commercially non-viable for development. The sustainable developer considered the optimised design to hit a number of financial social objectives for local authorities which traditional developments would not meet. As such he considered the model as a low cost way to leverage unused council land assets not fit for other forms of sale or development. It was noted that if the model could be fed into council and LA carbon abatement targets he could see the potential to generate incomes for whilst reducing emissions, currently a cost to councils. By LA’s capitalising this value it was considered that it may be possible to subsidise the increased build cost of the home. Respondent SB2 (Interview). We are always looking to extract value… and add value which often leads us to look in all manner of places. Which ranges from patches of land you can bang up a few houses, which is easy, or to where you would have to stretch hard to find any opportunity to add value. Respondent SB2 (Interview): once you have the long term benefit of low bills and bit of money coming back at a domestic level a way of [us] there’s using that future promise to raise capital to subsidise the value of the house. 7.2 Market potential and demand HB1:…does the sector want a code 6 house? HB2: code 6. I just going to happen …Mainstream don’t think it’s Another critical barrier is accurately establishing demand (Byrne, 2005; Birrell & Bin, 1997; Wilkinson & Reed, 2008; Callcutt, 2007). Due to the way the development process works, this must occur at the development phase and be predicted accurately to protect investors. Demand is usually predicted using market and historical data, however, documented sales history for commercial scale zero carbon homes does not exist. Callcutt (2007) considers accurately predicting demand and managing uncertainty as essential components of successful development. Establishing if demand for a zero carbon home exists is
commercially non-viable for development. The sustainable developer considered the optimised design to hit a number of financial social objectives for local authorities which traditional developments would not meet. As such he considered the model as a low cost way to leverage unused council land assets not fit for other forms of sale or development. It was noted that if the model could be fed into council and LA carbon abatement targets he could see the potential to generate incomes for LA’s whilst reducing emissions, currently a cost to councils. By capitalising this value it was considered that it may be possible to subsidise the increased build cost of the home. Respondent SB2 (Interview). We are always looking to extract value… and add value which often leads us to look in all manner of places. Which ranges from patches of land you can bang up a few houses, which is easy, or to where you would have to stretch hard to find any opportunity to add value. Respondent SB2 (Interview): once you have the long term benefit of low bills and bit of money coming back at a domestic level there’s a way of [us] using that future promise to raise capital to subsidise the value of the house. 7.2 Market potential and demand HB1:…does the sector want a code 6 house? HB2: …Mainstream code 6. I just don’t think it’s going to happen Another critical barrier is accurately establishing demand (Byrne, 2005; Birrell & Bin, 1997; Wilkinson & Reed, 2008; Callcutt, 2007). Due to the way the development process works, this must occur at the development phase and be predicted accurately to protect investors. Demand is usually predicted using market and historical data, however, documented sales history for commercial scale zero carbon homes does not exist. Callcutt (2007) considers accurately predicting demand and managing uncertainty as essential components of successful development. Establishing if demand for a zero carbon home exists is
6105467_Final_Thesis_2016_10_01_For_Upload_7.docx