A survey is an important part of any property transaction. This building survey will tell buyers and sellers if there is anything important that needs fixing either before a sale, or that may affect the market value of the property. Building surveys carried out in advance of a sale being
CHAS, the supply chain risk management expert, is calling on construction companies to encourage eligible EU workers to apply for ‘settled status’ to ensure they can continue to work legally in the UK once the Brexit transition period is complete. The British government has indicated that anyone settled in the
The Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee released their report on the draft Building Safety Bill this week outlining their concerns that the draft does not do enough to protect leaseholders. The report states that, in its current form, the draft legislation does not provide adequate protection against leaseholders paying
The Institute of Residential Property Management (IRPM) has responded in detail to the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee’s recent call for evidence on cladding. The call for evidence will inform the Cladding: Progress of Remediation inquiry which is reviewing progress in removing potentially dangerous cladding from high-rise and high-risk
Construction companies do not only have the task of erecting buildings on time and on budget. They also have the responsibility to make sure these buildings are fit for purpose and safe for those that use them. With that in mind, there are several safety areas of which construction businesses
In the UK as in other parts of the world, there are many rules to follow in case of a road traffic accident. But sadly, not many drivers are aware of these rules, and what they should really do in the event they are in a road traffic accident. If
Twelve months on from the launch of a ground-breaking emergency lighting software technology, Abtec Building Technologies (Abtec BT) says it is now as important as ever for building managers and operators to focus on building safety. ARGOHub, a software as a service (SaaS) offering, was launched by Abtec BT last
The UK government has recently published a draft landmark bill which is designed to improve residents’ safety in their homes. The Building Safety Bill, which marks one of the biggest changes to building safety in 40 years, will introduce a new era of accountability, making it clear where the responsibility
Building Passports as a means of certifying key information about a property are an extension of recommendations made in Dame Judith Hackitt’s review of building regulations and fire safety. In the report, which was published in following the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy, Dame Judith spoke of the need to create
Responding to official planning performance statistics for 2019/20 published today, trade body Homes for Scotland (HFS) described another overall increase in decision times for housing applications as “hugely frustrating”. Director of Planning Tammy Swift-Adams said: “Despite an 11.5 per cent drop in the number of decisions made on local housing
A survey is an important part of any property transaction. This building survey will tell buyers and sellers if there is anything important that needs fixing either before a sale, or that may affect the market value of the property. Building surveys carried out in advance of a sale being completed are generally designed to help buyers to make an informed decision on whether or not to proceed, to assess whether or not the purchase price is reasonable, and to determine if any action needs taking before contracts are exchanged. There are a range of different building surveys that can be carried out including the RICS Condition Report, RICS HomeBuyer Report and RICS Building Survey. The Building Survey is the most in depth report and is recommended for listed properties, buildings more than 30 years old, properties with an unusual construction, properties that you plan to renovate, or properties that have already undergone extensive renovations. What Will The Surveyor Check? 1 – General Condition One of the most important aspects of a building survey is a report on the general condition of the property. This will involve all aspects of the property, and often gives information based on a traffic light system. 2 – Damp Proofing A building survey should include a detailed description of the results of damp tests, and a report on the condition of existing damp proofing within a property. If issues are found here via a damp survey, the report may include recommendations on the actions that should be taken to rectify the issues. 3 – Major Faults All building surveyors should check for and report on any major faults within the property. These are faults that either need dealing with urgently, or may affect the property’s market value. 4 – Urgent Problems The building surveyor will give detailed information on any urgent problems that should be inspected by a specialist before contracts are signed. This could include any structural damage, electrical faults and other serious problems. 5 – Timber Condition Building surveyors should always check for any damage to any timber in the property. This will include checking for woodworm or rot, amongst other things. 