黑洞社区

Homes England is considering bringing in tough new sustainability standards for the homes produced by its partners or on its land, Housing Today can reveal.

The possibility of new stretching standards is being considered as part of a major review of the housing quango being conducted by its new chairman, former Argent boss Peter Freeman.

In an exclusive interview, Stephen Kinsella (pictured), the agency鈥檚 chief land and development officer, told Housing Today there was a 鈥渓ive conversation鈥� about whether the agency needed to ask development partners to produce homes to higher environmental standards than those called for by building regulations.

>>

The comments come after the government said at the start of the year that it wanted all new-build housing to be 鈥渮ero carbon ready鈥� by 2025 鈥� requiring big improvements in fabric efficiency and cutting homes off from mains gas.

Freeman said in an interview last month that 鈥渘et zero鈥� was one of 10 priorities he had identified for the agency during the course of the review so far.

His review was launched in the wake of the , following rumours of disagreements between Walkley and the secretary of state, Robert Jenrick.

Kinsella said: 鈥淲e currently require builders to build in accordance with regulations. The question is, do we set higher standards to show leadership, and more importantly to allow the industry to understand and learn before they need to deliver the new requirements on all their sites?

鈥淲e鈥檙e having a conversation at the moment [鈥�] we haven鈥檛 landed that yet as part of the strategic plan refresh. It鈥檚 part of the conversation with government around how we support the industry.

鈥淚t鈥檚 really important that we aren鈥檛 just able to deliver higher standards but we are also able to deliver 300,000 homes at higher standards, and every player in the housebuilding sector is able to deliver it.鈥�

Kinsella said the agency was also considering imposing higher standards, beyond those required by building regulations or planning, in other areas. He said the conversation included 鈥渉ow the agency does more in cross-cutting areas 鈥� I would include net zero, biodiversity, design, modern methods of construction鈥�.

If the agency did decide to go down that route, he said, not only would it start to require higher build standards on its land holding, but that also 鈥渙ur programmes will need to incorporate them鈥�.

From this year Homes England has started requiring strategic partners in its affordable housing programme to produce 25% of new homes using MMC, however, it currently only requires homes it funds to meet the usual regulatory standards for energy efficiency.

During the run-up to the previous 鈥渮ero carbon鈥� target for new-build housing in 2016, which was ditched by the coalition in 2015, Homes England, then operating as the Homes and Communities Agency, required partners to meet environmental standards above and beyond those required by law.

Despite the potential change in direction, Kinsella said the industry should not expect a huge shift in Homes England鈥檚 strategy following the review. He said Freeman had been 鈥渞eally impressed鈥� with the agency鈥檚 performance and  people should be 鈥渃areful not to overstate鈥� the significance of the review.

He said the outcome will be finalised in the autumn. The body had agreed with government that the review will see the agency update its strategic plan, formed when the body was re-branded as Homes England in 2018. The outcome is to be agreed with the Treasury as part of the planned three-year spending review due in the autumn.

Allison Whittington, head of housing at housing warranty provider Zurich said she 鈥渟trongly welcomed鈥� the idea of tougher standards. However, she said the plan did not go far enough and 鈥渞isks creating a two tier system鈥�, calling instead for 鈥渕inimum resilience鈥� standards for all new homes to protect them from the impacts of climate change.

She said: 鈥淲ith the unknown impact of climate change on the built environment, minimum resilience standards will ensure greater levels of protection are provided as a matter of course.鈥