BERKELEY GROUP SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2011...Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 1 WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO The Berkeley Group is a residential-led property developer with a passion

Our visionfor the future

BERKELEY GROUP SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2011

Berkeley Group sustainability report 2011

The Berkeley Group Holdings plcBerkeley House19 Portsmouth RoadCobhamSurrey KT11 1JGUK

Telephone +44 (0)1932 868555Facsimile +44(0)1932 868 667Website www.berkeleygroup.co.uk

Design by Hunter Design

Printed in England by Alito GroupThis report is printed on Greencoat Silk

CONTENTS

Our vision for 2020 24–25Progress against Vision2020 commitments 26Progress review 27–31Case Study: An ecological legacy 32Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 33

Our vision for 2020 34–35Progress against Vision2020 commitments 36Progress review 37–40The Berkeley Foundation 41Case Study: An employment success 42Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 43

Our vision for 2020 44–45Progress against Vision2020 commitments 46Reporting to our investors 47Progress review 48–51Case Study: Interview with Lorraine Cooper, Sustainability Manager 52Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 53

Vision2020 performance summary 54–57Key performance indicators 58–65GRI compliance 66–69GRI performance indicators 70–73Upstream sustainability services – Jones Lang Lasalle 74–75

Our vision for 2020 16–17Progress against Vision2020 commitments 18The customer focus 19Progress review 20–21Case Study: What our customers think about sustainability 22Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 23

INTRODUCTION

THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE

BUILDING GREENER HOMES

DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

RUNNING A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS

PERfORMANCE REPORT

Who we are and what we do 1About this report 2Chairman’s statement 3Our strategy and achievements 4–5Managing Director’s statement 6–9Vision2020 10–11How we manage risks and opportunities through Vision2020 12–13Our Vision2020 governance structure 14Reviewing Vision2020 and defining our reporting content 15

Front Cover: Stanmore Place.

Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 1

WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO

The Berkeley Group is a residential-led property developer with a passion for creating successful, sustainable places. This begins with acquiring land in the right locations. We then develop schemes renowned for their design, public realm, transport, open space and access to employment and amenities - all the things that people look for in a place to live.

We operate in London and the South East at a natural size, respecting the cyclical nature of property development. Our core brands are Berkeley, St James, St George and St Edward, our joint venture with Prudential.

The developments we create range in size from under twenty homes to complex mixed-use urban regeneration schemes with over four thousand. The types of homes we build include contemporary urban apartments, refurbished historic buildings and traditional family homes. Our mixed-use developments incorporate offices, retail units, leisure facilities, hotels and restaurants.

We sell homes and commercial space to a broad range of customers; housing associations, universities, shared-ownership buyers, key workers, investors, private buyers and commercial occupiers.

The Berkeley Group is registered in the United Kingdom at Berkeley House, 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG.

For more information on the company, including information on the subsidiary and joint venture companies and for details of our respective ownership in each of these, please see our Annual Report and Accounts.

INTRODUCTION – SUSTAINABILITY REPORT

2 Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011

This sustainability report provides a summary of the progress Berkeley has made against our sustainability strategy for the period from May 2010 to April 2011. Within the report we provide readers with an overview of what Berkeley does, an explanation of Vision2020 and how it is being delivered, as well as case studies demonstrating how we incorporate sustainability into our work.

Berkeley uses the term ‘sustainability’ to describe how we manage the environmental, social and economic impacts of, and risks facing, our business in a responsible way. This applies to both the day-to-day management of our business and the developments that we build. This sustainability report aims to present a transparent review of our sustainability performance to our stakeholders. Therefore the content of the report was defined through an extensive materiality review which included consultation with a number of our key stakeholders.

LAyOUT

The first section of the report contains statements from both our Chairman and Managing Director. This is followed by a summary of our 2010/11 achievements and an overview of our sustainability strategy, Vision2020.

The next section is divided into four parts which reflect the key action areas in our Vision2020 strategy: The Customer Experience, Building Greener Homes, Delivering Sustainable Communities and Running a Sustainable Business.

The final section presents a detailed assessment of our performance, highlighting progress against our commitments and our key performance indicators.

SCOpE

All of Berkeley’s operations are included in the scope of this report as they all have sustainability impacts and are all under Berkeley’s direct control. This report also covers, where possible, those operations where we have an influence, e.g. our supply chain. Any areas where we do not have complete data to report against all of our operations are indicated within the report.

The report focuses on those issues that we consider most material to the running of our business, as identified by our materiality review (see page 15). Additional information on our business and its financial performance, corporate governance, regulatory issues and directors’ remuneration is provided in our Annual Report and Accounts. Full details of our approach to sustainability including all policies, additional case studies and performance data can be found on our sustainability website, www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/ investor-information/sustainability.

GLOBAL REpORTING INITIATIVE (GRI)

This year we are delighted to have self certified our sustainability reporting to Level B of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Framework. Our conformity with these guidelines and an explanation of how we comply with the GRI principles is available in our performance section of this report.

FEEDBACk

If you have any feedback or further questions about this report please contact [email protected]

ABOUT THIS REpORT



SUSTAINABILITY REPORT – INTRODUCTION


This is our tenth annual sustainability report. In the years since we published our first report in 2002, Berkeley has built a reputation as the most sustainable major housebuilder in Britain and created a robust strategy that reflects the ever demanding environment within which we operate.

In the introduction to our first sustainability report, I said that we needed to “bring together the short-term and long-term requirements of our shareholders with the desire to create communities that work for future generations”. We have delivered this ambition in the ensuing years by building homes and communities that are both commercially successful and sustainable in every sense: durable, desirable, convenient and healthy places to live. This approach is now embedded in our business through our Vision2020 strategy which we launched last year.

Over the last ten years it has been interesting to see the growth in the importance that companies in all sectors have given to sustainability. Almost every company now claims that sustainability is central to the way they work. I can only say that I am proud that this is genuinely true of Berkeley and has been for many years. It is why we perceive Vision2020 not simply as a sustainability strategy, but as a plan for the whole business.

Through Vision2020 we have set out our intention for Berkeley to be one of the most successful and sustainable businesses in Britain. We measure our success, in part, through strong financial performance and I am therefore pleased that our results for 2010/11 demonstrate that we are on track to achieve this element of our vision. We sold 2,544 homes and over 119,351 sq ft of commercial space, generating a Return on Equity for our shareholders of 15.3%. Looking to the future, we have 27,026 plots in our land bank and forward sales of over £813.5 million.

We are working in a tough financial climate. Public spending cuts, mortgage availability, and the shortage of housing affects everyone. And yet Berkeley is an optimistic business. We have made the most of improving market conditions in London and the South East, both in terms of sales and the purchase of land. We bring that same determination and drive to sustainability, which remains the pre-eminent challenge for us all.

Tony pidgley Chairman

“ WE pERCEIVE VISION2020 NOT SIMpLy AS A SUSTAINABILITy STRATEGy, BUT AS A pLAN FOR THE WHOLE BUSINESS”

MORE THAN A SUSTAINABILITy STRATEGy





OUR STRATEGy AND ACHIEVEMENTS



2010/11 pERFORMANCE

2010/11 pERFORMANCE

COMMITMENTS FROM MAy 2011


AMBITIONS FROM MAy 2012


COMMENTARy

COMMENTARy

OTHER pROGRESS IN 2010/11


The

cu

sTo

mer

ex

per

ien

ce

Del

iver

ing

su

sTa

ina

ble

co

mm

un

iTie

s

positioning our customers at the heart of every decision we make

Developing high quality places where people want to live, work and spend leisure time

96%

29%

The 2010/11 score of 96% continues the 5-year trend of improved customer service performance and emphasises the success of Vision2020 in embedding the commitment to The Customer Experience.

By designing homes to meet the Lifetime Homes standard, Berkeley ensures those homes are able to adapt to the changing needs of the residents who live in them during their life.100% of homes submitted for planning in 2010/11 committed to apply the Lifetime Homes principles in their design.

The commitment to sustainability and high environmental performance standards also applies to commercial units. This year, Berkeley completed 7,067m2 of commercial space, of which 45% was certified to BREEAM Very Good. 100% of commercial developments in planning have committed to achieve BREEAM Very Good.

Survey every customer to measure satisfaction and continue to target that over 90% would recommend us to a friend. Ensure that all commercial space and student accommodation achieves BREEAM Very Good or is capable of achieving BREEAM Very Good if the fit-out is to be undertaken by the tenant.

Achieve at least the Building for Life Silver Standard on all new developments.Apply Berkeley’s Community Engagement Strategy on all planning applications over 500 units.

Install Smart Meters in all new homes to help our customers understand their energy use.On selected developments provide customers with a ‘sustainability options’ package which enables them to purchase additional sustainability features for their homes.

Publish annually an independently verified assessment of the design quality of all new Berkeley developments.Ensure all homes meet the Lifetime Homes standard.

Berkeley demonstrates its commitment to delivering well-designed homes and communities by committing to the Building for Life Silver Standard on all schemes. In 2010/11, Stanmore Place achieved the Building for Life Gold Standard and a further four schemes achieved the Silver Standard. In addition, 43 schemes in planning have committed to achieving this standard.

Completed market research with 26% of customers to establish how sustainability issues influenced purchasing decisions. Communicated Vision2020 to customers via a number of mediums, including brochures, marketing boards, websites and Berkeley’s annual reports.

Achieved an average score in the Considerate Constructors Scheme of 35.5, higher than the UK all sector average.

of customers would “Recommend us to a friend”

of homes completed met the Lifetime Homes standard

Achieved BREEAM Very Good on

45% of completed commercial developments

5schemes achieved Building for Life Standard

The following table summarises Berkeley’s progress against the Vision2020 commitments we established in May 2010 and against our key performance indicators within each of our four Vision2020 action areas.


Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 5Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 5

More details on Berkeley’s 2010/11 sustainability performance and a full explanation of Vision2020 can be found on our website:www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/sustainability

2010/11 pERFORMANCE

2010/11 pERFORMANCE





COMMENTARy

COMMENTARy



bu

ilD

ing

gr

een

er h

om

esr

un

nin

g a

su

sTa

ina

ble

bu

sin

ess

Minimising the environmental impact of our homes

Managing the economic, social and environmental impacts of our business

65%

3.63

Of the 65% of certified units, 34% were certified to Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 with the remainder certified using the EcoHomes methodology. In addition, Berkeley started the first Code Level 4 development during 2010/11 at Ropetackle in Shoreham-by-Sea.

The Accident Incident Rate (AIR) achieved is 0.20 lower than 2009/10, despite an increase in the number of operatives employed on Berkeley sites. This result is also below the industry average.

Design all new homes to achieve at least Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.Consider future climate change risks as part of development design and construction.

Reduce operational carbon dioxide emissions by 5% annually until April 2012.Reuse or recycle over 80% of construction, demolition and excavation waste.

Design all new homes to achieve Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.Ensure over 75% of completed homes are supplied with energy from renewable or low carbon technologies.

Achieve a reportable accident rate of less than 3.5 incidents per 1000 employees and sub-contractors.Carry out audits of at least 25% of our suppliers to ensure compliance with our Sustainable Procurement Policy.

The percentage of development completed on brownfield land dropped below the target of 95% in 2010/11 due to completions occurring on four greenfield sites. In future years, Berkeley expects that this will rise back to the target level as the commitment to brownfield land is reflected in the land purchasing decisions made by the Group.

Berkeley collects data on all direct carbon emissions (electricity, gas, petrol, diesel consumption) and those relating to business travel. In 2010/11, the normalised direct emissions decreased by 3.94% against the 2009/10 baseline.

100% of sites submitted for planning are within 1km of a public transport node and provide cycle storage.96% of sites submitted for planning have committed to employing an ecologist.

Reused or recycled 82% of construction, demolition and excavation waste.Contributed over 600 hours of staff time to communities and charities.Enhanced the Good Work Health & Safety initiative and arranged to run contractor conferences during 2011/12 for sub-contractor Directors.

of completed homes certified using an environmental performance methodology

RIDDOR Accident Incident Rate of

Total Carbon Emissions of

1.81 tonnes CO2e per operative

92% of development completed on brownfield land

Some of our main commitments for the coming year and our ambitions for May 2012 onwards are also shown in the tables below. A total of 40 commitments were made in May 2010 and we have added a further seven new commitments from May 2011.



The Berkeley Group’s Managing Director, Rob perrins, reflects on how Berkeley has performed over the last year and highlights some of the challenges and opportunities he expects the business to face in the year ahead.

how does berkeley understand sustainability? The way Berkeley approaches sustainability is intrinsically different to most others in the industry. This difference begins at the point of land acquisition, with the purchase of sites in locations with great potential and scope to create a low carbon community. Good design gives us a way to transform these sites into successful places. Debate and collaboration with local people then shapes the way we think and work. The process culminates in offering our customers a home with sustainability woven right through it, but without the glaringly obvious kit and style that is typically associated with ‘green’ housing.

Over the last few years, the focus of the sustainability agenda has been on tackling climate change and reducing carbon emissions. These are both incredibly important – but they’re not the whole story. Sustainability is also about creating durable, beautiful places where people want to live, close to where they work. Buyers are looking for the chance to buy a home in a place where they will be comfortable and content, and often these qualities are created through investment in the landscape as well as the architecture of each development.

I am confident every developer can build low carbon homes. But the real Berkeley difference lies in combining this technical ability with a passion for creating the kind of places in which people find it easy to live healthy, happy and successful lives.

What has gone well over the past year? I’ve been delighted to see how well Vision2020 has been embraced both within the company and by our stakeholders. It’s a strategy for the whole business, not just a plan about environmental sustainability. Its influence now touches all parts of the business, from land and planning through to our customer service teams. It has made us re-evaluate some of our thinking and our processes, the net result of which is an even stronger focus on the customer, on good design and how we run a sustainable business.

Externally, we have won a raft of awards. These included first place in the 2010 NextGeneration Sustainable Communities Benchmark. Delivering sustainable communities is one of the four key areas in Vision2020 and this result is an endorsement of our approach. We also won PricewaterhouseCooper’s Building Public Trust Award for our sustainability reporting and Building Magazine’s Housebuilder of the Year.

