Context
On 6 April 2006 revisions to Part L of the Building Regulations will come into force to further increase the energy efficiency standards of buildings.They will apply to all new buildings and when work is carried out in existing buildings.

The Government aims to reduce total UK Industry carbon dioxide emissions by 20% by 2010. With housing currently attributed with generating approximately 30% of the total UK carbon emissions it is clear that strong measures are required to meet these targets.

It is hoped that these amendments will help deliver an overall 25% reduction in carbon emissions from buildings and that when coupled with the strengthened Building Regulations of 2002 will generate a 40% saving in pre 2002 carbon emissions figures.

RICS view
RICS has strongly advocated the improvement of buildings performance through innovations in design techniques, materials, construction methods and building management.

We are therefore pleased that the Government has taken steps to ensure a holistic view to energy use in buildings is adopted by packaging all energy related matters into one calculation and requiring a maximum carbon emissions rating.

While we welcome the implementation of the “Consequential Improvements” requirements of the directive for the upgrading of existing buildings, we feel the success of this initiative remains to be seen.

The Directive refers to caps on the extent to which changes “are technically, functionally and financially” feasible.

However in the Building Regulation guidance advice is only given on the financially feasible changes, which is set at no more than 10% extra cost to the project, but not on “technically” or “functionally” feasibility.

These matters will be left for the designers and developers to discuss with Building Control and we would strongly recommend that this process in monitored in the long term.

RICS also believes that the dropping of “Consequential Improvements” in relation to domestic extensions is a missed opportunity to deliver huge energy savings.

In our response to the consultation we stressed that a key measure of success for the new Regulations will be their ability to foster improved energy efficiency in existing buildings. The UK housing stock is mainly comprised of existing stock and subsequently the most likely source of domestic extensions.

We accept that the wording, that led to the dropping, was inappropriate as it meant that a householder who had already carried out significant energy improvements and then wanted to extend their property would be required to do inappropriate further work such as replace double glazing with triple glazing.

We would support a rewording of the statute to include the introduction of a benchmarking exemption so that requirements would only apply if the property’s energy efficiency had never been improved from a specified date e.g. the 1980s rather than an exclusion from the “Consequential Improvements” criteria.

We recognise that these measure go some way to achieving a more energy efficient building stock within the UK but do not consider that they go far enough in some areas and therefore welcome the prospect of future changes in 2008.

The subject of “embodied energy” in different building materials is a key issue in this respect. While we acknowledge that limited quantifiable data in this field is a great hindrance and feel it is important that this issue is tackled in any future amendments to the Building Regulations.

RICS has serious concerns with regard to the potential social imbalance of the statute towards those living in low value housing, who, as a group, would include a larger percentage of lower economic profile households.

We understand that this issue is to be considered in the next round of changes to the Regulations and are keen to be involved in this debate.

RICS also has concerns regarding the timescale for implementation in relation to the information available. Initially planned to be introduced in January 2006 the enactment of the amended Building Regulations will now occur in April 2006.

While draft documents were made available at the time of consultation the accompanying computer programme was not issued until early February 2006 and the second tier of documents have still not been compiled.

The government is under pressure from Europe to implement the amendments or face significant financial penalties.

 As such RICS’s suggestion that the transition provision should allow for an application to be made but enforcement only to occur from April 2007 has not been adopted as it would be regarded a deferment of enactment by Europe.

The inadequate time available to prepare for implementation will potentially create serious challenges for Industry.

RICS also holds a second concern relating to the transition provision in relation to a discrepancy between the transition provision and the Building Act.

While the law allows for primary legislation to amend secondary legislation it does not allow the reverse.

Subsequently, the statement in the Transition Provision (secondary legislation) that even if full Building Approval has been granted the project must commence within a year conflicts with the Building Act (primary legislation) that stipulates a three-year leeway for commencement.

This discrepancy has potentially serious implications for Industry and the government should act immediately to resolve this issue.

We do however welcome government’s decision to adopt our suggestion that listed and historic buildings should be given sympathetic consideration within the scope of the Building Regulations especially as technical and physical issues have been addressed.

This compliments work conducted by RICS in partnership with BFP, English Heritage and Drivers Jonas into the use of historic buildings and the accompanying tool kit, Heritage Works.

Government’s decision to follow RICS recommendations that the status of modular and portable buildings should also be excluded from the scope of the Building Regulations is welcomed.

The recognition that these buildings consume less energy than conventional buildings and that significant effort has been made to increase their energy efficiency were key factors.

We recognise that these measures do go some way to achieving a more energy efficient building stock within the UK but do not consider that they go far enough in some areas and therefore welcome the prospect of future change in 2008.