Energy Statement vs Part L: planning or building control?
An Energy and Sustainability Statement satisfies planning policy before consent; Part L calculations satisfy building regulations before and after construction.
They are produced at different stages, for different regulators, against different targets — and one does not discharge the other. The Energy Statement demonstrates to the local planning authority that the scheme follows the energy hierarchy and meets local carbon reduction policy, often with an on-site percentage target and a carbon offset payment. Part L demonstrates to building control that the built form complies with national minimum standards.
Energy Statement vs Part L, attribute by attribute
| Attribute | Energy Statement | Part L |
|---|---|---|
| Regulator | Local planning authority | Building control |
| Stage | Pre-application to determination | Design stage and as-built |
| Target | Local policy, often percentage reductions | National TER, TPER and fabric standards |
| Typical content | Be lean, clean, green, seen; offset calculation | BRUKL output, evidence pack, EPC |
| Consequence of failure | Refusal or a condition you cannot discharge | No completion sign-off |
Which one applies to you
Choose Energy Statement when
- /A major planning application is being prepared
- /A London borough or similar authority requires policy compliance
- /A planning condition on energy must be discharged
Choose Part L when
- /Construction is about to start or complete
- /Design changes have moved the scheme away from the consented model
Keeping both models with one consultant matters: schemes routinely gain consent on an energy strategy that the as-built Part L model then contradicts, and reconciling them late is expensive.
Common questions
+Can one report cover planning and building control?
No, but they should share one underlying model so the consented strategy and the compliance submission stay aligned.