“ I’VE BEEN DELIGHTED TO SEE HOW WELL VISION2020 HAS BEEN EMBRACED BOTH WITHIN THE COMpANy AND By OUR STAkEHOLDERS. IT’S A STRATEGy FOR THE WHOLE BUSINESS, NOT jUST A pLAN ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITy”


CREATING SUSTAINABLE pLACES TO BE pROUD OF



“ THE BERkELEy FOUNDATION FOCUSES ON SUppORTING yOUNG pEOpLE IN LONDON AND THE SOUTH EAST WHO ARE NOT IN EDUCATION, EMpLOyMENT OR TRAINING”


In March 2011, we launched The Berkeley Foundation. This is the first time any housebuilder has set up a foundation to spearhead its CSR programme. However, it’s not designed simply as a charitable initiative. I see it as part of how we help to make society sustainable. The Berkeley Foundation focuses on supporting young people in London and the South East who are not in education, employment or training. We know their fortunes are directly connected to the success of the places where Berkeley works, and we’re now working strategically with a small group of partners in the voluntary sector to support them. Sports coaching and housing advice form two of the major programmes we will help deliver.

In terms of the commitments made when we launched Vision2020, overall I am pleased to report good progress has been made during the course of the year. We have either met or are on track to meet the majority of our two-year commitments and have a clear understanding of what we need to do in the coming year to improve our performance. In particular, while we have not met our energy or water operational targets this year we have responded to this by putting in place some clear action-focused commitments for the coming year.

vision2020 was launched with a commitment to cut injury and accident rates to among the lowest in the industry. how has berkeley performed?Overall, our Health & Safety performance this year has been very good. We have achieved a RIDDOR injury rate of 3.63, which is well below the all industry average. However, it’s with great regret that I have to report a fatality at a construction site on which we were acting as the client. Our thoughts and deepest sympathies are with the worker’s friends and family for the loss. This incident reminds us that it only takes one mistake, one lapse in concentration, for a serious accident to occur. That’s why we launched our “Good Work” campaign last year and put considerable effort into delivering its key message during 2010/11. Good Health & Safety is as much about the behaviour of workers as it is about the working environment and we need to pay equal attention to both to improve our Health & Safety performance further.



Do you think that new policies from the coalition government improve the operating environment for berkeley? More house-building and a healthy housing market will be essential catalysts for growth in Britain. We therefore welcome the Government’s recent moves to support the housing market and deregulate the construction industry.

The announcement that ‘Zero Carbon’ Building Regulations from 2016 will only hold developers accountable for those carbon dioxide emissions covered by Building Regulations has been the subject of heavy criticism from some parties. However, on the vast majority of schemes, it would not have been possible to generate enough energy on-site to offset these non-regulated emissions. The offsetting would have had to occur through off-site “Allowable Solutions” with no direct carbon or cost saving to the householder. Accounting for these non-regulated emissions would also have imposed an increased cost burden on housebuilders, potentially affecting the viability of marginal sites. The announcement therefore helps to increase housing delivery and we welcome it.

In our experience, the introduction of the Localism Bill has had an impact. Outside of London, some local authorities have appeared to delay decision-making until they fully understand the context. The Bill also puts great emphasis on community empowerment. I think this will focus more attention on the social dimensions of sustainability. We all debate the environmental agenda constantly but there is much less analysis of the social and economic aspects of place-making. I think the Prime Minister’s determination to promote a debate about well-being and happiness sets an important challenge for residential developers and it could be that the Coalition Government will motivate people to address this dimension of sustainability as strongly as the previous Government did carbon.

What are the big sustainability challenges faced by berkeley?The tightening of Building Regulations in 2013 towards ‘Zero Carbon’ in 2016 continues to be the most significant challenge that we face in the short- to medium-term. These targets will have major implications for the way we design and build homes. We need to find technical solutions that allow us to deliver carbon reductions whilst at the same time building homes that continue to be healthy, functional places in which our customers want to live.

“ THE TIGHTENING OF BUILDING REGULATIONS IN 2013 TOWARDS ‘ZERO CARBON’ IN 2016 CONTINUES TO BE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE THAT WE FACE IN THE SHORT- TO MEDIUM-TERM ”

The Berkeley Group, working in London & the South East8 Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011



The next long-term challenge is likely to be around climate change adaptation. There is a constant design challenge in creating homes that on one hand have extremely high levels of insulation and on the other are not at risk of overheating in a warmer future climate. Adaptation also involves a better understanding of green infrastructure and the design of spaces between buildings. Intelligent use of high quality open space will need to be a feature of every new housing development, helping us keep places cool and handle extreme weather conditions.

What are your priorities for the year ahead? Over the past year, Berkeley has bought some exceptional development sites in excellent locations. We will not compromise on the quality of homes we build in these locations. This will mean that in a housing market where people have choice and can demand the best, we are going to be very well positioned.

At the same time, we have been able to test new ways of bringing homes to the market: for example, through our award-winning Private Rental Initiative with the HCA. I think we need to encourage a shift in public attitudes towards the private rental sector. There is a broader marketplace than people sometimes consider and the Government could actively help to shape the way people think about this type of housing.

We have a number of exciting new projects underway, including sites at 375 Kensington High Street, Dickens Yard in Ealing, Tideway Wharf in Vauxhall and Crossrail at Woolwich. I look forward to embedding our Vision2020 commitments into their construction, just as we have done throughout their planning and design.

Vision2020 will continue to be the vehicle for developing and communicating our approach to sustainability. We will be refining our ambitions to make sure we have the right targets in place from 2012. We always welcome feedback from our stakeholders on this strategy and I hope anyone who would like to shape our approach will get in touch.

Rob perrins Managing Director

“ VISION2020 WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE VEHICLE FOR DEVELOpING AND COMMUNICATING OUR AppROACH TO SUSTAINABILITy. WE WILL BE REFINING OUR AMBITIONS TO MAkE SURE WE HAVE THE RIGHT TARGETS IN pLACE FROM 2012 ”

375 Kensington High Street, W14

Tideway Wharf (Riverlight,), Vauxhall




VISION2020

In 2010 Berkeley developed and launched Vision2020, a ten-year sustainability strategy that defines how we want the business to perform by 2020 and how we are going to get there. Over the past year we have successfully implemented the strategy whilst also further developing our thinking behind it.

We realise that sustainability and financial performance do not exist in isolation from one another and that in fact delivering value to shareholders is integral to running a sustainable business. We have therefore now woven this into Vision2020 and as a result we no longer consider Vision2020 to simply be our sustainability strategy but instead a strategy for the whole business. We have refined our headline vision to reflect this: “By 2020 Berkeley will be one of the most successful and sustainable businesses in Britain”.

The strategy to achieve this vision is divided into four action areas where we feel we need to drive our performance. These action areas form the framework of Vision2020 and each one has its own detailed vision statement which describes exactly how we want to perform in that area by 2020. You can read these detailed vision statements on the first page of each of the relevant chapters in this report.

THE CUSTOMER ExpERIENCE

Positioning our customers at the heart of every decision we make


Developing high quality places where people want to live, work and spend leisure time

To read more about what Vision2020 means for our customers

www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/environment/our-vision-for-2020


Minimising the environmental impact of our homes


Managing the economic, social and environmental impacts of our business

“ OUR VISION IS THAT By 2020 BERkELEy WILL BE ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL AND SUSTAINABLE BUSINESSES IN BRITAIN.





www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/environment/our-vision-for-2020


vision2020 commitments and ambitions We implement Vision2020 through a total of 40 commitments and ambitions in each of the four action areas. Our commitments represent actions we are taking (or targets we have set) to improve performance. Our ambitions are the future steps we think we will need to take to continue to improve performance. They provide an indication of what our future commitments are likely to be.

We set our commitments and ambitions on a two-year cycle. Our current commitments were set in May 2010 and run until April 2012. From May 2012 we’ll adopt new commitments and provide new ambitions. You can find our current commitments and ambitions set out in the table on the final page of each of the relevant chapters of this report.

Both our commitments and ambitions are reviewed annually to ensure they still reflect the operational context, our business priorities, the legislative environment and the material issues identified by our stakeholders.

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS By CREATING BEAUTIFUL pLACES THAT MAkE IT EASy FOR pEOpLE TO LIVE SUSTAINABLE LIVES”

Sustainability commitments have been set on a two-year cycle Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 11




HOW WE MANAGE RISkS AND OppORTUNITIES THROUGH VISION2020

The commitments and ambitions within our Vision2020 strategy help us manage the key risks facing the business. They are also designed to help us exploit some of the opportunities that we believe exist.

The diagram below describes the key risks and opportunities that we have identified in each action area, indicates their financial impact and shows the commitment or ambition that we have put in place to manage them.

kEy RISk

kEy RISk

FINANCIAL IMpACT

FINANCIAL IMpACT

FINANCIAL IMpACT

FINANCIAL IMpACT

MANAGEMENT THROUGH VISION2020




kEy OppORTUNITy

kEy OppORTUNITy

THE

CU

STO

MER

Ex

pER

IEN

CE

DEL

IVER

ING

SU

STA

INA

BLE

CO

MM

UN

ITIE

S

Failure to meet customer expectations

Failure to engage sufficiently with a community in the development process

Lower customer recommendations and sales as a result of damage to corporate reputation from poor service

Lower market value of homes due to lack of customer appeal

Commitment to target that over 90% of customers would recommend us to a friend

Commitment to apply our Community Engagement Strategy on all planning applications over 500 units

Ambition to demonstrate the ability to involve every age group in debating and supporting plans for new development

Commitment and ambition to carry out post-occupancy monitoring to measure the success of designs

Commitment to survey 25% of customers on how sustainability influenced their home purchase

Commitment to achieve at least the Building for Life Silver Standard on all new developments

Commitment to use bespoke design on all developments to create high quality homes and places

Engaging with customers to inform better design

Creation of new beautiful places

Higher sales due to highly desirable and comfortable home design

Increased market value of homes due to their customer appeal

Higher sales due to desirability of the location of our homes

Increased market value of homes due to the customer appeal of the location



Failure to gain planning approval

Reduced market value of homes in poorly functioning communities which do not meet local needs


kEy RISk

kEy RISk

FINANCIAL IMpACT

FINANCIAL IMpACT

FINANCIAL IMpACT

FINANCIAL IMpACT





kEy OppORTUNITy

kEy OppORTUNITy

BU

ILD

ING

GR

EEN

ER H

OM

ESR

UN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BU

SIN

ESS

Increasing legislatory/ regulatory requirements

poor health, safety and environmental performance

Increase in cost of building homes

Increase in research and development costs

Higher operating costs due to increased energy use and waste production

Higher operating costs due to increased insurance premiums and costs associated with legal action

Preparing the business by setting commitments and ambitions in advance of new legislatory and regulatory requirements

Various commitments and ambitions setting sector leading actions and performance targets including RIDDOR rates of less than 4, and 5% energy and water use reductions

Commitment to design all new homes to achieve at least Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes and an ambition to design all new homes to Level 4 from 2012

Commitment to undertake internal environmental audits on all construction sites

Commitment to reuse or recycle over 80% of construction, demolition and excavation waste

Market differentiation of our product

Enhanced corporate reputation due to sustainability of operations

Higher sales due to the appeal of unique product offering to customers

Increased market value of homes due to demand for good sustainable design

Increased shareholder value delivered through increased investor appeal

Lower operating costs resulting from lower waste production and lower energy use



OUR VISION2020 GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

Berkeley has a strong governance structure in place to manage the future direction of our Vision2020 strategy and its implementation within our business.

Our Board level sustainability/health & safety committee was set up in 2010 and is chaired by our non-executive director, John Armitt. This committee meets twice a year to agree the direction of Berkeley’s sustainability/Health & Safety strategy (Vision2020). The committee ensures that the chosen direction for the sustainability and Health & Safety strategy is aligned with Berkeley’s business objectives. It also agrees the measures used to assess Berkeley’s overall performance.

The berkeley group sustainability and health & safety Working groups are chaired by our Director in Charge of Sustainability, Karl Whiteman. The Sustainability Working Group meets three times a year and its primary role is to agree the detail of Berkeley’s sustainability strategy. In doing so, the working group ensures that Berkeley’s policies, Vision2020 commitments, ambitions and performance indicators are appropriate. The working group is also responsible for overseeing and ensuring implementation of the agreed strategies, including reviewing progress against Vision2020, performance against indicators and compliance with policies. The working group’s membership consists of directors and senior managers from each of our operating divisions. The Health & Safety Working Group functions in the same manner.

Each of our operating companies has nominated sustainability representatives who sit on Divisional sustainability Working groups. These working groups enable the Group’s sustainability strategy to be disseminated and implemented within the divisions. They review and agree implementation strategies, monitor each division’s sustainability performance and share best practice.

Our sustainability governance structure is supported by a small central sustainability team who assist in the delivery of our strategy across the Group. However, we believe that the key to running a sustainable business is to devolve responsibility and to that end, our ethos is that every one of our employees has responsibility for integrating sustainability into their own roles and working practices.

See page 52 for an interview with one of our Sustainability Managers.

The Berkeley Sustainability Working Group

Berkeley Group Health & Safety Working Group

Our people

Berkeley Group Sustainability Working

Group

Health & Safety / Sustainability Committee

Main Board

Divisional Sustainability Working Groups and Health & Safety Forum



karl WhitemanDirector in Charge of Sustainability and Health & Safety.

john ArmittChairman of the Group’s Sustainability and Health & Safety Committee.



H&S Prosecutions

RIDDOR

Water

INCREASING SIGNIFICANCE

Research & Development

Transport

Pollution Prevention

Climate Change

Land Use

Environmental Performance

StandardsPost-occupancy Monitoring Customer

Satisfaction

Sustainable Procurement

Energy

Waste

Sustainable Communities

REVIEWING VISION2020 AND DEFINING OUR REpORTING CONTENT

berkeley group materiality review: significant issues

materiality TestsDuring 2010/11, we took the opportunity to update our materiality review in order to identify the significant environmental, economic and social impacts of our business and to ensure that we continue to prioritise the management and reporting of these impacts. Our previous materiality review was conducted in 2008 but, given the pace at which the sustainability agenda is moving, we decided that it would be appropriate to update this work for 2010/11. The 2010/11 materiality review has been used to inform the content of this sustainability report as well as the annual review of our Vision2020 strategy.

