Net Zero Carbon Development Plan Document - Regulation 19

1.1.2 Set specific and ambitious maximum carbon emission standards. Can we adopt specific carbon emission targets in kwhr/m2/yr (not just percentages) as is widely recommended? And make the energy efficiency first principle first and more strongly - the cheapest energy is the energy we do not use.
Where in the document do we specify BREEAM for all developments, domestic and non-domestic now that CC3 is being superseded? Or does BREEAM apply only to non-residential buildings - in which case what standard for residential is being specified?
Each BREEAM standard needs to be specifically set by category and date and at maximum energy credits NOT very good to eliminate any non carbon emission/energy loopholes being exploited.
1.1.3 WDC as building and landowner should already be leading more strongly by example, by applying the proposed DPD standards - or better - in all projects since the CEAP was adopted, not waiting for formal DPD adoption; for example in Kenilworth Leisure, Spencer Yard and any others from WDC or partners in the pipeline.

The role of the District in generating inward and outward flows of commuter traffic (principally to/from Coventry and Birmingham) should be highlighted. To minimise carbon emissions from current and future traffic flows the DPD should explicitly favour new development with minimum dwelling densities (NPPF paras 124/5) especially along public transport routes; and co-located as far as practical with planned employment locations (both within and outside the District), to encourage shorter journeys and greater use of active transport

1.1.2 Set specific and ambitious maximum carbon emission standards. Can we adopt specific carbon emission targets in kwhr/m2/yr (not just percentages) as is widely recommended? And make the energy efficiency first principle first and more strongly - the cheapest energy is the energy we do not use.
Where in the document do we specify BREEAM for all developments, domestic and non-domestic now that CC3 is being superseded? Or does BREEAM apply only to non-residential buildings - in which case what standard for residential is being specified?
Each BREEAM standard needs to be specifically set by category and date and at maximum energy credits NOT very good to eliminate any non carbon emission/energy loopholes being exploited.
1.1.3 WDC as building and landowner should already be leading more strongly by example, by applying the proposed DPD standards - or better - in all projects since the CEAP was adopted, not waiting for formal DPD adoption; for example in Kenilworth Leisure, Spencer Yard and any others from WDC or partners in the pipeline.

The role of the District in generating inward and outward flows of commuter traffic (principally to/from Coventry and Birmingham) should be highlighted. To minimise carbon emissions from current and future traffic flows the DPD should explicitly favour new development with minimum dwelling densities (NPPF paras 124/5) especially along public transport routes; and co-located as far as practical with planned employment locations (both within and outside the District), to encourage shorter journeys and greater use of active transport

How can this DPD ensure that new development does not add to the District's deficit if the many thousands of new homes envisaged will NOT be net zero and there will be significant retrofitting?

1.3.1 The objective should also cover standards not just for new buildings but for all retrofitting, refurbishment, conversion and extension projects on existing buildings; and planned sample inspections by trained zero-engineers to ensure objective emissions are being sustained.
It is recognised that these standards may need to be more practical and flexible for existing buildings but should be as explicit and ambitious as possible. They also need to reflect an associated objective to encourage refurbishment of old stock rather than demolition/newbuild in order to minimise net additions to embedded carbon. See comments under section 9 & 10 below

Support the objective to bring forward Future Homes Standard policies in Warwick District. However could this be more ambitious? Have we considered the policies developed by Bath, Central Lincolnshire, Greater Cambridge for example?

Add reference to paras 124/5 (more efficient dwelling densities) and section 12 paras 126 to 136 (the importance of good design) to put the emphasis on sustainability in a fuller balanced planning context.

See last comment. Will new guidance on density and design (Plan, DPD or SPD) be required to incorporate new carbon emission standards?

Useful background

Useful background

What does the policy aim to deliver in terms of unregulated energy emissions - is that also net zero? This needs to be made clear.

Not just newbuilds - see detailed Comment under 1.3.

Expand 'earlier where possible' to include a firm commitment to apply this net zero policy to all current and future developments/refurbishments of WDC property and land.

Is gas explicitly ruled out as implied by 7.3? If not, some hard conditions need to be stated and applied to avoid significant additional costs for future owners when fitting air source heat pumps:
· No combi boilers
· No microbore pipes
· Need to allow internal space for a hot water cylinder and heat store.
· The cylinder should be equipped with an immerser linked to the PV panels.