6 – Technical Information The surveyor should investigate the technical specifications of the property’s structure and the materials used. This helps to identify any properties that are of non-standard construction that may cause issues from a mortgage perspective. 7 – Energy Some modern building surveys will include an investigation into the energy efficiency of the property. If this is included, it will include an Energy Performance Certificate. How Much Will a Survey Cost? The cost of a survey will vary depending on where in the United Kingdom you are, and what kind of survey you require. The value and size of the property may also have an affect on the price that you pay for the survey. As a guide: Condition Reports should start at around £250 HomeBuyer Reports start at around £350, with an additional £100 or so for a valuation Building Surveys start at £500, however this can vary greatly depending on the age, size and unique features of the property Home Condition Surveys generally start from £400
CHAS, the supply chain risk management expert, is calling on construction companies to encourage eligible EU workers to apply for ‘settled status’ to ensure they can continue to work legally in the UK once the Brexit transition period is complete. The British government has indicated that anyone settled in the UK for more than five years as of exit day (31, January, 2020) – will likely to be able to gain ‘settled status’ which will grant them the same rights as British citizens. Those who do not meet the five year criteria may still be able to gain pre-settled status which will allow them a grant of limited leave to remain for five years. Eligible EU nationals have until 30 June 2021 to submit an application – after which if they haven’t done so and they continue to work in the UK they will be doing so illegally. However there are concerns that language barriers and a lack of awareness of the requirement may prevent some workers from completing the application potentially driving them into the illegitimate labour market. Employers can help by spreading awareness of the need to apply for ‘settled status’ and offering assistance where required – such as access to computers to complete the application. It is free to apply and a step-by-step application guide is available in 26 European languages. The application can be accessed here: https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families/applying-for-settled-status Employers may also wish to consider whether as an employer they are eligible to become a sponsor which could help them to recruit from the EU in the future. https://migrate-uk.com/sponsor-licence-applications-uk-2021/
The Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee released their report on the draft Building Safety Bill this week outlining their concerns that the draft does not do enough to protect leaseholders. The report states that, in its current form, the draft legislation does not provide adequate protection against leaseholders paying the bill for work to remedy fire safety defects, this includes the removal of dangerous cladding. Among the 40 recommendations contained within the report was a review of ‘Building Safety Charges’, a new type of service charge that will be introduced to help fund future fire safety remedial work. However, the report states that these new charges will make long leaseholders of higher-risk buildings liable to pay, making the charges a mechanism for ensuring residents foot the bill, rather than funding the cost of future work. What is the Building Safety Bill? The Building Safety Bill is a new piece of UK Government legislation aimed at reforming the regulations surrounding the safety of high-rise buildings in the UK. A major part of the UK Government’s response to the Grenfell Tower tragedy, it is currently being scrutinised while in draft form, but is expected to be brought to Parliament early next year. In September, Propertymark responded to the pre-legislative scrutiny of the Draft Building Safety Bill with a number of concerns, including the way in which the Building Safety Charge is structured, which will make it much easier for building owners to pass the costs of remedial work to leaseholders. ‘Propertymark response to draft Building Safety Bill‘ Lack of detail forces urgent question The Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee also highlighted in their report a lack of detail and an over-emphasis on legislation and regulation that has not yet been published, making it ambiguous as to how the new regulations would work in practice. In light of the concerns the Committee provided in their report, Clive Betts MP, Chair of the Committee, tabled an urgent question to Government on Tuesday 24 November on whether leaseholders are expected to pay for the removal of dangerous cladding, with the Housing Minister Christopher Pincher MP taking the despatch box to represent the Government. During the session, MPs repeatedly outlined concerns their constituents had about letters requiring them to pay for the removal of cladding and extreme service charges while the UK Government delayed their response. The Minister stressed that the UK Government writing a blank cheque to developers sends the wrong signal and costs for removing unsafe cladding should fall on those responsible, which includes developers, building owners and other stakeholders. However, he could not guarantee costs will never