The updated materiality review was completed by undertaking materiality tests in line with GRI guidelines.

Each test highlighted a number of material issues. These were categorised and their significance was ranked according to the frequency with which they occurred during the tests. Each issue was then aligned with one or more Vision2020 action area.

The results of the materiality review are shown in the diagram below which demonstrates the significance of each material issue to Berkeley and which Vision2020 action area they fall into.

We have used these results to define the content of each of the following sections within this sustainability report. The results, in particular the feedback from the stakeholder survey, have also influenced a number of updates to our Vision2020 commitments and ambitions that we have made this year.

you can read more about our materiality review and its results on our website www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/ investor-information/sustainability

RISkS AND OppORTUNITIES

Review the likely impact of key sustainability risks and opportunities for the business.

pOLICy

Determine the extent to which the Berkeley Group policies are being managed through Vision2020 and reported on annually.

pEER REVIEW

Identify those issues which peers in the housebuilding and construction sector are expected to manage and report on.

STAkEHOLDER CONCERNS

Conduct a survey to establish the issues which our stakeholders deem material.

REGULATORy REVIEW

Assess which current and future regulatory and non-regulatory issues are material to the business.

Delivering sustainable communities running a sustainable business

The customer experiencebuilding greener homes



www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/investor-information/sustainability


THE CUSTOMERExpERIENCE

our vision for 2020“ We will consistently meet or exceed our customers’ expectations by delivering well-designed, beautiful homes and communities where they can live happy, healthy and environmentally-efficient lifestyles. The service that we provide to our customers throughout the purchasing process and after completion will be exceptional. Customers will be positioned at the heart of our business and will be central to the decisions that we make.”


Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 17Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 17Royal Arsenal Riverside, SE18.

THE CUSTOMER ExpERIENCE – SUSTAINABILITY REPORT


pROGRESS AGAINST VISION2020 COMMITMENTS

OUR COMMITMENTS FROM MAy 2010

OVERALL pROGRESS 2010/11

Customer satisfaction

Survey every customer to measure satisfaction and continue to target that over 90% would recommend us to a friend.

Selling the benefits

Highlight the sustainability benefits of our developments in all sales and marketing materials/handover packs.

Train all sales and marketing staff in sustainability so that they are able to sell the benefits to customers.

Communicate Vision2020 to all customers.

Ensure that all commercial space achieves BREEAM Very Good or is capable of achieving BREEAM Very Good if the fit-out is to be undertaken by the tenant.

Driving the market for sustainable homes

Undertake market research on at least 25% of purchasers to understand how sustainability influences their home buying preferences.

This table provides a quick-glance summary of our Customer Experience commitments and the progress we have made against them during 2010/11.

The pages that follow describe our progress in more detail. To read our updated 2011/12 commitments and our ambitions in this Vision2020 action area, please go to page 23 at the end of this section.

To see a full summary of progress against all of our Vision2020 commitments, go to page 55.

96%of customers in 2010/11 would recommend berkeley to a friend

SUSTAINABILITY REPORT – THE CUSTOMER ExpERIENCE

Commitment not met in 2010/11

Further action required to meet commitment during 2011/12

Commitment on track for completion by May 2012


THE CUSTOMER FOCUS

Our customers are considered during every stage of the development process to ensure that we meet and exceed their expectations.

The diagram below explores some of the key questions that we ask during each of these stages.

THE CUSTOMER at the centre of every decision

LAND ACQUISITION PLANNING DESIGN

SAL

ES &

MA

RKET

ING

A

FTER

SALES CARE

CONSTRUCTION PROCUREMENT

D

ETAI

LED

DES

IGN

What size and type of home will our customers want to purchase in this location?What features do we need to integrate into the design to create a place that is desirable to our customers?

Does the specification of the home meet our customers’ aspirations?Is the design and layout of the living space functional, comfortable and healthy?Have we minimised the running costs and maintenance requirements of the home?

Are the contractors that we use able to deliver the quality that our customers expect?Would our customers be happy with the quality and source of the products that we are procuring?

Are we managing the construction process well enough to deliver homes on time and without defect?

Are we providing our customers with the right information so that they fully understand the benefits of the homes we build?

Are our sales staff sufficiently trained to be able to provide customers with exceptional service from initial enquiry, through to reservation and exchange?

Are we providing customers with the right information to ensure they understand how to operate and maintain their new home?Have we got the right people and procedures in place to exceed our customers’ expectations when responding to any problems that arise?Are we responding appropriately to the feedback we receive so that we can continue to improve our product and our service?

Will our customers be attracted to this location?

THE

CUST

OM

ER E

xpE

RIEN

CE



Our customers are fundamental to our success. We aim to provide them with an exceptional experience throughout the purchasing process and with our aftersales service. We ensure our customers are at the heart of the decisions that we make, from the land that we buy, through development planning to the detailed design, specification and construction of homes and commercial space. Meeting and exceeding our customers’ expectations helps secure our reputation and leads to repeat custom, both of which are key in maintaining our financial performance over time.

As we build to higher standards of sustainability, we have the opportunity to enhance the saleability of our product by making sure our customers understand the advantages that a sustainable home provides. Equally we must also ensure that the sustainable features we incorporate into our homes match the needs of our purchasers.

The following pages chart our progress this year against our commitments relating to our customers.

customer satisfactionWe use customer satisfaction surveys undertaken by an independent external agency to measure how well we are meeting our customers’ expectations. This year 96% of our customers said they would recommend us to a friend, which continues the 4-year trend of improved performance. This result also emphasises the success of Vision2020 in embedding our commitment to The Customer Experience.

selling the benefitsIn order to communicate the sustainability benefits of our homes properly, we provide customers with a selection of informative material through the marketing of our developments and during the sales process.

Within many of our sales and marketing suites, sustainability information boards have been installed and this year we have created an information board for our customers specifically to communicate the benefits of Vision2020. A number of our sites have also developed informative sustainability brochures and we will soon be publishing a customer facing brochure on Vision2020. Providing reliable information upon which our home buyers are able to make their purchasing decision is a key part of our compliance with The Consumer Code for Home Builders. This Code sets good practice requirements that all home builders must meet and ensures that a home warranty is provided to all purchasers of newly built/converted homes.

pROGRESS REVIEW

sustainability brochures

84%

2010/11

2009/10

2008/09

2007/08

2006/07

86% 88% 90% 92% 94% 96%

96%93%

91%89%

90%

% of customers who would recommend us to a friend

For more information on our developments, please visit our website:

www.berkeleygroup.co.uk


THE

CUST

OM

ER E

xpE

RIEN

CE

Berkeley Annual Report 2011 21

helping our customers live sustainablyDuring 2010/11 we sold 2,544 units. Upon handover, all our customers are provided with a home manual which explains key information about the property including how it should be operated and maintained. These manuals contain a section on sustainability which explains how to use the sustainability features within the home, provides information on green living , local public transport routes, recycling and waste disposal and useful links to local community facilities.

commercial customersWhile we are primarily a residential developer, we also sell commercial space on our mixed-use developments. For example we developed retail units and gym facilities within the Central Plaza at our Kennet Island development, and office and restaurant spaces at our Royal Clarence Marina development. This year, we sold 119,351 sq ft of commercial space.

Our commitment to sustainability and high environmental performance standards applies to all the buildings on our developments and we aim to ensure that all commercial space achieves BREEAM Very Good, or is capable of achieving BREEAM Very Good if fit-out is to be undertaken by the tenant. During 2010/11 100% of our commercial space submitted for planning met these requirements and 45% of our completed commercial space was certified to BREEAM Very Good.

45% of our completed commercial space in 2010/11 was certified to breeam very good

The Waterfront, Royal Clarence MarinaBerkeley Sustainability Report 2011 21


CASE STUDy:WHAT OUR CUSTOMERS THINk ABOUT SUSTAINABILITy

One of our Vision2020 commitments is to “undertake market research on at least 25% of purchasers to understand how sustainability influences their home buying preferences”.

To fulfil this commitment we asked Inhouse Research and Training Ltd, an independent market research company, to conduct a telephone survey with all customers that purchased a Berkeley property between january and December 2010.

26% of our customers responded to the survey (221 in total). Of these, 24% were investors and 76% were private buyers.

The results showed that our customers are environmentally conscious:

85% agreed that they are concerned about protecting the environment;

69% agreed that they put a lot of effort into living an environmentally friendly lifestyle.

We asked our customers to identify what was important in terms of sustainability when purchasing their new home. Running costs and good transport links came out top, with the Code for Sustainable Homes rating, cycle storage and home office facilities less frequently considered important.

There is clearly scope for the industry and Government to increase awareness of the Code for Sustainable Homes and for us to better market the sustainability of our homes. although 44% of our customers had not heard about the code for sustainable homes, 60% of customers felt that the sustainability features of their new home had been well marketed by berkeley.

We used the survey to test the market for providing a sustainability options package when buying a home – one of our Vision2020 ambitions. an overwhelming majority of customers (93%) said that if they were offered a choice of sustainable features (e.g. solar panels, energy consumption display devices, energy efficient appliances) as an option, they would have been interested.

just under two thirds of our customers (64%) said they would be willing to pay a higher price for a more sustainable home and interestingly, investors (74%) gave this response more frequently than private buyers (61%) suggesting they may see more value in sustainable homes.

The results of this research have influenced our review and update of our Vision2020 commitments for 2011/12 and will play a key role in forming the future direction of our sustainability strategy.

88%88%

81%76%

76%74%

63%47%47%

44%

70%of customers agreed that the berkeley group had built a sustainable home with a low environmental impact

Kennet Island, Reading


Features that customers agreed were important when buying their home


Customers agreed or strongly agreed that they are concerned about protectingthe environment

Customers who disagreed or strongly disagreed that they are concerned about protecting the environment

Customers who were neutral about their concern about protecting the environment

85%

13%

2%

Customers agreed or strongly agreed that they are concerned about protectingthe environment

Customers who disagreed or strongly disagreed that they are concerned about protecting the environment

Customers who were neutral about their concern about protecting the environment

85%

13%

2%


THE

CUST

OM

ER E

xpE

RIEN

CE

Features that customers agreed were important when buying their home

VISION2020 COMMITMENTS AND AMBITIONS MOVING FORWARD

OUR COMMITMENTS FROM MAy 2011 OUR AMBITIONS FROM MAy 2012

Customer satisfaction


Carry out post-occupancy monitoring of electricity, water and gas/heat consumption on at least four completed developments in order to measure the success of our designs and to influence the design of future schemes.

Survey every customer to measure satisfaction and target that over 95% of customers would recommend us to a friend.

Extend our programme of post-occupancy monitoring to cover the internal living environment and the design of external space.

Selling the benefits

Highlight the sustainability benefits of our developments in sales and marketing materials and home manuals.


Communicate Vision 2020 to all customers.

Ensure that all commercial space and student accommodation achieves BREEAM Very Good or is capable of achieving BREEAM Very Good if the fit-out is to be undertaken by the tenant.

Launch ‘Pledge for a better tomorrow’ – a partnership between Berkeley and our customers to make it easier for residents to live a more sustainable lifestyle.

Install Smart Meters in all new homes to help our customers understand their energy use.

Provide tenant fit-out guidelines to commercial customers, enabling them to optimise the environmental performance of the premises they purchase.

Driving the market for sustainable homes


On selected developments provide customers with a ‘sustainability options’ package which enables them to purchase additional sustainability features for their homes.

We have reviewed our commitments and ambitions made in May 2010 to ensure they appropriately consider those issues which are material to our stakeholders. Our revised commitments and ambitions are set out in the table below.



our vision for 2020“ We will have completed our first zero carbon community and all our new developments will be low or zero carbon. Our proven track record of delivering high quality, well-designed, comfortable homes with low environmental impact will make them highly desirable to customers and will have expanded our market base. Homes built by Berkeley will be recognised throughout the industry as the very best examples of sustainable design and construction.”


Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 25A Code Level 3 home at Queen’s Acre, Beaconsfield. Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 25

BUILDING GREENER HOMES – SUSTAINABILITY REPORT



65%of homes completed during 2010/11 were certified using either the code for sustainable homes or ecohomes methodology

92%of our completed development was on brownfield land in 2010/11

96%of our live sites during 2010/11 were within 500m of a transport node

This table provides a quick-glance summary of our Building Greener Homes commitments and the progress we have made against them during 2010/11.





Achieving environmental performance standards

All new homes to gain certification to Code Level 3.

Improving energy efficiency

Achieve at least a 25% improvement in energy performance compared to 2006 Building Regulations.

Adapting to climate change

Future climate change risks considered as part of development design and construction.

Improving water efficiency

All new homes to achieve water use of 105 l/p/d.

Providing green transport options

All sites situated within 1km of a public transport node.

Provide cycle storage on all sites.

Provide home office working facilities to all units.

Reducing waste

Recycling facilities are provided for every home.

Enhancing ecology and maximising land use

Over 95% of development is on brownfield land.

All sites employ an ecologist to provide advice and guidance on protecting ecology.

SUSTAINABILITY REPORT – BUILDING GREENER HOMES




BUIL

DIN

G G

REEN

ER H

OM

ES


pROGRESS REVIEW

The homes we build have an environmental impact not only during the construction process but also through their occupation. Designing homes to meet environmental performance standards such as the Code for Sustainable Homes, helps minimise these impacts whilst giving us the ability to clearly demonstrate their performance to our customers and other stakeholders.

However we know that environmental performance standards alone do not cover all of the measures that we could take to reduce the environmental impact of the homes we build. Vision2020 therefore commits us to integrating additional measures to reduce impact where we believe these add value or meet the demands of our stakeholders.

achieving environmental performance standardsWe use environmental performance standards, such as the Code for Sustainable Homes, to make sure our homes are designed and built with low environmental impact . We also use environmental performance standards as a way of communicating the environmental performance of our homes to our customers and other stakeholders.

