Policy ENV10 - BREEAM

Careful consideration needs to be given to accelerating the Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) and BREEAM standards in advance of adopted policy. CSH is not a mandatory requirement and only the energy criteria (i.e. 25%) will be become regulation through Building Regulations Part L from 2010 and further improvements at specified milestones thereafter.

In 'Building a Greener Future Policy' reference is made to building performance and local authorities would need to have regard to a number of considerations, including whether the proposed approach is consistent with securing the expected supply and pace of housing development shown in the housing trajectory required by Planning Policy Statement 3. Indeed, further consistent references are also referenced in PPS 1.

It goes on to state that national standards for reducing carbon emissions from homes should be set through building regulations, supported through the planning system. Indeed, given the level of ambition built into the national framework, CLG believe it would make it harder for industry to invest in supply chains with confidence or get the economies of scale to make new technologies cost effective. "It would also jeopardise our parallel commitment to increase the level of house building and deliver the affordable homes the country needs".

Given, these drivers it is considered that if levels for CSH and BREEAM are stipulated they are subject to review against national policy and importantly viability tests. Furthermore, the 'Core Strategy' would benefit from reflecting on the publication of the 'Definition of Zero Carbon Homes and Non-domestic Buildings' policy, and the soon to be published 2010 Code for Sustainable Homes consultation paper, and in addition the UK-GBC Consultation on a Code for Sustainable Buildings.

With regard to water conservation aspects, the setting of water standards through CSH is fraught with risks, for example the Approved Document G of the building regulations, 'Sanitation, Hot Water Safety and Water Efficiency' was published in May and was to take effect from October 2009; however this has now been put back to April 2010. The reason behind this is because under the Technical Standards Directive (98/34/EC), notification to the European Commission of the guidance contained in the draft Approved Document G was required.

Consequently on the 3rd September a "detailed opinion" was received from the Commission with a number of comments on the draft Approved Document. This resulted in a '3 month standstill' which prohibits introduction of the Approved Document before 2 December 2009. Accordingly, CLG have decided to delay its issue until 6 April 2010.

With regard to surface water run-off, category SUR1 of CSH is now subject to similar review by CLG Technical Advisory Group, because it has been found to be unreasonable in its intent and will result in significant technical problems and additional costs compared with current regulations.

Moreover, PPS 25 must be treated with caution as its interpretation is subject to variable outcomes at the sub-regionally level. For example, we support the principles of SuDs; however Highways Departments very often will not accept or adopt such measures.

We support the inclusion of this policy because it will also go some way to address the issues of water efficiency highlighted in the "Essex Thames Gateway Water Cycle Study Scoping Study" (March 2009).