fall to leaseholders in some circumstances. The Minister was keen to highlight the recent ‘win’ of ensuring that External Wall Fire Review forms (EWS1) are no longer required for buildings without cladding, however, one MP highlighted that this had not been formally agreed, with UK finance and the Building Societies Association not yet backing the announcement. It is pleasing that the Committee has agreed with Propertymark that there needs to be greater protections for leaseholders, including reducing administration and costs, as well as more clarity for those involved in managing property. In particular, greater guidance and support will be needed for Building Safety Managers and Accountable Persons to deliver the new regime as well as the need for the Building Safety Charge to be incorporated into existing Service Charge arrangements. We will continue to press for a holistic approach to ensure that the New Homes Ombudsman works alongside existing, and proposed, regulation of home buying and selling to deliver consistency for consumers moving between property on the existing market and purchasing new build property. Mark Hayward NAEA Propertymark Chief Executive
The Institute of Residential Property Management (IRPM) has responded in detail to the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee’s recent call for evidence on cladding. The call for evidence will inform the Cladding: Progress of Remediation inquiry which is reviewing progress in removing potentially dangerous cladding from high-rise and high-risk buildings, and the adequacy of funding by the Government. The Committee is seeking evidence on the following issues: Is the Government’s new £1 billion remediation fund sufficient to address all remaining concerns in high-rise and high-risk buildings? What lessons should be learned from the administration of previous funding mechanisms? Will the new External Wall Fire Review process for the valuation of high-rise properties be effective in improving access to buildings insurance and mortgage finance for leaseholders? What additional challenges have been presented by the coronavirus pandemic and how might these be overcome? The IRPM response addresses these questions in order. Is the Government’s new £1 billion remediation fund sufficient to address all remaining concerns in high-rise and high-risk buildings? No. The contribution is substantial and warmly welcomed, but it is a small sum compared to the likely cost of remediating buildings to a safe condition. The National Housing Federation estimates that their membership is facing a £10bn bill to remediate buildings in the social and affordable sector. The G15 group of housing associations estimates £6.8 bn for their members alone. ARMA estimate £3.6bn for their private sector members. Until at-risk buildings have been assessed, the final remediation cost will remain unknown but since the size of the private sector is approximate to the social sector, the best estimates suggest a bill anywhere between £12-20bn. However, the scope of the fund is limited to certain types of non-ACM cladding only for buildings above a notional height. It does not include other elements of the external wall system, nor other failings of fire safety such as compartmentation and fire stopping both internally and externally. It is akin to funding one or two new tyres on a car but disregarding the loose wheel nuts, defective brakes and leaking fuel tank. Replacing cladding will not in itself make buildings safe. Within the defined scope of the terms of the fund, it is thought likely that the £1bn fund will require increasing. Further analysis and more surveys will be required to assess by how much. However, if the question is widened to providing safe external wall systems and fire compartmentation in multi-dwelling residential buildings, then it is clear that the £1bn fund is a small fraction of the likely cost. Beyond the scope of the original ACM fund and the later £1bn non-ACM fund are other costs and other buildings. Other costs are: other related remediation costs, e.g. insulation and related fire safety failures. The focus on cladding alone as opposed to the external wall system does not tackle the more complex reality of wall systems. waking watches (typically £3,000 per building per week, £6,000 for a larger building). Around 420 waking watches across the country are wiping out estate reserve funds and being charged back to residents with harmful consequences. Some residents are simply unable to meet these substantial and unexpected costs. ameliorative measures such as temporary alarms. increased insurance premiums and excesses. the human cost. The metrics of this situation seem confined to easily measured financials. It is difficult to quantify the human cost to people whose lives are on hold and blighted personally and financially but anxious residents are suffering a raft of harms including stress, mental health issues, bankruptcy and domestic violence. In addition to the misery caused to innocent residents, some of these costs will crystallise into monetary costs against the state; welfare, policing, health, restrictions on labour mobility, bankruptcy procedures and so on. the time, cost and stress on managing agents, who find themselves involved in the substantial reconstruction of sometimes very large and complex buildings, far beyond their remit and