Our industry-leading commitment to certify all homes to Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes led to the completion of 832 certified homes during 2010/11 and a further 5,980 homes committed to achieve Level 3 through the planning applications that we submitted.

There is a growing push towards developing higher performing homes and we are already designing a number of projects to Level 4 of the Code due to local planning requirements. At Berkeley we are committed to staying at the forefront of the industry and whilst challenging, these projects give us experience in delivering homes to this higher standard that we can apply to all of our future schemes. In 2010/11 we submitted planning applications for 1,068 homes which committed to achieving Level 4 of the Code.

Berkeley has formed a number of development committees to identify key business challenges or aspects of operational concern and promote operational solutions. Our Technical Committee has been looking at the technical and cost implications involved in moving from Level 3 to Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The findings will inform our ambition to certify all homes to Level 4 of the Code from May 2012.

1,640To date we have completed

homes that achieve level 3 of the code for sustainable homes

EcoHomes Very GoodEcoHomes Excellent

Code Level 3

2009/10 6%

30% 1%

39% 19%

34%2010/11

proportion of units built to environmental standards

ROpETACkLE, SHOREHAM-By-SEA

Our first project to deliver homes to Level 4 of the Code is Ropetackle, a 226 unit mixed-use development in Shoreham-by-Sea. In July 2011, 48 Housing Association homes were completed and handed over. This project has provided an excellent opportunity for us to fully understand the costs and realities of achieving Level 4 in advance of our Vision2020 ambition to apply this standard to homes on developments submitted for planning from May 2012.


compared to the average household in the uK, we have calculated that our code level 3 homes could save our customers around

£380per year on their energy bills1

improving energy efficiencyEnergy efficiency is fundamental in the delivery of sustainable homes and, given the legislative environment and energy market in Britain, is set to become increasingly important. At Berkeley, we are committed to delivering energy-efficient homes and see this as a priority both in terms of lowering their environmental impact and saving our customers money through reduced heating and electricity bills.

To deliver energy-efficient homes we adopt a fabric-first approach that focuses on reducing heat losses through walls, floors, windows and the roof. There is generally a point at which it becomes uneconomical to enhance the building fabric any further and this is the point at which we introduce low carbon or renewable technology.

On many developments, planning conditions also require us to provide a proportion of a development’s energy demand through low carbon or renewable technology. The combination of these factors mean that increasingly more and more of our homes have this technology installed. In 2010/11, 50% of our completed units incorporated low carbon or renewable technology and a further 62% of sites submitted for planning in the same period specify their inclusion.

Across our sites a variety of technologies are in place from solar thermal panels at Forest Hill, Worcester Park and Knowle Village to air source heat pumps at Silvermill and Orchard Grove.

The average improvement in carbon performance of our completed units over part l1a 2006 building regulations was

20%

adapting to climate changeWe seek to minimise climate change risk on our homes through a thorough consideration of both adaptation and mitigation measures on all our developments. Flooding is currently the most pertinent climate change issue and is a key consideration that is reviewed during the land acquisition, planning and design process. It is becoming an issue of increasing importance in light of recent Government cuts to flood defence spending and the likely challenges that this will lead to in terms of flood insurance availability.

RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGy

Upon completion of phase 1 of our landmark kidbrooke Village development in Greenwich, each of the 80 houses will have nearly 5m2 of solar thermal panels installed on their roofs. These have the potential to provide a 10-15% reduction in carbon emissions through the generation of hot water that can be used for heating. Furthermore, the apartments within the same phase of the development are linked to a district heating system which draws upon energy from central gas and biomass boilers to provide an efficient and renewable source of heating. The biomass boilers alone reduce the carbon emissions of each of the 368 flats by at least 15%.

pROGRESS REVIEW (CONTINUED)

DESIGNING TO MITIGATE FLOOD RISk

At our Blackheath Road development, flood risks highlighted through the Flood Risk Assessment process led to design alterations which ensure that no habitable space is provided at ground level and all residential dwellings sit above maximum flood levels. Safe escape routes have also been included in the development in accordance with DEFRA guidance. These efforts to adapt to climate change related flood risks improve the long-term resilience and value of the development.


BUIL

DIN

G G

REEN

ER H

OM

ES


improving water efficiencyGiven the widely accepted prediction that, over time, water shortages will become common in the UK due to increasing demand and hotter, drier summers, we see the minimisation of water use in our new homes as very important and are committed to designing our homes to use less.

All of our developments include measures to reduce water consumption as part of our commitment to the Code for Sustainable Homes. The average consumption of water in the code-certified homes we build is currently 100 litres per person per day, far below the UK average of 150 litres per person per day. This equates to a reduction in metered water bills of approximately £168 per household, per year2.

RAINWATER HARVESTING AT GROSVENOR WATERSIDE

At Grosvenor Waterside, a mixed-use development in Chelsea, we have installed water meters for every home, provided water efficient appliances and installed a site-wide rainwater harvesting system. Whilst the intention is for the harvested water to be used to irrigate the site’s landscaping, it was installed early on in the development process and is currently being used in the construction site welfare accommodation to minimise water consumption during construction.

493

285

204

82107

29

CarMotorbike

Bus

RailUnderground

Ferry

average reduction in water use of 50 litres per person per day equates to a saving in metered water bills of approximately

£1682

per household, per year

providing green transport optionsTransport was responsible for 25% of the UK’s carbon emissions in 2010 3. We can help to reduce these emissions in two ways. Firstly we can locate new developments close to public transport nodes. During 2010/11, 100% of the developments which we submitted for planning were within 1km of a public transport node. Secondly we can provide low-carbon modes of transport to our residents. This joint approach enables residents to reduce their transport related carbon emission through the choices available on the development. For example, our Raynes Park development, which is located close to a train link, may encourage a resident to change from commuting to work by car to commuting by rail, which could reduce their average commuting emissions by 411kg CO2-e per year (see Figure A).

average commuting emissions by vehicle type (kg co2-e) 4

Figure A

During 2010/11,

100%of the developments which we submitted for planning were within 1km of a public transport node

1 Assuming the average household in the Uk is a 3 bed semi detached home with a SAp rating of 51 (the 2008 SAp value for all tenures in the housing stock published in the English Housing Survey Headline Report 2008-9 http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/pdf/1479789.pdf )

2 Based on an average household of 4 people and a reduction in water consumption from 150l/p/d to 100l/p/d. Assuming that on average, a litre of tap water, supplied and taken away, costs 0.23p http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/consumerissues/chargesbills/household/prs_lft00910_waterseweragebills.pdf

3 http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Statistics/climate_change/1515-statrelease-ghg-emissions-31032011.pdf

4 Average annual commuting emissions by vehicle type were calculated using DEFRA emissions factors for transport, available http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/reporting/pdf/101006-guidelines-ghg-conversion-factors.xls and the Department for Transport 2009 figure for the average annual commuter distance of 1,266 miles per year http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/nts/factsheets/commuting.xls

493

285

204

82107

29

CarMotorbike

Bus

RailUnderground

Ferry

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/nts/factsheets/commuting.xls

http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/reporting/pdf/101006-guidelines-ghg-conversion-factors.xls


CREATING TRANSpORT OppORTUNITIES ON THE RIVER THAMESThe River Thames is a valuable resource that provides a more unusual and exciting opportunity for transportation. At our riverside residence of St George Wharf, a pier is currently being constructed that will provide inhabitants with access to an additional mode of transport and a new way to experience London. Construction is due to be officially opened in September.

Additionally, at our Royal Arsenal Development, the Thames Clipper provides public river transport while at Grosvenor Waterside, the harbour provides residents with the opportunity to enjoy time on the river.

providing green transport options

pROpOSED CROSSRAIL AT ROyAL ARSENAL RIVERSIDE

One example of our commitment to reduce transport related emissions is the planned construction of a Crossrail station at our Royal Arsenal Riverside development in Woolwich. This new train line, due to open in 2017, is expected to revolutionise travel between the East and West of London bringing improved quality of access across the city through new tunnels under London. With this new service, journeys from Woolwich to the Isle of Dogs will take around 8 minutes, while Heathrow will be just 50 minutes away. It is thought that this station will bring considerable social and economic benefits to the area, providing access to jobs and leisure activities.

proposed crossrail journeys

8 mins from Woolwich to the isle of Dogs

50 mins from Woolwich to heathrow



BUIL

DIN

G G

REEN

ER H

OM

ES


reducing wasteNot only is there a finite and fast reducing amount of landfill space remaining in the UK, but sending waste to landfill also has a series of negative environmental impacts. Currently only 33% of UK household waste is recycled or composted and many attribute this to the lack of ease in using recycling and composting facilities.

We can reduce the long-term impact of our housing stock by designing in features to help our customers divert their waste from landfill. 85% of homes completed in 2010/11 included recycling facilities and 16% of our sites incorporated composting facilities.

maximising land useGiven the environmental and social value of greenfield land in the UK and our focus on urban regeneration, we believe it is appropriate to continue our long-standing commitment to ensure that over 95% of our development is on brownfield land. Between 2005/6 and 2009/10, 100% of our homes completed were on brownfield land. In 2010/11 this dropped to 92%, below our commitment level. This drop has been caused by the completion of 194 homes on four greenfield sites. These sites will continue to generate completions during 2011/12 but we expect development on brownfield land to remain at or around our commitment level. This commitment continues to be reflected in the type of land we purchase, with only one planning application made during 2010/11 on greenfield land.

enhancing ecology The land upon which we develop is a precious resource and we are conscious of both its economic and ecological value. We continuously seek to maximise the ecological value of our developments for the benefit of both our residents and the wider community. 59% of our live sites in 2010/11 had some form of biodiversity action plan in place and through Vision2020 we have committed to employ an ecologist on all sites that have sought planning from May 2010 .

A number of sites incorporate large areas of parkland (see p32) while other developments such as Woodberry Down, Griffin Studios and Silkworks incorporate brown roofs that both enhance local ecology and slow rainwater run-off, providing added protection from flooding.

92% of our developments have been on brownfield land in 2010/11

59% of live sites in 2010/11 had some form of biodiversity plan in place

85% of homes completed in 2010/11 included recycling facilities

ENHANCING ECOLOGy ON OUR CONSTRUCTION SITESOur efforts to enhance ecology vary across sites and stages of development. The construction phase of developments can often be particularly disruptive. To combat this many of our developments have installed measures such as an insect hotel at our Silvermill site, log piles at our Queens Acre and Stanmore Place sites, as well as a broad array of other initiatives including bird boxes, butterfly feeders and insect boxes which offer local wildlife a temporary home.

“ THE LAND UpON WHICH WE DEVELOp IS A pRECIOUS RESOURCE AND WE ARE CONSCIOUS OF BOTH ITS ECONOMIC AND ECOLOGICAL VALUE”

32 Berkeley Annual Report 2011

We take pride in creating beautiful places and spaces with lasting value. protecting and enhancing ecology is one way in which we are able to do this. Here are just a few examples from around our current developments:

THE HAMpTONS

Here a 30 acre area of parkland provides a striking landscape which protects and enhances local wildlife and also functions as a recreational venue for residents and the general public. Furthermore, the lakes within the park offer protection to the development from flooding, forming a key part of the sustainable urban drainage system.

ORCHARD GROVE

At this site we have created and maintained a series of “green wildlife corridors” that link the site to the wider countryside and provide a valuable route through the development for wildlife. These “corridors” include watercourses, hedgerows, tree belts and small areas planted with wetland meadow grass species. We have also planted additional fruit trees to enhance the existing orchard which is classed as protected under National Biodiversity Action plans.

EDENBROOk

This represents one of our largest investments in ecology. Here we have transformed an 84 acre site in Hampshire into a beautiful country park that boasts a large selection of attractions to residents, locals and wildlife. The park encompasses a variety of green spaces including woodlands and hedgerows, grassland, meadowland, ponds and wetlands. These offer a home to animals including woodpeckers, pheasants, badgers, deer, and water voles. Dipping ponds, cycle paths and a green amphitheatre offer a wealth of recreational opportunities. This natural asset has been enjoyed by many since its opening and is expected to grow in local and ecological value over time.

CASE STUDy: AN ECOLOGICAL LEGACy

The Hamptons, KT4

Orchard Grove, Yarnton

Edenbrook, Fleet



BUIL

DIN

G G

REEN

ER H

OM

ES


BUIL

DIN

G G

REEN

ER H

OM

ES


Achieving environmental performance standards

Design all new homes to achieve at least Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.

Design all new homes to achieve Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.

Develop (or adopt) a standard equivalent to Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes to be applied to refurbishment schemes.

Improving energy efficiency

Design all new homes to achieve at least a 25% improvement in energy performance compared to 2006 Building Regulations.

Design all new homes to achieve at least a 25% improvement in energy performance compared to 2010 Building Regulations.

Ensure over 75% of completed homes are supplied with energy from renewable or low carbon technologies.

Adapting to climate change

Consider future climate change risks as part of development design and construction.

Put in place adaptation measures on all developments to address future climate change risks.

Improving water efficiency

Design all new homes to achieve water use of 105 l/p/d (a 30% reduction compared to average home water use).

Implement rainwater harvesting on all high-density schemes.

Providing green transport options

Locate all developments within 1km of a public transport node.

Provide cycle storage on all developments.

Provide home office working facilities in all homes.

Provide electric car charging points in all communal car parks.

Reducing waste

Provide recycling facilities for every home. Provide composting facilities on every development.

Enhancing ecology and maximising land use

Complete over 95% of development on brownfield land.

Consult an ecologist on all developments to provide advice and guidance on protecting ecology.

Install living roofs on all high-density schemes.

VISION2020 COMMITMENTS AND AMBITIONS MOVING FORWARDWe have reviewed our commitments and ambitions made in May 2010 to ensure they appropriately consider those issues which are material to our stakeholders.

