36
INDUSTRY VIEWFINDER
down, bringing in more use of local weather data, and carbon emissions reporting. Whether or not any of these are being fully considered, as HEM’s 2027 launch looms, is impossible to say. Specifi c improvements they would like to see, shown in verbatim comments, included a need for consistency and clarity in data, and less scope for different assessors to have differing interpretations, and “straightforward reporting that architects, contractors and clients can all understand.” Also needed, said respondents, was more clarity on the new inputs and information architects will need to provide for compliance, plus more certainty on default values. And, when manufacturer-specifi c performance data can be used, a clearer audit trail from design assumptions to as-built evidence would improve confi dence.
How important is third-party verifi ed testing data when specifying products for Future Homes Standard compliance?
sizes, 66% said overheating had only ‘somewhat affected’ designs. What overheating mitigation strategies were they most frequently adopting? Perhaps surprisingly, ‘solar control glazing’ was number one, with 70% picking it, whereas reduction of glazing size on facades was only slightly behind, at 64%. Speaking to the UK’s lack of facility for built-in external shading options currently due to inherited design precepts, external shading was 10 points behind, at 54%. Interestingly, natural ventilation was a popular choice at 44%, although whether opening windows without a cross- ventilation strategy will continue to be a viable option in hotter summers looks unlikely. And changing buildings’ orientation was clearly a diffi cult nut to crack in residential scenarios, with only 16% choosing this strategy.
Home Energy Model improvements We asked a handful of key questions around what needed to be addressed in HEM (and its notional building), to improve on the current ‘interim’ SAP 10.3; the top answer was ‘clarity on design and specifi cation’ (inferring a need for clarity on the ramifi cations of certain design decisions within HEM). 80% picked this, but EPC metrics (with EPC also about to be updated) were critical, with 75% picking it. Also needing addressing were overheating, ‘fabric calculations shortcomings,’ the ‘infl exibility of the PV requirement’ in SAP 10.3, meaning mandatory 40% of ground fl oor area), ‘dual running issues’ with 10.3 and HEM once it is published, and lower
The comments submitted centred on the need for performance data to be robust and reliably consistent, “not assumptions that don’t refl ect real world situations,” and which were unambiguous on the notional building itself. Regional weather data should also be included, designers can interrogate earlier in the design process, plus clearer info on overheating, fabric and services, “so we can understand where the main compliance risks sit,” as well as how much fl exibility there is around the standard specifi cation. The model needed to have “more dependable product inputs and fewer assumptions that are diffi cult to verify on live projects,” and outputs that were “clearer so value engineering decisions can be assessed before they create a compliance problem.” Also there should be clearer recognition of the impact of installation quality and commissioning, and guidance on “what evidence is needed at each design stage.” We also asked whether respondents believed that SAP 10.3 (and the notional building) were a fi t-for-purpose interim measure. Strangely, given the responses to how 10.3 should be altered, the majority were ‘unsure’ around whether it was fi t for purpose. But a combined 81% were unsure or defi nite no’s – amounting to a conclusively lukewarm vote.
Cost impacts & stakeholder reaction Lastly, compared with current practice, we asked what impact architects expect the Future Homes Standard to have on construction costs per home? This was a broad and somewhat hypothetical question, and there were a broad range of responses – while 16% thought that only 1K-5K would be added to the build cost, 28% thought it would be 10K-£20K, and 3% even thought it could be over 30K per home. This not only suggests applying the full palette of insulation, PV, heat pumps and other infrastructure, but also potentially designers working in higher-end markets. The fi gures on whether clients, contractors and planners were accepting the design changes required for FHS compliance refl ected these infl ated costs, with a broad middle being seen in responses; 72% said it was a case of ‘slight acceptance,’ but there was a worrying segment of 25% saying that the uplifts and changes were ‘not accepted’ at all. These are all crucial challenges to resolve for design teams as we approach FHS implementation next year.
For the full white paper, visit
www.insights.netmagmedia.co.uk
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
ADF OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2026
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108