expertise of managing a functional building. They are now dealing with justifiably unhappy residents, an obstructive and protracted system that can prevent them from acting, a [worsening] lack of experts and contractors to survey and fix buildings, and an expectation of providing solutions over which they may not have the authority, the funding or the ability to act. As with innocent leaseholders, managing agents are similarly not to blame for the failure of our construction industry; they are left trying to clear up someone else’s mess. Other buildings: buildings below 18m in height, where government’s own advice (Consolidated Advice Note) recommends buildings of all heights with ACM and HPL cladding should be within the building safety regime. Note, bringing these buildings into scope changes the number of buildings under scrutiny from around 12,000 to over 100,000, a massive leap in scale. Fire, as demonstrated in Barking, Bolton and beyond, does not respect notional boundaries. buildings with external wall systems that are considered a risk but are not covered by the scheme, such as rendered polystyrene. buildings constructed of nominally safe materials but are unsafe due to poor construction, building control and certifications; for example missing fire breaks and inadequate compartmentation. While considering whether £1bn will meet the costs within the limited scope of the fund, it is the costs outside the scope of the fund, which constitutes the majority of buildings and works, that will likely prove the greater concern if we are to make our buildings safe. Going forward, this situation will further crystallise. Dame Judith Hackitt’s Building Safety Programme will require buildings to be certified. Meanwhile, mortgage lenders are now alive to lending only on demonstrably safe buildings. These two drivers will ensure that intrusive inspections will take place on buildings above and below 18m irrespective of the external wall system, whereupon the systemic failures of our construction industry, building regulations and supervisory/certification system will be further laid bare in the coming years, with further remediation costs to follow. Prioritisation of risk, speeding up the process and unlocking the housing market Given the shortages of
Construction companies do not only have the task of erecting buildings on time and on budget. They also have the responsibility to make sure these buildings are fit for purpose and safe for those that use them. With that in mind, there are several safety areas of which construction businesses need to be aware. Keep reading to find out what they are. Building Safety Bill The first thing that construction firms need to be aware of is the Building Safety Bill. This is a new bill brought in by the UK government in response to the Grenfell tragedy. Firstly, the bill outlines better safety features for multi-unit buildings and high rises. Additionally, the Building Safety Bill also extends the amount of time any construction company can be held responsible for non-compliant work. All of which means that safety should be even more critical to construction businesses than it has ever been. Movement within the building When considering construction safety, it is not only the infrastructure of the building, that is important. The way the building design and materials allow movement within it is also vital, as this is an essential part of how users will behave within it. The good news is that there are several features construction businesses can use to make movement around the building as safe as possible. The first of these are stair rails, which support people using their stairs and create a barrier if they do slip or fall. Additionally, installing anti-slip stairs made from resin can help prevent falls and accidents when users move from one area of the building to another. The good news is that such products are good value for money and hard-wearing enough to last for a long time too, making them an excellent investment for construction businesses looking to up their safety game. Non-toxic materials Another vital consideration for construction companies when it comes to building safer buildings is the materials they use. Unfortunately, traditional construction materials haven’t always been the most user friendly, with a trade-off between high toxicity and efficacy. Sadly, building materials with high toxicity aren’t only dangerous to the people using them in building the building. They put the health of the people who inhabit the building at risk too. The good news is that with modern technology, new materials are being created that are much less toxic and perform brilliantly. A particular example of these is the use of hypoallergenic insulation in walls and roofs. Something that keeps the building’s temperature stable effectively, but is much better for the health of the occupants. Location considerations Finally, when it comes to building safety builders, construction firms must always consider factors specific to their working location. What this means is properties built on a flood plain must have additional protection built into their design. The same goes for those in locations at higher risk of fire, erosion, and even earthquakes. If the firm building them wants to maximise the safety of those that use them and ensure that their work stands the test of time.