Our revised commitments and ambitions are set out in the table below.



our vision for 2020“ We will create high quality, sustainable places where people choose to live, work and spend their time. These will be places that directly encourage the well-being of residents and offer them a space and a base from which to lead safe and fulfilling lives. Our ability to transform sites into thriving communities will be considered the best in our industry. Through our ability both to engage and to deliver, Berkeley will be the developer of choice for local authorities and existing communities.”


Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 35Pocket Park at Riverlight, SW8 Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 35

DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES – SUSTAINABILITY REPORT




Well-designed homes and communities

Achieve at least the Building for Life Silver Standard on all new developments.

Use bespoke design on all developments to create high quality homes and places.

Creating safe, healthy and inclusive communities

Consult with a Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) or Police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) on all developments.

Apply the Lifetime Homes principles on all new homes.

Engaging local communities

Apply our best practice community consultation guidelines on all planning applications over 500 units.

Employment opportunities and job creation

All developments of 1,000 units or more will create an Employment Plan that includes targets for the proportion of local labour used, plans for long-term job creation and measurement of the success of the plan implementation.

Considerate Construction

All sites register with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and continue to achieve a minimum of 32 points.


29% of completed homes in 2010/11 meet the lifetime homes standard

This table provides a quick-glance summary of our Delivering Sustainable Communities commitments and the progress we have made against them during 2010/11.



SUSTAINABILITY REPORT – DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES




DEL

IVER

ING

SU

STA

INA

BLE

COM

MU

NIT

IES


Berkeley’s strategy for every site is to create a successful, sustainable place. We develop a specific solution, using bespoke design. We do not have standard products. Unlike most major housebuilders, we consistently use qualified architects to design each scheme, whether it consists of 10 or 4,000 homes.

Each place we create emerges through the management of a complex series of relationships and processes. Together these deliver the right mix of housing, transport, open space, retail and other facilities. We work very closely with the community to achieve this; their needs and ideas inform the design. Ultimately, they must take pride in the place and responsibility for its long-term success. We have a culture in our business of talking directly to residents and delivering what we promise.

Our strategy puts equal emphasis on each dimension of sustainability. This means building a place which offers people access to employment and a good quality of life, as well as the chance to live in a low carbon environment. Berkeley invests in the social fabric of each community just as we invest in the environmental performance of each home. Our ability to deliver this integrated approach to making a place sustainable is a core part of what makes us different.

The following pages chart our progress this year against our commitments relating to delivering sustainable communities.

NExTGENERATION BENCHMARk: SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

In 2010 we were ranked first in the NextGeneration benchmark for the fourth consecutive year. The 2010 benchmark placed particular focus on sustainable communities and the result is testament to our unrivalled ability to deliver in this area.

Our consistent performance at the top of this benchmark is strong recognition of our sector-leading sustainability strategy and performance.

pROGRESS REVIEW

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

Berkeley Group

Crest Nicholson

Miller Homes

Willmott Dixon

Keepmoat Group

Taylor Wimpey

Barratt Developments

Lend Lease

Redrow

Morris Homes

Countryside Properties

Galliford Try

Bellway

Gladedale Group

Persimmon

Bovis Homes

Lovell Partnerships

Stewart Milne

Kier Residential

McCarthy & Stone

Galliard Homes

Fairview New Homes

Cala Group

Bloor Holdings

Antler Homes

85%78%

69%64%

59%58%

51%43%43%

38%38%

26%20%

15%13%13%

8%8%

4%

31%

nextgeneration sustainable communities benchmark 2010

Further information on this benchmark and our ranking is available online:

www.nextgeneration-initiative.co.uk

“ THIS yEAR BERkELEy RETAINED ITS LEADERSHIp OF THE NExTGENERATION BENCHMARk FOR THE FOURTH CONSECUTIVE yEAR. WE COMMEND THEM FOR THEIR ONGOING EFFORTS AND LEADING COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITy, pARTICULARLy IN THE AREA OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES”

philip hirst, nextgeneration secretariat


one development (stanmore place) achieved the building for life gold standard in 2010/11


BUILDING FOR LIFE

We have demonstrated our ability to deliver well-designed homes and communities through our Vision2020 commitment to achieve the Building for Life Silver Standard on all new developments.

Building for Life assesses developments against 20 criteria that cover four broad areas. These are detailed in the diagram below and explored in the context of our Stanmore Place development.

BUILDING FOR LIFE kEy CRITERIA

Four developments Queen mary’s place, parkwest, beaufort park and grosvenor Waterside achieved the building for life silver standard in 2010/11


STANMORE pLACE

This year Stanmore Place achieved a Gold Building for Life Standard. The assessors identified it as a well-designed, well-integrated development that has captured the opportunities available in and around the site. The development provides a mix of affordable and private housing to suit the local housing market and includes a range of community facilities including a children’s play area, a community hall with crèche facilities, and a number of retail and small business units. Connected well to public transport with bus and tube links within 250m, one-for-one bicycle parking is located adjacent to each apartment/building entrance while parking facilities are limited in the immediate vicinity of dwellings to discourage the use of cars for short journeys. These are just a few of the key elements encompassed in achieving a Building for Life Standard.


• Well-designed public space with suitable management

• Architectural quality

• Well-designed internal layouts

• High quality, innovative construction

• Buildings outperform minimum standards

• provision of community facilities

• Accommodation mix reflects needs of the local community

• Tenure mix reflects the needs of the local community

• Development easy to access by public transport

• Reduced environmental impact

• Design specific to the scheme

• Reflects existing buildings and landscapes

• Has a distinct character

• Navigation around the development is easily understood

• Clear layout of streets and buildings

• Roads do not dominate

• Car parking well integrated so it does not dominate

• Streets are pedestrian, cycle and vehicle friendly

• Scheme integrates with existing paths and roads

• public realm is overlooked to give a sense of security

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITy

CHARACTER

STREETS, pARkING AND pEDESTRIANISATION

DEL

IVER

ING

SU

STA

INA

BLE

COM

MU

NIT

IES


THE kAyAk CLUB

As part of our kew Bridge Road development, we have established a new community boating club in two previously empty riverside arches. The arches have recently undergone a major refurbishment that will provide improved facilities and access to people of all ages within the communities of West London, including children and adults with learning and physical disabilities.

SUNkEN ROSE GARDENS

Prior to our acquisition of Queen Mary’s Place, the site’s much loved rose gardens had been paved over to provide additional parking for staff at the nearby hospital. The local community highlighted this during consultation and as a result we have been able to restore these beautiful gardens for the enjoyment of residents and the public.


BESpOkE DESIGN

Our tailored approach allows us to create developments that meet local needs through appropriate interpretation of standards and liaison with local communities and planners to ensure that our designs fit into their local settings.

Examples that demonstrate how we do this include:

THE WATCHTOWER

Following extensive public consultation at our Beaufort Park site, we managed and funded the refurbishment of this Grade II listed RAF Watchtower to its former glory, relocating it to the nearby RAF museum where it is a valuable historical asset that is enjoyed by many.

“ I AM DELIGHTED WITH THE BUILDING – IT IS A CREDIT TO THE COMMUNITy AND ENHANCES THE BOROUGH’S REpUTATION. I LOOk FORWARD TO IT BEING USED FOR CHILDREN AND THEIR EDUCATION AND I ALSO LOOk FORWARD TO ANy FUTURE DEVELOpMENTS ON THE SITE.”

Former mayor of barnet, councillor anthony Finn, speaking about The Watchtower at beaufort park.


creating safe, healthy and inclusive communitiesThis year, 29% of our completed homes were designed to meet the Lifetime Homes Standard. Through Vision2020 we have committed to apply the Lifetime Homes principles on all new developments with the ambition to achieve the Lifetime Homes Standard on all new homes from May 2012.

engaging local communitiesOur Land and Planning Committee has updated our Community Engagement Strategy during the year to reflect Vision2020 and the objectives of the Coalition Government’s localism policies. The strategy provides guidance on pre-planning application engagement to help us to enter into a valuable dialogue with locals who are likely to be affected by our developments. Through measures such as community meetings and planning weekends, we believe this allows our projects to be better designed, to better contribute to local communities and to make a smooth transition through the planning process.

employment opportunities and job creationOur developments have an important role to play in contributing to economic growth and prosperity in the local community. At Blackheath Road, we expect around 120 full- and part-time jobs to be created through the development of new commercial space and a 90-bed hotel. We actively work to promote job opportunities at our developments both during construction and once occupied. This is an important mechanism through which we add value. Additionally, many of our developments draw in new business to the area and boost the wider employment opportunities.

Further information on the type of employment opportunities created by Berkeley is available in the case study on page 42.

considerate constructionCONSIDERATE CONSTRUCTORS SCHEME (CCS)

In order to minimise the impact of our construction sites on local communities, all of our construction sites are registered under the voluntary Considerate Constructors Scheme and we aim to achieve a minimum of 32 points in all CCS audits. Our average CCS score during 2010/11 was 35.5, exceeding the industry average score of 32.5 points for the Berkeley financial year 2010/11.

Our continued commitment to being a considerate constructor is regularly recognised. During 2010/11 we received a number of CCS Awards. Dakota House was runner up in the Most Considerate Site Award, Parkwest achieved a gold award and numerous other sites achieved silver and bronze awards including Queen Mary’s Place, Forest Hill Central and Silkworks.

COMMUNITy ENGAGEMENT AT FULHAM REACH

Following the purchase of our Fulham Reach development in November 2010 we organised a community planning week which was widely publicised through local media, letters and banners on site. This was followed by in-depth workshops with groups exploring different aspects of the development. The local primary school was also invited to take part with children contributing their ideas for the site.

This process led to a number of changes to the project design to ensure that the community is able to derive the maximum possible benefits from the development.

berkeley group vs. considerate constructor scheme average scores

parkwest

grosvenor WatersideTrinity placesilkworksbattersea reach – block sKidbrooke – phase 1beaufort parkForest hill central

Queen mary’s placest george Wharf– block aroyal arsenal riverside – phase 2

Dakota house

Berkeley Group average scoreCCS UK all sector average

30

35

40

2008 2009 2010 2011

34.134.5

35.3 35.5

MOST CONSIDERATE SITERUNNER UP

Children from Greycoat Hospital School in Westminster taking part in a game of Street Elite on one of the Berkeley Group’s central London developments.



30

35

40

2008 2009 2010 2011

34.134.5

35.3 35.5


DEL

IVER

ING

SU

STA

INA

BLE

COM

MU

NIT

IES


THE BERkELEy FOUNDATION

The Berkeley Foundation was launched in March 2011. It is designed to capture, coordinate and drive forward the Group’s corporate social responsibility activities. This is the first time a major house builder has set up a Foundation to spearhead its CSR programme. Our main strategic focus is on supporting young people in London and the South East, particularly those not in education, employment or training.

The latest Government figures from February 2011 reveal over a million young people in this situation nationwide. We see a direct connection between their fortunes and the success of the places and communities in which Berkeley works. We intend to work with organisations that can model new ways of supporting these young people, as well as funding projects and services that have already proved their worth.

With this goal in mind, The Berkeley Foundation will support the following charities over the next 12 months:

In addition, The Berkeley Foundation raised over £300,000 for the Mayor’s Fund for London at its launch event at Horse Guards parade. We are also supporting three Olympians and paralympians at the 2012 Olympic and paralympic Games.

The berkeley Foundation’s objective

“ TO IMpROVE THE LIVES OF, AND OppORTUNITIES FOR yOUNG pEOpLE, THEIR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES”


DEL

IVER

ING

SU

STA

INA

BLE

COM

MU

NIT

IES


CASE STUDy: AN EMpLOyMENT SUCCESS

As part of our ongoing effort to create employment opportunities, we partnered with the London Borough of Southwark to run the ‘Camberwell Grove Employment and Training Initiative’ (CGETI) at our South London development.

The programme was set out in a tiered structure to provide:

• Careers advice

• CSCS training qualification

• Short training courses

• Work placements

• Full time employment

CGETI has been particularly successful in its ability to provide opportunities to a broad spectrum of individuals, from school leavers to the long-term unemployed.

INSpIRING SUCCESS STORy FROM THIS INITIATIVE

Teigan Augustus is an inspiring success story from this initiative. He joined CGETI after attending the 2010 Imperial Wharf jobs and Careers Fair to enquire whether he would be able to arrange work experience to supplement his degree in construction management at Westminster University. Following his exceptional performance during his work-experience, St George made an offer of undergraduate employment to Teigan, proposing he convert to part-time study and work as a Construction Trainee on our Imperial Wharf development. St George has also committed to sponsoring Teigan for the remaining three years of his university course.

“The key skill in construction management is being able to utilise theoretical knowledge in an applied working environment. My degree has taught me a lot but the CGETI has given me the chance to apply my knowledge on live construction sites. Experience of this calibre is invaluable and has helped kick start my career in the construction industry”Teigan augustus

Following Teigan’s success, St George will be promoting further undergraduate training opportunities at the Imperial Wharf jobs and Careers Fair 2011.

“ My DEGREE HAS TAUGHT ME A LOT BUT THE CGETI HAS GIVEN ME THE CHANCE TO AppLy My kNOWLEDGE ON LIVE CONSTRUCTION SITES”

Teigan Augustus




DEL

IVER

ING

SU

STA

INA

BLE

COM

MU

NIT

IES






Apply minimum design standards on all Berkeley homes including standards for sound insulation, space, storage and overheating.

Publish annually an independently verified assessment of the design quality of all new Berkeley developments.

Creating safe, healthy and inclusive communities

Consult with a Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) or Police Architectural Liaison Office (ALO) on all developments.

Apply the Lifetime Homes principles in the design of all new homes.

Design and build new developments that can be shown to enhance the well-being of residents.

Ensure all homes meet the Lifetime Homes Standard.

Engaging local communities

Apply Berkeley’s Community Engagement Strategy on all planning applications over 500 units.

Demonstrate the ability to involve every age group, including young people and working professionals, in debating and supporting plans for new development

Employment opportunities and job creation

Put in place an Employment Plan on all developments of 1,000 units or more incorporating targets for the proportion of local labour used, plans for long-term job creation and measurement of the success of the plan implementation.

Put in place an Employment Plan on all developments incorporating targets for the proportion of local labour used, plans for long-term job creation and measurement of the success of the plan implementation.

