Thank you to the speakers at the Westminster Property Association (WPA) breakfast session last week for sharing their experiences with recent planning applications in Westminster and for summarising the draft new Retrofit First Policy. It’s exciting to see such ambitious embodied carbon targets being discussed. Below are some of my key takeaways and thoughts from the breakfast session.
Is the building structurally sound?
This is a fundamental question – something that would be considered to determine if a building can be kept and refurbished or demolished and rebuilt. My concern is that this question will be interpreted differently, and quite possibly open to abuse.
And so what’s the solution? Designers should provide a robust case for either situation and provide sufficient detail and test results to justify their approach. Perhaps proposals should be peer reviewed by an engineer with a track record of successful retrofits?
If partial demolition equates to more than 50% then the application is considered a new build.
This figure seems a bit arbitrary at the moment – further clarification would help. I agree to defining parameters such as this, but should this figure be based on 50% of the embodied carbon of a building as opposed to floor area?
Clear carbon targets
It’s good to see the embodied carbon target roughly aligns to the draft Part Z targets. Perhaps track Part Z to give a clear expectation of year on year incremental improvements that align with scientific net zero goals?
Whole life carbon assessments are key but what is the tipping point? We need to reduce carbon emissions now, so is a 30-40 years carbon payback going to the make the impact needed?
The carbon generated from the temporary works and strengthening required to maintain existing assets must be assessed as part of the retention design.
Do benefits to the public have greater importance than the embodied carbon emissions of developments?
This could be considered the get-out clause. It’s subjective and could lengthen the planning process (think Marks and Spencer’s!) We need clarity in planning policy to boost economic activity, not more uncertainty.
We heard from the panel that office space occupancy in Westminster has actually fallen since the opening of Crossrail. Should this huge infrastructure investment now be maximised? I believe with robust and clear sustainable policies that it should.
To summarise, it’s great to see Westminster leading the way on sustainable development but I do hope they can provide more certainty and clarity regarding the planning process to allow asset owners and developers to progress their schemes with confidence.
If you have a development opportunity in Westminster, please drop me an email or give me a call.
Mike Davies, Co-Founder and Director of SD Engineers