In the UK as in other parts of the world, there are many rules to follow in case of a road traffic accident. But sadly, not many drivers are aware of these rules, and what they should really do in the event they are in a road traffic accident. If you are involved in a road accident through no fault of your own, you should definitely know what to do. It’s one thing to keep calm, but another to know precisely what is required of you. Here, then, are some of the top questions asked about dealing with road accidents – and the answers. What should I do right after an accident? Any driver in the UK is obligated by law to stop after an accident, regardless of the severity of the accident or who was to blame. If you don’t stop, you could be imprisoned for a maximum of six months, and you can even be fined as well. Additionally, if your vehicle can still be driven, find a place where you can park it. Try to look for a safe area such as the hard shoulder or off the road completely, if possible. Once you have found your safe spot to park your vehicle, you should switch off the vehicle’s engine and turn on the hazard lights. Unless you have injuries that prevent it, get yourself and anyone in the car with you out and to a safe place. If there is anyone who is injured, emergency services should be called right away. What information should be collected after an accident? If you are the driver, you should give your name and address, vehicle details, and insurance information to the other party – or parties – involved in the road accident. With all the pertinent information exchanged between all drivers involved, it may help speed up the claims procedure. You should also report the road accident to the nearest police station within the next 24 hours. You can report the accident online by using the police RTI (road traffic incident) form. Details should also be provided, especially if there has been damage caused to a parked vehicle or property. You should, however, contact the police immediately if there is suspicion that drugs or alcohol are involved. Keep a note of the details of the accident, such as the date and time, the weather conditions, and the name and contact details of any witnesses. If you can, take photographs of the accident scene as well. This is easier to do nowadays as most people have mobile phones, and it will help you with your claim when necessary, as confirmed by road accident claim Gloucester experts like those from Shires Law. If I crash into the rear of a vehicle, is it always my fault? In general, yes, as you should always leave an adequate distance between your vehicle and the one in front. Maintaining a safe distance behind a vehicle allows you time to react and brake if the first vehicle slows down. In light of this, it is unlikely for an insurer to decide that liability for the accident should be attributed to the driver of the vehicle in front of you. If you have any doubts about the legalities of your insurance claim, claiming damages for any personal injuries sustained, and so on, you should seek expert legal advice as soon as you can.
Twelve months on from the launch of a ground-breaking emergency lighting software technology, Abtec Building Technologies (Abtec BT) says it is now as important as ever for building managers and operators to focus on building safety. ARGOHub, a software as a service (SaaS) offering, was launched by Abtec BT last Autumn after five years in development in response to an urgent market need for secure, robust emergency lighting reporting solutions. With post-Grenfell legislative changes continuing to hit the headlines, the subject of building safety – and buildings which fail to keep occupants safe – remains headline news. Most recently, residents raised concerns about the safety of homes in Brooke House, Basildon, where emergency lighting did not work; the leader of Basildon Council said he would “do what he could” to help residents find new homes if they wanted to move.* In the commercial sector, with more people returning to their place of work, Abtec BT believes even greater work is needed to shine a spotlight on the ways in which building users can be assured of safety at all times. Dave Watkins, Director of Abtec Building Technologies, comments: “Building safety continues to need the full attention of our industry – and there must be a ‘no compromises’ approach from building owners and managers. Emergency lighting is about more than the luminaires, and building managers and operators must be sure they can control, monitor and test their emergency lighting systems with ease and confidence. Yet too many buildings reman ill-equipped with outdated systems and testing practices. This means they cannot be relied upon in the event of an incident. “With the recently launched Draft Building Safety Bill, those with responsibility must take a good look at their existing system and ask themselves whether they it is truly fit for purpose. We know from experience that integrating technology such as ARGOHub into building management systems will enhance overall building safety and bring peace of mind to building owners, operators and users everywhere.” Technology solution Launched September last year, lARGOHub allows building managers to maintain a close watch on system performance and respond quickly to actual or potential faults. For clients with multiple sites, ARGOHub can be integrated with Google Maps to provide location-based monitoring worldwide. Fully supportive of the current industry standards, ARGOHub can be tested in accordance with BS EN 50172:2004/BS 5266-1:2016, which specify the minimum provision and testing of emergency lighting for different premises. For more information visit www.argohub.com.