Considerate Construction

Register all sites with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and achieve a minimum of 32 points in all site audits.

Register all sites with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and achieve a minimum of 34 points in all site audits.

We have reviewed our commitments and ambitions made in May 2010 to ensure they appropriately consider those issues which are material to our stakeholders. Our revised commitments and ambitions are set out in the table below.



our vision for 2020“ Sustainability will be fully integrated into our business strategy and operations. Our environmental impact will be as low as possible and our operational sites will be healthy and safe places to work. We will retain a highly skilled and passionate workforce and through The Berkeley Foundation we will have given help to many young people, their families and communities. We will maximise shareholder value over the long-term in a sustainable and safe way, for an acceptable level of risk.”


Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 45Dismantling the old warehouse for reuse at Marine Wharf, Lewisham. Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 45

RUNNING A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS – SUSTAINABILITY REPORT




Improving operational environmental efficiency

Reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions by 5% until April 2012.

Reduce annual water consumption by 5% until April 2012.

Reuse or recycle over 80% of construction, excavation and demolition waste.

Managing and preventing pollution

Undertake internal environmental audits on all construction sites.

Valuing our employees

All employees to receive sustainability training.

Measure staff retention rates and benchmark performance.

Working with charities and local communities

Capture and quantify our work with charities and local communities and benchmark performance.

Driving sustainability through our supply chain

Communicate our sustainability aspirations and requirements to suppliers through our Sustainable Procurement Policy.

Sustainability requirements integrated into supplier contracts and management rules.

Being a sector leader

Share our experiences with Government and the rest of the industry through representation at steering groups and other events.

Reducing workplace accidents

Continue to achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) of less than 0.20.

Continue to achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Incident Rate (AIR) of less than 4 incidents per 1,000 employees and sub-contractors.

Health & Safety training

All direct employees to receive Health & Safety training.

Health and well-being

Undertake an internal review of our policy and arrangements regarding employees health and well-being with a view to establishing a programme.

Measuring performance

Undertake work to identify an external benchmarking programme (e.g. CHAPSI) to positively measure the Group’s Health & Safety performance.

Undertake internal Health & Safety audits on all construction sites.

Behavioural safety

Further enhance the Group’s ‘Good Work’ programme through active engagement with Contractors’ management and operatives.


0 environmental and health & safety prosecutions

This table provides a quick-glance summary of our Running a Sustainable Business commitments and the progress we have made against them during 2010/11.



16,262 tonnes co2-e

Total carbon emissions of

3.63 per 1,000 people working on our sites

riDDor accident incident rate of

0.178 which is below the industry average.

accident frequency rate of




SUSTAINABILITY REPORT – RUNNING A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS

RUN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BUSI

NES

S


REpORTING TO OUR INVESTORS

Financial summaryThis has been a year during which Berkeley has performed strongly, exceeding targets set for both return on equity and land bank growth. The increase in our pre-tax profits by 23.5% to £136.2 million is driven principally by a growth in revenue of 20.7% from £615.3 million to £742.6 million, and reflects our ability to deliver high quality homes and places in great locations in London and the South East.

Our strong operating margin is up to 18% and continues to mirror our highly selective land acquisition strategy based on opportunity rather than volume. During this year our land bank has grown 13.1% with the acquisition of some 3,600 plots across 24 excellent sites.

Looking ahead, our strategy reflects the cyclical nature of property development and seeks to optimise returns for shareholders. In the long-term, we recognise that our financial success is a key part of our sustainability success.

For further information on our financial performance, please refer to our Annual Report and Accounts.

assessing our sustainability successThe Berkeley Group uses four measures to communicate its sustainability performance to the investment community and other stakeholders. These measures, described below, provide robust industry-wide frameworks for understanding sustainability, identifying what is accepted as being good business practice generally, and best practice in house building specifically.

FTSE4GOOD

FTSE4Good is a FTSE Index designed to allow investors to identify and invest in companies that have globally recognised corporate responsibility standards. This Index is an ‘in-or –out’ Index rather than a ‘best in class’. If a company can demonstrate that it has met the minimum criteria then they will be included. Berkeley has been listed in FTSE4Good for six years.

THE QUEEN’S AWARD FOR ENTERpRISE: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOpMENT

The Queen’s Award recognises companies which have made outstanding advances in performance or have a high level of continuous achievement. In April 2008 the Berkeley Group was recognised in the Sustainable Development category for strong leadership, promoting best practice in our sector and embedding sustainability through our entire business operations.

THE CARBON DISCLOSURE pROjECT

The Carbon Disclosure project encourages organisations to measure, manage and reduce their carbon emissions. We participate in the project by voluntarily disclosing information about our own processes and progress. The results are published in twenty countries around the world.

Companies are scored using two metrics; a Carbon performance score and a Carbon Disclosure score. The Carbon performance score recognises companies taking positive action to mitigate their impact, manage the risks and seize the opportunities presented by climate change. The Carbon Disclosure score assess companies on the quality and completeness of their disclosures. In the 2010 CDp Berkeley achieved a ‘Disclosure score’ of 71, higher than that of all other Uk FTSE350 homebuilders. Our ‘performance score’ of ‘C’ indicated that our performance is comparable with our peers. We continue to try and improve our CDp ranking by improving our transparency and management practices.

THE NExTGENERATION BENCHMARk

Our performance in the NextGeneration benchmark is highlighted on page 37.

RUN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BUSI

NES

S

27,026 plots in the land bank

23.5% on 2009/10


profit before tax up

FTSE4Good


The success of our business is a cumulative measure of our financial, environmental and social performance and how well we are able to manage risks and comply with regulations.

The following pages chart our progress this year against our commitments relating to our business operations.

improving operational environmental efficiency

ENERGy

In 2010/11, our total carbon emissions were 16,262 tonnes CO2-e, of which our Scope 1 and 2 emissions were 9,964 tonnes CO2-e. This equates to 1.81 tCO2-e per operative on site, which is the normalisation metric we believe most accurately reflects our business activity and therefore our relative energy consumption.

Last year, we established a commitment to reduce our carbon emissions by 5% year-on-year. We have assessed our Scope 1 and 2 emissions to establish our progress against this target. We have chosen to exclude Scope 3 emissions in this assessment as we began robustly collecting additional Scope 3 emission data in 2010/11 and did not collect this in 2009/10. This ensures that we assess our progress on a like-for-like basis. See page 63 for a breakdown of our emissions data.

Whilst we are pleased that we have reduced our normalised Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions by 3.94% compared to our performance in 2009/10, we have not met our challenging commitment for a 5% year-on-year reduction. We have identified a number of factors which will have contributed to this. In 2010/11 Berkeley increased the numbers of sites in production, the result of which is that many developments are now in the early phases of construction. These early phases are generally energy intensive but labour efficient – for example demolition works and concrete frame construction. Therefore, using the number of operatives on site to normalise our carbon emissions may not give a true reflection of our performance on site during these phases of construction. It is anticipated that during the coming years, phases of construction will become more labour intensive and therefore normalising using the number of operatives on site will give a better indication of year-on-year performance. As well as this, the UK experienced very poor weather during the winter months of 2010/11, which is likely to have had an impact on heating and lighting energy consumption across all our sites and offices.

We recognise that it is good practice to take a proactive approach to reducing energy consumption, particularly in light of our 2010/11 performance. We have therefore updated our Vision2020 commitments to include new action-based energy reduction commitments in 2011/12. You can read these new commitments on page 53.

GREEN TRANSpORT INITIATIVES

Overall, our carbon emissions relating to car travel have reduced this year. Our Company Car Policy ensures that our company car emissions are reducing, with an average emission rate for our fleet cars of 152gCO2/km compared to 161gCO2/km in 2009/10.

Although transport emissions to and from our construction sites are outside the scope of our emission commitment, we realise the importance of their impact and have put initiatives in place to reduce these, in particular through the formation of construction stage transport plans. Other initiatives include the installation of cycle racks and encouraging subcontractors to car/van share. Some of our sites also measure the emissions associated with deliveries to and from sites.

pROGRESS REVIEW

0.0

0.5

0.25

1.0

0.75

1.5

1.75

1.25

2.0

2010/11

1.090.06

0.63

0.11

ElectricityNatural Gas

Diesel

PetrolLPG

2009/10

1.08

0.18

0.470.060.01

CARBON REDUCTION COMMITMENT

For the first time this year, we are required to report our carbon emissions to the Government through the ‘Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency Scheme’.

The scheme requires us to purchase carbon allowances equivalent to the amount of carbon we produce from April 2011 onwards. We expect this will add approximately 10% to the cost of our energy and provides us with an added incentive to reduce our carbon emissions.

berkeley group normalised scope 1 & 2 carbon emissions (tco2-e normalised per operative on site)


RUN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BUSI

NES

S


WATER

During 2010/11 our total water consumption was 117,488m3, which we have normalised by the average number of operatives on site during the year, giving a result of 21.32m3 per operative, compared to 20.38m3 per operative in 2009/10. This reflects an increase of 4.4% in our water consumption against our 2009/10 baseline and means that we have not met our commitment to reduce water consumption by 5% year-on-year.

In part, this is a consequence of a number of new projects starting during the year and the type of activities taking place across the business as we begin new development phases. The demolition process, in particular, is highly water intensive, requiring water to dampen the site to limit the spread of dust to local areas. In order to reverse this trend, we will be reviewing our high water consuming projects and offices over the next year to understand how we can reduce water consumption.

All our sites and offices are striving to reduce their carbon emissions and water consumption. Some examples of this are tabled below.

WASTE

Our efforts to reduce both the volume of waste we generate and the volume of waste we send to landfill are driven not only by environmental concerns, but also by the rising landfill tax which is currently set at £56 per tonne for inert waste and which will reach £80 per tonne in April 2014 (where it will stay until at least 2020).

During 2010/11 our efforts to reduce waste have moved away from purely focusing upon reducing waste sent to landfill, to reusing and recycling as much as possible within our existing waste streams. This year, we generated 788,243 tonnes of construction, excavation and demolition waste, of which we recycled or reused 82%, exceeding our commitment in this area.

managing and preventing pollutionEnvironmental audits are performed at all our sites by members of our sustainability and Health & Safety teams. The audit document includes 16 sections covering a variety of themes including waste management, ecology and pollution prevention. All sites are scored and where appropriate, recommendations for improvement are made. These audits form part of our Sustainability Management System and are seen as a catalyst for continual improvement.

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

95,200

87,391

67,888

117,488

74,481

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

16%

16%11%

20%37%

Reuse Incineration (with energy recovery)

Incineration (without energy recovery) Compost

Deep well injected

Recycled (following on site segregation)

MRF (Material Recovery Facility)

Landfill (Non-hazardous or inert)

Landfill (Hazardous)

Landfill (Beneficial Use)

Hazardous waste treatment facility

OFFICES CONSTRUCTION SITES

Energy efficiency initiatives

Smart meters.

Timers on electronic equipment.

Light zoning and upgrade.

purchase Green electricity.

Motion sensor lighting.

Timers on electronic equipment.

Smart meters.

Water efficiency initiatives

Infra-red taps.

Low flow showers.

Dual flush toilets.

Waterless urinals.

Rainwater used for trade purposes.

Retrofitting waterless urinals.

Water-butts for washing boots.

berkeley group construction Waste Disposal routes

berkeley group Total Water consumption (m3)

energy and water saving initiatives


valuing our employeesOur success as an organisation is a testament to the knowledge, skill and hard work of our employees. It is important to us to ensure that we maintain our high calibre workforce and we therefore seek to achieve a high level of staff retention. This year we measured our staff retention rate and our staff turnover rate for the first time.

We believe that the success of Vision2020 is a responsibility shared by all our employees. It is therefore important that all our staff are provided with a strategic understanding of Vision2020 and its relevance to their role and to the company more broadly. This understanding is embedded through a variety of different training methods, tailored to suit different staff roles, including inductions, conferences, briefings and formal training days.

Working with charities and local communitiesWe began capturing information on the contribution both our staff and the company is making to local charities and communities this year. We are proud to report that we have contributed over 600 hours of staff time to local charities and communities and made numerous in-kind donations throughout 2010/11. Some examples of what we have done are listed below:

• 30 staff from St George and Berkeley completed the property Week 10k run on behalf of Muscular Dystrophy.

• 3 staff from St james completed the Green park Triathlon for Sport Relief.

• Given donations for prizes in a number of charity raffles and school fetes.

• Repaired, refurbished and redecorated community buildings such as a children’s and religious centres, church halls and local schools.

• provided advice on planning applications for local community facilities.

• provided a training workshop for the Royal Engineers on site safety.

Driving sustainability through our supply chainWe are continually improving the extent to which sustainability is driven through our supply chain. Given that the value of our supply chain is over £450 million, we see this as an area in which we can have considerable impacts and drive our sustainability objectives.

Reflecting this, the Berkeley Group Management Rules which all contractors that work with us must sign up to, are currently being re-written and a code of practice on sustainability will be included to cover our sustainability requirements.

our staff turnover rate was

17%during 2010/11

in 2010/11 we contributed over

600 hours to local charities and communities

BERkELEy GROUp SUSTAINABLE pROCUREMENT pOLICy

Our Sustainable Procurement Policy states that:

• For those goods sourced from developing countries, we expect suppliers to demonstrate that minimum supply chain labour standards have been met.

• We give a preference to procuring materials and services which are ethically sourced.

• We use the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Base Code and the standards adopted by the UN through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the ILO Conventions as the basis for this policy.

To view our Sustainable procurement and Timber policies please see our website.www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/ investor-information/sustainability/policies



www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/investor-information/sustainability/policies

RUN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BUSI

NES

S


2010/11 2009/10 2008/09 2007/08 2006/07

3.63 3.83 3.90 3.80

7.20

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

reducing workplace accidentsThe 2010/11 period has seen production levels increase significantly across the Group and this requires continued vigilance and hard work from our teams to maintain our standards.

