This is inkeeping with the EU directive (Energy Performance of Buildings) that sets a deadline of 2020. I'm currently trying to work out how this fits with the 'commitment' for zero carbon homes by 2016. If anyone can rationalise this, I'd be very grateful.

Just correcting a typo: the requirement for 2020 is for new buildings to be "nearly zero energy" (not nearly zero carbon). There is a requirement being introduced in 2013 for all new developments to consider installing 'high efficiency alternative systems' (renewables, CHP, heat pumps etc.). I wonder if Government feels this will deliver nearly zero carbon homes by 2016 and that therefore this meets the commitment?

Just looked at the Zero Carbon Hub website. They clearly state that "The UK Government has set out an ambitious plan for all new homes to be zero carbon from 2016." I understand that they are tasked to investigate how to make this possible. A major part of the work is what is termed "allowable solutions". It means that the actual buildings won't really be zero carbon, instead the developer will pay to offset the carbon elsewhere. It is therefore dubious whether these homes can really be called "zero carbon" - it appears they won't have to match the carbon emission rates of Code for Sustainable Homes Levels 5 or 6.

I found these two documents quite enlightening: http://www.zerocarbonhub.org/resourcefiles/ZeroCarbonStrategies_web.pdf http://www.zerocarbonhub.org/resourcefiles/FEE_A4_4pp_final_web.pdf It seems Part L may be tightened up by 2016, with higher Fabric Energy Efficiency Standards (FEES) which will go some way towards improving housing. However it seems there will be a strong reliance on allowable solutions at least until 2020 and the 'nearly zero energy' requirement. Our building control people think this final 2020 requirement may allow for onsite energy production rather than fabric improvements to reach nearly zero energy so developers could feasibly stick with the minimum fabric required by FEES and achieve zero carbon or nearly zero energy through other means, and this could be the case well into the future. Horsham have recently built 12 Passivhaus homes for affordable rent so in my opinion this is a weak outcome and does not meet the 'fabric first' ideal. Whether this leaves scope for introducing a local building standard though I can't say. I'd imagine proving viability would be a very resource hungry activity.

Thanks for the useful responses. My concerns came from a recent Inside Housing article highlighting that changes to part L of the Building Regulations for 2013 have not been confirmed, in terms of achieving the full zero carbon standard for new homes by 2016. http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/eco/zero-carbon-uncertainty-holding-back-new-homes/6525798.article

Hi all, Hopefully not too late in responding to this one but from what I can make out, changes to Part L 2013 (which are currently awaiting minsterial approval) will introduce a lower level of carbon reduction that was orginally planned for introducing zero carbon homes in 2016 (so about 33% lower than Part L 2006 as opposed to the original plan for 44% lower than Part L 2006 equivalent to Code Level 4). The definition of zero carbon has also been amended following the 2011 budget so that it only deals with regulated emissions (so equivalent to Code Level 5). In getting to zero carbon, housebuilders will only need to do a certain amount on-site (known as carbon compliance which is roughly 44-60% carbon reduction deoending on house type) with the remainder through 'allowable solutions'. The big issue here is that the Government have yet to respond to the Zero Carbon Hub's recommendations in relation to 'Allowable Solutions' and at Ecobuild this week the Hub were very concerned about the future of allowable Solutions. As for evidence base for Code levels, this comes down to technical and economic viability. We had a study undertaken back in 2010 that looked at this and forms the basis for our local plan review, which you might find helpful and can be downloaded as follows: https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/sites/www.cambridge.gov.uk/files/docs/Decarbonising_Cambridge_final_report_220910.pdf