Mon, 17 Aug 2026 01:54:53 +0100 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11189#Comment_11189 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11189#Comment_11189 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:14:00 +0000 ally.gill https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11193#Comment_11193 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11193#Comment_11193 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:41:32 +0000 skywalker
As for 'green bling' almost any develoment in the Thames Gateway you care to look at is claiming high environmental standards & there are tons of grants/funds being supplied by HMG there (majority for infrastructure). Though high environmental standards there tends to mean homogeneous manicured street scenes. Should be enough happening there to get you started.

S.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11194#Comment_11194 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11194#Comment_11194 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:49:27 +0000 jon
You've stumbled upon a difficult subject: You will find it difficult to get real answers.

As skywalker says, development is about making money. Bling abounds. Grants are rarely of value. Building standards will make the production of buildings more expensive. Development these days is largely controlled by a relatively small number of developers.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11195#Comment_11195 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11195#Comment_11195 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:55:07 +0000 skywalker
Good luck!

S.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11196#Comment_11196 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11196#Comment_11196 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:58:45 +0000 skywalker https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11201#Comment_11201 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11201#Comment_11201 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:50:13 +0000 ally.gill https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11202#Comment_11202 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11202#Comment_11202 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:54:24 +0000 ally.gill https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11204#Comment_11204 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11204#Comment_11204 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:27:04 +0000 nigel Developers baulk at the extra cost because it will devalue their existing landbank.

If government set out long term improvements in standards developers would be able to predict these increasing costs and reflect these in the price they pay for land.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11207#Comment_11207 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11207#Comment_11207 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:44:13 +0000 skywalker
Generally speaking the developers only need to up the ante on one house of each type within a development as usually only the first one of each type finished is tested (so if you ever buy a brand new house ask which one was finished first!). The rest may be constructed as well but my experience (I've walked around a lot of big building sites) is that they are often 'less carefull' with the rest. Unless random testing is done (or all properties are routinely tested) on completion and say 2-3 years later (with a remedial cost penalty to the developer) it is my contention that no house (or at best a vanishingly small number of commercially built ones and the odd self build) gets to part l (as ammended) or stays there in terms of performance for more than a couple of years (if that). I hope I am wrong.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11209#Comment_11209 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11209#Comment_11209 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:47:02 +0000 tony
Green and sustainable issues seem have become a marketing tool without any more changes than are necessary under part l and planning rules.

Minimum action seems the way ahead and as skywalker points out profits are their goal not good/green/sustainable homes these are merely incidental.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11238#Comment_11238 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11238#Comment_11238 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:29:35 +0000 Jeff https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11239#Comment_11239 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11239#Comment_11239 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:54:53 +0000 jon
Yes, it is feasible. Providing that they haven't already paid for the land at current prices. Of course, to get planning permission at all for a large development it takes many years so they will have already paid for a lot of land at current prices: If buyers cap their spend, to compensate for more difficult times, they are most likely to wind down operations to keep their core businesses going, to land-bank what else they have and to stop buying land. This, of course, may make it a tad difficult for those councils looking for development partners to enable them to comply with their development allotments. It is going to make it especially difficult given that most councils seem to be after higher social provisions (35%+) and increased Section 106/278/78 requirements:

Profit margins on the building component of development are generally quite tight. The huge profit gains have been from the rising prices that buyers have been willing to spend on the right to occupy land for residential use: So the profit is associated with the land and development rights rather then the building of that development: All profits may have already been accounted for within the land value of many existing potential developments. Rather than expanding supply, if buyers cap or lower spend limits, the industry is likely to contract further (we are already at an all-time low for supply).

Hope this helps]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11247#Comment_11247 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11247#Comment_11247 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:18:06 +0000 tony
It is more likely that the number of bricklayers labourers is the critical controlling factor here.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11250#Comment_11250 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11250#Comment_11250 Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:37:47 +0000 ally.gill regarding pre/post planning profits on land value i thought thats where the council gets in for their section 106 payments for infrastructure. (http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolicyimplementation/planningobligations/)

so a region specific developer is predominantly going to be influenced by councils local development plans: (http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/regionallocal/)
availability of local labour force, housing demand and buyers energy performance awareness, quality certification standard check-ups across all/random properties, technologies will be specified based on most efficient 'supply cost/bling credits' ratio, performance will be a side issue (similar to door hardware, undersized boilers, dg windows (thats for you jeff), floor finishes)]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11255#Comment_11255 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11255#Comment_11255 Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:48:09 +0000 jon https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11256#Comment_11256 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11256#Comment_11256 Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:56:10 +0000 tony https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11257#Comment_11257 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1008&Focus=11257#Comment_11257 Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:03:14 +0000 jon