by Richard Nelson, Co-Founder, DON’T WASTE BUILDINGS and Founder/MD, Abyss Global
I read an article in The Guardian today (Untouched parts of England’s green belt at risk amid housing target pressure) that got me slightly annoyed.
You can follow the above link to the article, but essentially it talks about how green-belt campaigners are feeling slighted by the government’s wording in proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which apparently says that councils lacking enough brownfield or ‘grey-belt’ sites for housing construction will be expected to offer untouched ‘green-belt’ plots for construction in order to meet targets.
Rather than pitting opposing factions against each other, why not come together and look at the empty homes and empty buildings across the UK as part of the housing solution?
Empty properties that are owned by absentee or disengaged landlords will not necessarily be identified by local councils as brownfield or grey-belt, yet they suck the life out of local communities nonetheless. Repurposing them for good quality housing (or other productive socio-economic-environmental uses), rather than building new, would help us meet the housing need while also meeting our statutory net zero carbon targets (The Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment) Order 2019).
At DON'T WASTE BUILDINGS we are advocating that retrofitting and reusing empty and disused buildings will not only help the UK meet its statutory net zero carbon targets (retrofitting incurs about 50% less, or more, embodied carbon than new builds), but also it will enable the government to deliver the 1.5m homes it is promising, as retrofitted properties can usually be delivered in half the time or less than new builds. (And, by the way, trying to deliver 1.5m all new-build homes will wipe out our carbon budget entirely.)
Empty properties, which are usually seen as unloved eyesores in many councils, can be turned into much needed and valuable social and economic assets, while helping to alleviate some of the environmental damage that construction causes — the industry is responsible for about 27% of the UK’s carbon emissions and a whopping 60% of waste!!
Think about it: In one policy move — modifying the NPPF to include regulations on the level of embodied or whole-life carbon in building projects — the government would stimulate:
the presumption in favour of retaining/reusing existing properties
providing social, economic and environmental benefits to local communities
the growth of low-carbon and net zero carbon building materials
an increased use of recycled or reused materials
re-skilling our workforce for the green economy
providing new employment opportunities
growth and innovation as existing companies re-tool their products and services to be more green, and new companies are created to meet the demands of the green economy
satisfying the country’s housing need
improving public health through the provision of decent homes
And so on. There would be numerous benefits from regulating embodied carbon.
It makes sense. Much more sense than arguing about green, grey, brown or any other colour belts.