The UK government has recently published a draft landmark bill which is designed to improve residents’ safety in their homes. The Building Safety Bill, which marks one of the biggest changes to building safety in 40 years, will introduce a new era of accountability, making it clear where the responsibility for managing risks lies throughout the design, construction and occupation of buildings. Ambar Kelly welcomes the new set of rules, which will apply to buildings over 18m. Yet are there any loopholes? Whilst the bill provides a framework for accountability and safety, what does it say about risk? The Building Safety Bill gives residents greater agency when it comes to assuring their security. It will enable them to have access to safety information and give them the opportunity to develop safety proposals if they feel their security is being compromised. As such, the bill will introduce tougher sanctions for building owners who fail to meet their obligations. Central to ensuring the regime is effective will be a powerful new Building Safety Regulator housed within the Health and Safety Executive. It will have responsibility for implementing and enforcing a more stringent regime for higher-risk buildings and will oversee the safety and performance of all buildings. What of product testing? Although the bill is an important framework which will hopefully provide greater accountability and safety when it comes to building design, there are some ambiguities. The first and foremost is in regards to testing. Under clause 92 of the Construction Products section of the draft bill, it highlights: “The bill provides powers so that all construction products marketed in the UK fall under a regulatory regime, allowing them to be withdrawn from the market if they present a risk.” Whilst this is important as it will ensure unfit products are not used on building schemes, there is little to no mention of the testing which is needed to ensure these products fit the bill. How are they going to determine which products are a potential risk? In the public inquiry for the fire which tore its way through King’s Cross underground station in 1987 it was stipulated that going forward, combustible and flammable materials cannot be used on a development. The inquiry came to this conclusion as the cause of the fire was said to be a discarded match which had caught on the wooden escalators that had been in use for over 76 years. We all know that wood is a highly flammable material, so it beggar’s belief how that was deemed appropriate for all those years. But risky materials are continually put into use when it comes to riser shaft design. GRP grating is regularly installed within riser shaft design, as it is a cheap product that is widely accepted as preventing falls from height. Its effectiveness is questionable, however. When installed in a riser’s chimney-style environment, GRP grating with an Iso resin is found to be extremely flammable. It is an oil-based product which readily burns. This makes the BS 476-7 classification unsuitable for its use within a riser shaft. With safety at stake, why is this material used in high-rise construction? Why aren’t Phenolic GRP (identifiable, as it is red/brown in colour) or steel modular riser flooring units used? In my opinion it is because the testing is not rigorous enough. Iso resin GRP grating is said to meet BS 476-7, the regulation relating to the measure of the surface spread of flame, but only in flat sheet form, tested vertically (so grating cannot meet that test). Although Iso resin meets these tests on paper, when installed in its real-time environment the reality is far different. The bill must therefore, place greater emphasis on improving product testing as the current framework contains too many loopholes which compromise safety. Ambar Kelly has undertaken evidence-based, independent fire tests in the environment in which our product, RiserSafe® will be employed. Our tests were carried out in the Building Research Establishment (BRE) fire hall in Watford. It was found that when RiserSafe® is used in combination with a fire compound, two hours of horizontal fire protection is achieved. We can make factory-based load tests of up to 2.5 kN/m2, to ensure that our product works as a barrier to the spread of smoke and flame. It must be said that the draft Building Safety Bill represents a monumental step-change for the construction industry in terms of safety. It will go some way to inciting change for the better. My main concern however, is in terms of product testing, an area which the bill has evaded. Testing is of primal importance to ensure construction products hit the mark on safety. If it isn’t made an essential consideration, where does that leave the industry?
