In the UK’s Net Zero strategy, there is a commitment to clarifying the relationship between central and local government - and also to improving the co-ordination between different departments and layers. But the panel felt there is still much work to be done to fix policy deficits and disconnects.
“There’s an opportunity for district councils to lobby more effectively,” observed William Cornall. “The Planning White Paper didn't get much traction. Now is probably a good pause point for them. There's so much that could be done. Development management policy should just be standardised. The government should be setting the tone. If a district council wants to do something different, they should be able to justify that and take it forward - currently it's almost the other way around. There’s nothing in place unless the district puts it in place. It's ridiculous that you'd have 12 districts in Kent ploughing resources into developing these policies. You’re talking about 12 variations on a theme.”
Matthew Blythin of DHA Planning backed up the point:
“The Planning White Paper gave a lot of credence to the idea of national development control. Whether that materialises through the National Planning Policy Framework we’ll have to see.” “Developers on the whole really just want certainty, if they know that a policy requires them to deliver something in particular, whatever it might be in terms of sustainability, they'll craft it from day one. It’s also worth saying that Local Plans are unwieldy and very slow processes.” “There's also a big question about the interface between planning and building regulations. For years, it's been two completely separate things.”
Mark Ellson, architect at Holmes Miller, stressed the benefits of being able to revert back to national policy. “You hit these crunch points and you’ve got decisions to make.” He talked about a tangible example of these conflicts on a carbon neutral school his company is working on for Morgan Sindall Construction.
“It's got a 600 kilograms of co2, which is the equivalent baseline target to meet on embodied carbon. As it’s an out-of-town school, the planning policy says it needs 120 car parking spaces, so the design team can work through the carbon calculation. We had to create a site plan with no building because the carbon budget was spent on the infrastructure and car parking. And so you present a drawing that looks incomplete and say: ‘That's how the carbon has been spent.’ Then it’s about talking through the policy, reducing the car parking and then looking at the green infrastructure and green travel ways. You shrink down the budget for the landscaping, and then put money and carbon budget back into the building. But, that all takes time to nurse through, to refine policy documents to actually get them to serve at a project level too.”
“And that's consultancy fees that's coming out of a pot of money that should be going in school,” commented Hayley Porter-Aslet. “It's just nonsense, isn't it?”
Mark Ellson concurred. “I think that gap will start close. But yes, it’s taking time and money to do it.”
Stuart Pryor of Kent County Council said: “The issue we have is quantifying exactly what it is that we're trying to achieve. Whether it be from a carbon reduction-based scenario or from a cost perspective. Understanding the cost difference between complying with building regulations or achieving the policy aspirations.”
“It’s a challenge because we have to meet targets related to A, B, and C which are not always necessarily aligned with sustainability. We are dealing with public funds, so it's all about accountability. And the measure for that is the output specifications. We work to those benchmarks. We can go below that specification, but that's not very easy. To go above that specification feels like really sticking your head above the parapet – and it goes to local members for sign-off.” “We're expecting information from Kent County Council next year, which will give us more certainty. It's important that we have more clarity. Because just in terms of school construction, it’s ongoing, it's constant, we're delivering new or older buildings, as we’ve got a growing population.”
In terms of schools, Stuart Pryor pointed out the Department for Education (DfE) policies don’t change overnight. “The timescales can be unfortunate. It can take the DfE a long time to make adjustments to the output specification.” His colleague Dave Mounter agreed: “We’re waiting for a clearer direction on what it is that we need to be doing. That’s from a sustainability, carbon neutral and build-ability perspective. But there’s lots of opportunities, that's for sure.” Thomas Warner of Hawden MEP noted the challenge of dealing with any developer that has a tick-box approach to sustainability. “Housing is probably the prime example where you can find an organisation that just wants to get everything built and move on. It can be difficult from our perspective to talk to a developer in a more holistic way – perhaps more photovoltaics or using a different technology when they are so focused on the bottom line.” Matthew Blythin accepted the point. “While there is certainly a move towards developers actually having an appetite to do things sustainably, the reality is that the majority will do the minimum amount because of funding or other commercial pressures.” Nicholas Thurston said: “We’ve engaged with big house builders, and asked them if they would be prepared to start leading on this? Because it takes quite a long time for a Local Plan to come through. I actually don't think we're going to see a massive shift in the way everything works in a five-year timescale. But we know we need to act now.”