Our Accident Incident Rate (AIR) at Year End is 3.63, which is 0.20 lower than 2009/10, when it was 3.83. Our Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) for Year End is 0.178, which is 0.009 lower than 2009/10, when it was 0.187. This is despite a significant rise of over 50% in the number of people employed across our operations, averaging at 6,579 at the end of April 2011 against 4,373 at the same point 2009/10.

These results demonstrate that we have improved on our 2009/10 performance and continue to outperform the industry. We are proud of these results, particularly when they are viewed in the context of a year in which our levels of production have doubled.

It is with regret that we must also report a serious incident which occurred on one of our sites this year, which unfortunately resulted in a fatality. Although we were acting in a client capacity at the time of the incident, we will consider the conclusions following the investigation and ensure that any lessons that can be learnt are reflected in our own Health & Safety management practices.

Our commitment to high Health & Safety standards has been recognised by both RoSPA and the NHBC. We received 14 Gold Awards and 1 Gold Medal Award from RoSPA this year. We also won an NHBC Health & Safety Award in the ‘Best Site Award – National Winner’ category for The Tower at our St George Wharf development. 4 other sites were highly commended and a further 3 commended.

behavioural safety

GOOD ORDER AND GOOD WORk

Our Good Order and Good Work programmes are designed to help drive high Health & Safety standards on our sites by tackling the two key causes of accidents: the working environment and the behaviour of workers.

Both Good Order and Good Work have been positively received by our contractors, managers and operatives as positive steps in improving safety and awareness on our sites.

During 2010/11 a number of enhancements to the programmes have been made, which include:

• producing a new corporate induction video which familiarises site operatives with the Good Order and Good Work programmes

• Updating the suite of Good Work information cards for use on sites to advise operatives of the ethos behind each programme

• Distributing new Good Work posters for use on site

In September 2011 we will be running six contractor conferences where we will present the Good Work initiative to around 400 directors in our contractor companies. The directors will be asked to disseminate the ethos of the initiative to ensure that they embrace it within their own businesses as much as we do within ours.

accident incident rate per 1,000 employees

20 11

GOLD MEDALAward

nhbc health & safety awards 2011: best site award – national Winner (multistorey) – The Tower, one, st george Wharf

rospa awards 2011: 14 gold awards1 gold medal award (st george Wharf)

52 Berkeley Annual Report 2011

CASE STUDy: INTERVIEW WITH LORRAINE COOpER, SUSTAINABILITy MANAGER

Having joined the Berkeley Group in 2010, Lorraine Cooper is the Sustainability Manager for Berkeley, Berkeley First and St james. Here she reflects on her first year in the role.

What is an average day for you?Each day is different - one day I might be on site advising the build teams on how to manage sustainability issues effectively and another I might be attending a pre-start meeting, delivering training or meeting with management teams to discuss strategy and performance. My overall aim is to help deliver the Group’s strategy and ensure that we are reducing our environmental impact .

Who is in your team and how do you manage sustainability across the business?We have a small central team focusing on leading and delivering the Group’s sustainability strategy which includes providing training to project teams and undertaking inspections to ensure sites are complying with our in-house sustainability management system.

The success of our team is underpinned by a network of sustainability representatives across the business. Each business has a representative tasked with championing sustainability, all construction sites also have someone who is designated to manage sustainability issues, and there is a green champion at every permanent office. This structure is critical in ensuring that sustainability is embedded within our day-to-day operations and that we are all working together to achieve our goals.

how do you engage staff and contractors in sustainability?All employees receive sustainability training so that they are aware of its importance, not only to the company but to the wider environment and community. Our contractors are made aware of potential sustainability issues and our expectations during the tender process and this is then reinforced during pre-start meetings and on an individual level through the site induction process and toolbox talks. The site managers are the key link between the company and the subcontractors as they ensure that contractors are on board to help us manage environmental and social issues successfully.

how is berkeley monitoring and improving the environmental impact of our construction sites?Each of our live sites is formally audited once a quarter to determine how it is performing in respect of the Sustainability Management System. The results are then distributed to our site and management teams. This helps to maintain a healthy level of competition between sites and divisions, driving continual improvements in performance.

What do you think are the main opportunities for the coming year? Historically the main focus of our sustainability efforts has been on construction phase sustainability impacts, but I’d like to continue to work more with the technical and commercial teams so that we can improve the management of sustainability through the design and procurement stages.

“ ALL EMpLOyEES RECEIVE SUSTAINABILITy TRAINING SO THAT THEy ARE AWARE OF ITS IMpORTANCE, NOT ONLy TO THE COMpANy BUT TO THE WIDER ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITy ”

Lorraine Cooper



RUN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BUSI

NES

S


RUN

NIN

G A

SU

STA

INA

BLE

BUSI

NES

S



Improving operational environmental efficiency

Reduce operational carbon dioxide emissions by 5% annually until April 2012. Reduce operational water consumption by 5% annually until April 2012.Reuse or recycle over 80% of construction, demolition and excavation waste.Conduct a sustainability review at all permanent offices and provide recommendations for improvement, specifically including recommendations for reducing energy and water use.Measure carbon emissions associated with commercial transport movements to and from sites. Undertake an energy and water use reduction programme at three construction sites and share the lessons learnt around the business. Set up a material exchange programme to facilitate the sharing of excess materials between construction sites and reduce the volume of waste sent to landfill.

put in place new sector-leading operational energy, water and waste reduction or stabilisation targets.

Managing and preventing pollution

Undertake environmental audits on all construction sites.

Valuing our employees

provide sustainability training to all employees. Measure staff retention rates and benchmark performance.

Undertake staff satisfaction surveys and develop action plans to address any issues raised.Have personal development plans in place for all staff.

Working with charities and local communities

Capture and quantify our work with charities and local communities and benchmark performance.Match employees’ donations and fundraising for The Berkeley Foundation.Implement a Give as you Earn Scheme.Raise £300,000 for The Berkeley Foundation through employee fundraising and donations.

Achieve the Business in the Community Mark.

Driving sustainability through our supply chain

Communicate our sustainability aspirations and requirements to suppliers through our Sustainable procurement policy.Integrate sustainability requirements into supplier contracts and management rules.

Carry out audits of at least 25% of our suppliers to ensure compliance with our Sustainable procurement policy.Only use certified timber and timber based products.

Being a sector leader

Share experiences with Government and the rest of the industry through representation at steering groups and events.

Measure the costs and benefits of sustainability initiatives so that we can demonstrate the value of our approach to stakeholders.

Reducing workplace accidents

Continue to achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Incident Rate (AIR) of less than 4 incidents per 1,000 employees and sub contractors.Continue to achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) of less than 0.20.

Achieve a reportable accident rate of less than 3.5 incidents per 1,000 employees and sub-contractors. Achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) of less than 0.175.

Health & Safety training

provide Health & Safety training to all direct employees. provide all direct employees with an individual Health & Safety training assessment and allocate training based on individual need.

Health and well-being


Make available a health and well-being programme to all employees.

Measuring performance

Undertake work to identify an external benchmarking programme (e.g. CHASpI) to positively measure the Group’s Health & Safety performance.Undertake internal Health & Safety audits on all construction sites.

participate in an external benchmarking programme and report at least annually.Gain OHSAS 18001 certification for 20% of construction operations.

Behavioural safety

Further enhance the Group’s ‘Good Work’ programme through active engagement with contractors’ management and operatives.

Set a performance target for our projects and contractors in respect to the ‘Good Work’ programme.

We have reviewed our commitments and ambitions made in May 2010 to ensure they appropriately consider those issues which are material to our stakeholders.

Our revised commitments and ambitions are set out in the table below.


pERFORMANCE REpORT

The Hamptons, Worcester Park54 Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011


COMMITMENTS FROM 2010PERFORMANCE 2010/11 COMMENTS ON PROGRESS



The percentage of customers that would recommend us to a friend for the year to March 2011 was 96.2%.

Communicate Vision2020 to all customers. Vision2020 is communicated to our customers through boards and brochures in our sales and marketing suites, a dedicated section on the Berkeley Group website and logos on hoarding and marketing materials. We will look to improve our communication in 2011/12.

Highlight the sustainability benefits of our developments in all sales and marketing materials/handover packs.

We have produced a selection of marketing materials containing sustainability information and will work throughout 2011/12 to ensure that all sales outlets use these materials. Most home manuals now contain information on sustainability and we will be working to ensure all new home manuals produced in 2010/11 contain this information.


We have training in place for our sales and marketing staff and will ensure that by the end of 2011/12 all have been given this training.

Ensure that all commercial space achieves BREEAM Very Good or is capable of achieving BREEAM Very Good if the fit-out is to be undertaken by the tenant.

100% of our developments submitted for planning during 2010/11 containing commercial space committed to BREEAM Very Good. One development will only be constructed to shell and core and therefore fit-out will be undertaken by the tenant.


The market research has been completed. 221 survey responses were received, representing 26% of purchasers that completed in the period 1 january 2010 to 31 December 2010. The results can be found on page 22.


All new homes to gain certification to Code Level 3. planning applications were submitted for a total of 8,151 homes during 2010/11. Four schemes did not commit to Code Level 3:

- One scheme (755 homes) was an application to make relatively modest changes to an existing planning permission granted in july 2008. The original application committed to achieve EcoHomes Very Good and this position was retained on the amended scheme.

- One scheme (5 homes) is adjacent to an existing site that is not developing homes to Code Level 3. The site is also contaminated. The costs of remediation in conjunction with the costs of achieving Code Level 3 would affect the economic viability of the scheme. We believe there would also be issues associated with marketing similar homes on the adjacent sites that have been built to differing standards.

- One scheme (18 homes) was an application to optimise an existing planning permission for six private homes for which the application was submitted prior to 1 May 2010. The existing consent did not commit these homes to Code Level 3 and this position was retained on the optimised scheme.

- One scheme (373 homes) was a reserved matters application pursuant to an outline application granted planning permission in 2006. The outline application did not commit to Code Level 3 and this position was retained on the optimised scheme.

Of the schemes which committed to Code Level 3 or above, 1,068 homes across three schemes committed to Code Level 4.

Achieve at least a 25% improvement in energy performance compared to 2006 Building Regulations.

All our homes submitted for planning during 2010/11 will meet this commitment (with the exceptions noted above) in order to gain Code Level 3 certification.

During 2010/11 we have made considerable progress towards the achievement of our two-year commitments set in May 2010. The table below provides a summary of our progress against our commitments.

VISION2020 pERFORMANCE SUMMARy Our vision

for the future

pERFORMANCE REpORT – SUSTAINABILITY REPORT






BUILDING GREENER HOMES (cont.)

Future climate change risks considered as part of development design and construction.

100% of our schemes submitted for planning during 2010/11 have, or will, consider climate change risks as part of development design and construction. Measures include full flood risk assessments undertaken during the planning process and assessment of overheating risk as part of Building Regulations part L 2010 compliance.

All new homes to achieve water use of 105 l/p/d. All our homes submitted for planning during 2010/11 will meet this commitment (with the exceptions noted on previous page) in order to gain Code Level 3 certification.

All sites situated within 1km of a public transport node. 100% of sites submitted for planning during 2010/11 are within 1km of a public transport node.

provide cycle storage on all sites. 100% of our developments submitted for planning during 2010/11 will provide cycle storage facilities for residents.

provide home office working facilities to all units. 100% of the homes submitted for planning during 2010/11 will provide home office working facilities.

Recycling facilities are provided for every home. 100% of the homes submitted for planning during 2010/11 will provide recycling facilities for every home.

Over 95% of development is on brownfield land. In 2010/11, 92% of our completed development was on brownfield land. This has dropped due to completions occurring in the year on four greenfield sites.

One planning application was made during 2010/11 on a greenfield site.

All sites employ an ecologist to provide advice and guidance on protecting ecology.

One scheme (5 homes) will not employ an ecologist. The site is covered in hard standing and will also not be designed to Code Level 3 for the reasons outlined above.



All of our new developments submitted for planning during 2010/11 are expected to achieve the Building for Life Silver Standard.


Through our commitment to Building for Life, and inherent in the way we work, we use bespoke designs when creating and constructing all our homes and communities.

Consult with a Crime prevention Design Advisor (CDpA) or police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) on all developments.

All developments submitted for planning during 2010/11 have already consulted with a CDpA/ALO or will do so during detailed design.

Apply Lifetime Homes principles on all new homes. All homes submitted for planning during 2010/11 (excluding student, extra care and hotel accommodation) have committed to applying the Lifetime Homes principles in their design.

Apply our best practice community consultation guidelines on all planning applications over 500 units.

100% of our schemes over 500 units which submitted planning applications during 2010/11 consulted with the community using our best practice guidelines or demonstrated exemplary community consultation.

All developments of 1,000 units or more will create an Employment plan which includes targets for the proportion of local labour used, plans for long-term job creation and measurement of the success of the plan implementation.

We have developed a draft Employment plan and will be rolling this out on our largest developments in 2011/12.

All sites register with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and continue to achieve a minimum of 32 points.

All sites have registered with CCS. The Group average score for 2010/11 is 35.5. Four sites have not achieved a score above 32 during the year – two scored 31.5 and two scored 31.

SUSTAINABILITY REPORT – pERFORMANCE REpORT




Reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions by 5% per year until 2012.

We collect data on all our direct carbon emissions and those relating to business travel. This year we also began collecting data on subcontractors’ fuel consumption on our sites. We have measured our reduction in carbon emissions based on our Scope 1 and 2 emissions only and have normalised our consumption by the average number of operatives on site each year. On this basis, we decreased our 2010/11 carbon emissions by 3.94% compared to 2009/10.

Reduce annual water consumption by 5% per year until 2012.

We have normalised our water consumption by the average number of operatives on site. On this basis, our water consumption increased by 4.4% in 2010/11, against our 2009/10 baseline.

Reuse or recycle over 80% of construction, excavation and demolition waste.

We reused or recycled 82% of our construction, excavation and demolition waste during 2010/11. See pages 64–65 for a breakdown of our waste data.

All employees receive sustainability training. All our staff have access to sustainability training, either via our sustainability training programmes or via individual briefing sessions, both of which are tailored to specific roles. The training courses range from a 2-hour briefing about Vision2020 to Directors to a 1-day training course on environmental management for construction staff.