Building Passports as a means of certifying key information about a property are an extension of recommendations made in Dame Judith Hackitt’s review of building regulations and fire safety. In the report, which was published in following the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy, Dame Judith spoke of the need to create a ‘golden thread’ of data about a building for a supply chain of stakeholders from architects to engineers, through to building safety managers and end users. And whilst this ‘thread’ applied specifically to high-rise buildings, it has given credence to the idea that the same informative package could be produced for regular housing. So, how would a building passport work, and how useful might it be in addressing issues relating to the UK’s energy deficient housing stock? In essence, a building passport would be a constructional blueprint of a property. This would include information such as the thermal standards a property was built to – and that it achieved those standards – and the type of materials that were used to build it inside and out. Accessible to housing and building authorities, such data would be crucial to ensuring all homes within a new development, for example, were built to the same standard. It would also provide householders with a clearly-defined, certified baseline upon which to improve on their home’s energy performance, should they so wish. Call to action For easy accessibility, building passport data would be held digitally. This would lead in all probability to terabytes of information needing to be stored securely but accessibly. This information would need to be kept up to date when changes to the building are made, such as changing the boiler or building an extension, so it remains accurate and relevant to the building. The Insulation Manufacturer’s Association estimates more than 3,400 homes would need to be upgraded per day from now until 2035 in order to meet the government’s target for EPC band C for homes . Unfortunately, the necessary renovation work is nowhere near starting; a fact which is made all the more lamentable by the persisting instance of houses being built to outdated regulations. In my opinion, the government should be tackling the issue of Britain’s poorly-insulated homes with the same vigour it applies to other public endeavours and displays of national infrastructure investment. Easy access Having outlined the likely logistical issues involved with processing and storing a huge amount of building passport data, it is worth pointing out that the information is already available – it’s just a case of collating it. BIM, EPC certificates, U-value calculations and supporting data sheets are a basis for modern housing developments. If accessible in one easily downloadable digital space, this information would make retrofitting or altering a property to an acceptable standard a far more straightforward prospect. In her review of building regulations and fire safety, Dame Judith makes it clear that the UK construction industry requires a sea change in culture and practice to improve its all-round standards. Initiatives such as the building passport would certainly represent a positive break from tradition, as it would remove the element of guesswork involved in increasing a property’s energy efficiency. In knowing what a home’s performance is to begin with, small changes could be made to further improve it. And small changes on a mass scale could make a huge difference to the country’s emissions count. The government has shown favour to Dame Judith’s golden thread in relation to high-rise buildings, so it’s hoped the same accord will be bestowed upon a similar scheme for standard properties. As stated, upgrading nearly 30 million poorly-insulated UK homes represents an almighty challenge. Therefore, the imminent issue of building passports for new properties offers an easier option. It would mean we wouldn’t be adding to an already serious problem.
Responding to official planning performance statistics for 2019/20 published today, trade body Homes for Scotland (HFS) described another overall increase in decision times for housing applications as “hugely frustrating”. Director of Planning Tammy Swift-Adams said: “Despite an 11.5 per cent drop in the number of decisions made on local housing applications (defined as being for less than 50 homes), the time taken to make those decisions crept up for the second year running. “This is concerning given that these small developments are, by nature, the lifeblood of SME home building businesses – a sector supported by Scottish Government loan funding during the crisis, but also needing local government support if it is to thrive”. “Things are no more positive for major housing applications (those for 50 or more homes), decisions on which were two weeks slower than the previous year at 37.5 weeks – more than double the 16 week statutory timescale.” “With all of the consultation and discussion time that has gone into improving the planning system, it is extremely frustrating to see this evidence that improvements are just not emerging on the ground.” “And, of course, we also await the Scottish Government’s decision on whether planning application fees will be increased again. This decision, and the timing of its implementation, must be made in the context of this performance – with home builders currently receiving some of the poorest service across the system whilst already paying the lion’s share of fees.” Swift-Adams also points to the Scottish Government’s new consultation document proposing changes to Scottish Planning Policy. These include removing the principle that planning applications that will help solve housing shortages should be looked upon favourably by decision-makers. The paper also seems to suggest that planning authorities should focus more singly on allocating their preferred sites and pay less regard to whether or not the homes that are needed are actually going to be built. She continued: “Scottish families and communities don’t need housing land. They want real homes to live in, and more of them. That requires a better functioning system and policy that encourages local planning authorities to ensure the sites they choose for housing development can and will be delivered. With the housing market showing encouraging signs post-lockdown, now is the time for local authorities to work closely with home builders to deliver the homes required.”
