BASE HEADER

Yes

ID sylw: 108373

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mackenzie Miller Homes

Asiant : Lichfields (Birmingham)

13.1 Generally, Mackenzie Miller Homes supports the SWC’s approach to ensuring future
developments deliver high-quality developments that seek to tackle climate change with
proactive sustainable measures. However, Mackenzie Miller Homes fundamentally
considers that policies must be sufficiently flexible, fit for purpose and well evidenced – as
required by the NPPF.
13.2 Mackenzie Miller Homes recognises the importance of reducing embodied carbon within
the development process, however, wishes to highlight that embodied carbon emissions are
unregulated in the UK. Current policies and regulations focus exclusively on operational
energy use, rather than embodied carbon. At present, there is no nationally approved
regulator, recognised standard, national planning policy, or building regulation
requirement to evaluate and report embodied carbon emissions or conduct whole life cycle
carbon assessments. Notably, the Future Homes Standards - MHCLG Consultation on
changes to Parts L and F of the Building Regulations does not suggest an embodied carbon
target.
13.3 It is recognised that SWCs are within its right to deviate from the Future Homes Standard
and Building Regulations, however, Paragraph 32 of the NPPF is clear that the
“preparation and review of all policies should be underpinned by relevant and up-to-date
evidence.” In this context, whilst supportive in principle, Mackenzie Miller Homes has
concerns that the SWCs are seeking to make provision for a policy that deviates from the
national requirements without providing sufficient justification. Indeed, none of the SWC’s
evidence base produced to date outlines policy options for embodied carbon; albeit it is
noted that the SWC’s SWLP’s Technical Evidence ‘Future Work’ suggests that ‘Climate
Change Evidence’ will be prepared to support the SWLP, alongside the ‘Site Delivery &
Viability Studies’. However, this evidence would need to sufficiently demonstrate that such
an approach is justified (Para 36b, NPPF), aspirational but deliverable (Para 16b, NPPF),
and not undermine the deliverability of the Local Plan (Para 35, NPPF).
13.4 Mackenzie Miller Homes also wishes to highlight that other Councils have proposed a
similar requirement for developments, which have not been accepted by Inspectors.
Particularly, in 2022 West Oxfordshire District Council [WODC] submitted its Area Action
Plan [AAP] for a Salt Cross Garden Village – a case study recognised in the SWC’s ‘Climate
Change Baseline Report (2022) at paragraph 4.5.4. The AAP included Draft Policy 2 (Net
Zero Carbon Development), which required all new development to be net zero on-site
through the use of ultra-low energy fabric specification, low carbon technologies, on-site
renewable energy generation and embodied carbon reductions – Notably, Policy 2 required
developments to meet a < 500 kg CO2/m2 requirement.
13.5 However, the Inspector felt that the policy was inconsistent with national policy, as the
standards within it amounted to a significant uplift on Building Regulations – which
conflicted with then Secretary of State for Communities and Government – Eric Pickles MP
– Written Ministerial Statement [WMS] in March 2015, which stated that policies should
“not be used to set conditions on planning permissions with requirements above the equivalent of the energy requirement of Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes”. In
addition, the Inspector noted that the 2015 WMS “remains current national policy on this
matter” (IR124) – indeed, this position remains in the PPG (PPG ID: 6-012-20190315).
13.6 The Inspector also highlighted that whilst Section 1 of the Planning and Energy Act 2008
does allow for some policies to exceed energy requirements of building regulations if they
are deemed reasonable and consistent with national policies, in that instance, the
requirements were not reasonable (IR30). Furthermore, the Inspector highlighted that:
• There was a lack of evidence base to demonstrate the appropriateness of building
typologies and how key performance indicators were selected over alternatives;
• The standards within the plan were too rigid, and could not be realistically met by the
end user; and
• The standards of the policy were not flexible when having regard to the ever-changing
net zero building policy nor to “technological and market advancements and more
stringent nationally set standards, including within the Building Regulations” (IR137).
• Consequently, the Inspector suggested a series of modifications to the policy –
including the deletion of the embodied carbon KPI – and suggested below amendment
to the policy wording:
13.7 “An energy statement will be required for all major development, which should
demonstrate the following:
13.8 …Embodied carbon – reducing the impact of construction by minimising the amount of
upfront embodied carbon emissions including appropriate embodied carbon targets. A
calculation of the expected upfront embodied carbon of buildings and full lifecycle
modelling”
13.9 Furthermore, regard should still be given to the then Minister of State for Housing’s – Lee
Rowley MP – Written Ministerial Statement [WMS] in December 2023. Whilst this was
challenged in the High Court by Rights Community Action, the case was dismissed,
meaning the WMS remains current government policy and a material consideration.
13.10 In this context, Mackenzie Miller Homes emphasises that the Government aims to achieve
zero carbon by 2025 through the gradual implementation of higher building regulations.
While the SWCs are generally permitted to deviate from the Future Homes Standard and
Building Regulations if there is evidence supporting a higher requirement as set out in
Paragraph 32 of the NPPF, PPG, and the 2023 WMS, Mackenzie Miller Homes points out
that adequate evidence is necessary to justify this approach.