Undertake internal environmental audits on all construction sites.

Environmental audits are conducted at all sites by members of our sustainability and Health & Safety teams at least 3 times per year. This currently includes sites where we are not the principal Contractor.

Measure staff retention rates and benchmark performance.

Retention rates are measured on a quarterly basis and have been benchmarked against published housebuilder/developer peers where they make this publicly available.

Capture and quantify our work with charities and local communities and benchmark performance.

This year we began collecting information on both our financial and in-kind contributions to local charities and communities. We will assess our performance in this area year-on-year. Information on our 2010/11 performance can be found on page 50.

Communicate our sustainability aspirations and requirements to suppliers through our Sustainable procurement policy.

Our Sustainable procurement policy is distributed to our suppliers with all tender documents and contracts.

Sustainability requirements integrated into supplier contracts and management rules.

The Berkeley Group Management Rules are under review and a Code of practice covering sustainability has been drafted. These will be launched in 2011/12. All our suppliers who are on our central call-off database will be contracted under these management rules.

Share our experiences with Government and the rest of the industry through representation at steering groups and events.

During 2010/11, we have participated in the London plan Examination in public through the Consortium of London Developers.

We also participated in and supported the UkGBC Task Group on Legal Frameworks for Sustainable Community Infrastructure.

In addition, we have engaged with national and local government directly on a number of issues including the impact that building regulations and local planning policies are having on building design and the comfort of homes.

Continue to achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) of less than 0.20.

Our AFR rate in 2010/11 was 0.178 which is below the industry average.

Continue to achieve a RIDDOR reportable Accident Incident Rate (AIR) of less than 4 incidents per 1,000 employees and sub-contractors.

Our AIR rate in 2010/11 was 3.63 which is below the industry average.

All direct employees to receive Health & Safety training.

Following the annual training review, we have updated our current training programme with the introduction of further specialist courses. We have also reviewed our current training matrix, which outlines all the courses we currently run and establishes a timeline by which an employee must have attended the given course.


A sub-working group has been established to take this commitment forward. In May 2011 the sub-working group drafted a ‘health and well-being’ strategy, and during june/july they began drafting a programme of possible arrangements. It is intended that a proposed programme will be forwarded to the Group’s Health & Safety Working Group in Q3 2011/12.

Undertake work to identify an external benchmarking programme (e.g. CHApSI) to positively measure the Group’s Health & Safety performance.

Research into an external benchmarking programme is currently being undertaken to establish an appropriate comparative benchmark to measure our performance against. It is envisaged that proposals will be put forward to the Group’s Health & Safety Working Group in Q3 2011/12.

Undertake internal Health & Safety audits on all construction sites.

During Q2 2010/11 three dedicated Health & Safety Auditors were employed . Their purpose is to undertake unannounced monitoring visits at each project to provide an independent overview of Health & Safety performance. All sites were visited monthly during Q4 2010/11.

Further enhance the Group’s ‘Good Work’ programme through active engagement with Contractors’ management and operatives.

In September 2011 we will be running six Contractor Conferences where we will present the Good Work initiative to around 400 directors in our subcontractor companies.





2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Average customer satisfaction 90% 89% 91% 93% 96%KPI

GRI PR5 PAGE 20

percentage of customers who would recommend Berkeley to a friend as assessed through customers’ surveys undertaken by Inhouse Research and Training Ltd, an independent external agency.

percentage of completed commercial space certified to BREEAM Very Good ND ND ND ND 45.2% PI PAGE 21

A total of 7,067m2 of commercial space was completed during the year. 3,193m2 of commercial space was certified to BREEAM Very Good. 2,569m2 was only completed to fit-out stage and was therefore not certified.

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL pERFORMANCE STANDARDS

percentage of completed dwellings certified using the EcoHomes methodology. 43.2% 48.4% 37.4% 45.7% 30.9%

PAGE 27percentage of completed dwellings certified using the Code for Sustainable Homes methodology. ND ND ND 18.0% 33.7% PI

percentage of completed dwellings certified using an environmental performance methodology. 43.2% 48.4% 37.4% 63.6% 64.6% KPI

This covers all homes completed in the year – a total of 2,544

ENERGy pERFORMANCE OF HOMES

Average improvement in energy performance compared to 2006 Building Regulations. ND ND ND ND 20% PAGE 28

This figure covers all homes completed in the year.

LAND USE

percentage of completed dwellings on brownfield land. 100% 100% 100% 100% 92% PI PAGE 31

This figure covers all homes completed in the year.

64.6%63.6%

37.4%48.4%

43.2%

2010/112009/10

2008/09

2007/08

2006/07

percentage of completed dwellings certified using an environmental performance methodology.

kEy pERFORMANCE INDICATORS



percentage of sites where 80% of the development is located within 500m of a transport node. 91.8% 94.3% 94.8% 90.7% 96.2% PAGE 29

This covers all sites under construction in 2010/11.

percentage of sites where 80% of the development is located within 500m of a transport node

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

LIFETIME HOMES

percentage of completed dwellings designed to the Lifetime Homes Standard. ND ND ND ND 29% KPI PAGE 40

717 homes completed in the year were designed to the Lifetime Homes Standard. This represented 29% of completed homes during 2010/11.

CONSIDERATE CONSTRUCTION

percentage of sites registered under the Considerate Constructors Scheme (CCS). 98% 100% 100% 99% 100% PI PAGE 40

Average score in the Considerate Constructors Scheme. ND 34.1(1) 34.5(2) 35.3(3) 35.5(4) PI PAGE 40

This covers all sites and is out of a maximum of 40 points.

(1) The Uk average CCS score across registered sites in 2007/08 was 30 (May 2008).

(2) The Uk average CCS score across registered sites in 2008/09 was 31.5 (May 2009).



Four projects fell below our target of 32, however the Group average remained above the benchmark and above the Uk average.


34.1 34.5 35.3 35.5

2008 2009 2010 2011


34.1 34.5 35.3 35.5

2008 2009 2010 2011


considerate constructors scheme scores

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

TRANSpORT

94.3%

91.8%

96.2%94.8%

90.7%

2008 2009 2010 20112007




2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

FINANCIAL pERFORMANCE

Revenue (£ million) . 918.4 991.5 702.2 615.3 742.6

KPI GRI EC1

PAGE 47Annual Report and Accounts

Revenue from residential sales (£ million). 867.9 960.1 671.7 595.7 721.4

Revenue from commercial sales (£ million). 50.5 31.4 30.5 19.6 21.2

Capital employed (£ million). 700.6 685.9 516.5 545.4 891.7

Total net (debt) or cash (£ million). 81.0 -4.5 284.8 316.9 274.9

Shareholders Equity / Net Assets (£ million). 781.8 681.4 801.3 862.3 933.8

Return on Equity. 23.2% 26.6% 16.2% 13.3% 15.3%

Units sold . 2,852 3,167 1,501 2,201 2,544

Number of sites on which commercial space sold. 14.0 11.0 6.0 19.0 9.0

All results are published in accordance with IFRS.

FINES AND LEGAL ACTIONS

Number of health, safety and environmental prosecutions. 0 0 0 0 0 KPI

Monetary value of significant fines relating to noncompliance with environmental laws and regulations. 0 0 0 0 0 GRI EN28

Total number of legal actions for anti-competitive behaviour, anti-trust and monopoly practices and their outcomes. ND ND ND 0 0 GRI SO7

Monetary value of significant fines relating to noncompliance with laws and regulations. ND ND ND 0 0 GRI SO8

This covers all of our operations. No fines or legal actions have been incurred across any of our operations.

CHARITABLE AND COMMUNITy CONTRIBUTIONS

Charitable Giving (£’000). 172.0 268.0 128.0 238.6 574.0

This result is published in accordance with IFRS.

Total Money Donated to Charitable Causes and the Community (£’000). ND ND ND ND 0.8

PAGE 50Total Time Donated to Charitable Causes and the Community (hours). ND ND ND ND 613

The total amount contributed by Berkeley and its staff to charitable and worthy causes includes money which was raised by The Berkeley Foundation during the year.

Information on the time donated to charitable causes and the community was collected by each division during the year.



2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

EMpLOyEES

Number of employees . 865 996 836 748 935

This covers all activities and is presented as an average figure for the year.

percentage of direct employees who are female. 36% 36% 34% 32% 32% GRI LA13

This covers all activities and is presented as an average figure for the year.

Total number and rate of employee turnover - Under 30 ND ND ND ND 5% (51)

GRI LA2 PAGE 50

Total number and rate of employee turnover - 30 to 50 ND ND ND ND 8% (84)

Total number and rate of employee turnover - 50+ ND ND ND ND 4% (39)

Total number and rate of employee turnover - Males. ND ND ND ND 10% (102)

Total number and rate of employee turnover - Females. ND ND ND ND 7% (72)

All employees are based in the South East of England, so are deemed to be within one region. The number in brackets indicates the number of staff leaving employment. The percentage indicates the rate of turnover, based on a total of 1,053 permanent staff in employment as of April 2011.

HEALTH & SAFETy

RIDDOR AIR per 1,000 employees (Client and principal contractor sites). 7.20 3.80 3.90 3.83 3.63

KPI GRI LA7 PAGE 51

This covers all activities, direct employees and sub-contractors on site.

Number of training days per direct employee. 0.96 0.46 1.7 0.29 0.79

This covers all activities.

percentage of site operatives holding a CSCS card. ND ND ND ND 99.0% GRI LA10

This covers all activities, direct employees and sub-contractors on site.

RIDDOR AFR (Client and principal contractor sites). ND ND ND ND 0.178 PI PAGE 51

This covers all activities and covers sub-contractors on site by calculating the number of RIDDOR injuries per 100,000 hours worked.

3.63

37.4%3.833.903.80

7.20

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

riDDor air per 1,000 employees




2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

CLIMATE CHANGE

Scope 1 Greenhouse Gas emissions by weight (tCO2-e) ND ND ND 2,913 3,999

PAGE 48



Total direct and indirect Greenhouse Gas emissions by weight (tCO2-e) 10,870 8,927 8,165 8,040 16,262

KPI

GRI EN16, EN17

This figure is used in our submission to the Carbon Disclosure project (Total Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions). Data for May 2009 to April 2011 has been recalculated using DEFRA conversion factors 2010. Data for May 2007 to April 2009 used 2009 DEFRA conversion factors as reported in the 2010 Sustainability Report.

Scope 1 emissions include those fuels directly consumed - natural gas, directly purchased diesel, petrol, LpG and other fuels, diesel and petrol relating to business travel.

Scope 2 emissions relate to the electricity directly consumed.

Scope 3 emissions relate to those fuels indirectly consumed - air travel, sub-contractors’ diesel, petrol, LpG and other fuels and indirect emissions relating to the extraction and transportation of primary fuels.

Detail on data coverage and assumptions is provided against the key performance indicators for direct and indirect energy consumption below.

The inclusion of CO2 equivalents, in addition to CO2, covers the impact (global warming potential) from methane and nitrous oxides only. Remaining gases (HFC-134a, HFC-143a and Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) are believed to be relatively insignificant for reporting on emissions arising from our activities.

Total direct and indirect Greenhouse Gas emissions by weight broken down by source (kg CO2-e) 10,870,081 8,927,221 8,165,469 8,039,665 16,261,849

broKen DoWn by Type:

Electricity (brown) usage total 7,671,126 5,796,186 4,744,445 3,967,730 5,846,937

Electricity (green) usage total ND ND ND ND 117,708

Gas usage total 65,955 60,035 168,399 211,061 1,010,311

Diesel usage total - direct - - 510,189 2,287,239 2,602,193

Diesel usage total - indirect - - - - 3,851,692

petrol usage total - direct - - 349 412,887 344,902

petrol usage total - indirect - - - - 5,183

LpG usage total - direct - - - 1,412 41,951

LpG usage total - indirect - - - - 24,179

Gas Oil usage total - indirect - - - - 1,353

Fugitive emissions from fuel use - indirect - - - 1,050,423 2,178,659

Fuel usage (air travel) - - - 108,914 236,781

Fuel usage (business travel) 3,133,000 3,071,000 2,742,086 - -

The following 2010 conversion factors have been used (kWh to kg CO2 or CO2-e):

CO2 Nitrous Oxide Methane Scope 3 Indirect Emissions

GHG emissions from Natural gas 0.20515 0.00012 0.00030 0.01996

GHG emissions from Diesel 0.26607 0.00294 0.00015 0.05105

GHG emissions from petrol 0.25227 0.00171 0.00051 0.04504

GHG emissions from LpG 0.22999 0.00018 0.00010 0.0288

GHG from purchased Grid Electricity 0.54160 0.00337 0.00024 0.07185

All conversion factors taken from: DEFRA, 2010, http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/reporting/pdf/101006-guidelines-ghg-conversion-factors.xls



2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

CLIMATE CHANGE (cont.)


0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000

Electricity (brown)

Electricity (green

Gas

Diesel - direct

Diesel - indirect

Petrol - direct

Petrol - indirect

LPG - direct

LPG - indirect

Gas Oil - indirect

Fugitive emissions from fuel - indirect

Fuel usage (air travel)

Fuel usage (business travel)

2010/11

2009/10

2008/09

2007/08

2006/07

Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight broken down by source (Kg co2-e)

OpERATIONAL ENERGy USE

Total Direct energy consumption (Gj) 1,163 1,059 9,871 40,150 58,031 GRI EN3

broKen DoWn by Type:

Natural gas (Gj) 1,163 1,059 2,969 3,696 17,692 GRI EN3

Diesel (Gj) ND ND 6,897 30,592 34,804

petrol (Gj) ND ND 5 5,841 4,879

LpG (Gj) ND ND ND 22 656

Other fuel (Gj) ND ND ND - -

Data has been gathered from meter readings and billing information and delivery tickets in relation to fuels delivered to sites.

Gas data has been collated from total gas usage where in use across offices and sites. Gas was used on sites which accounted for 297 completed units in 2007 and 95 units in 2008. In 2008 gas was used on 3 sites accounting for 446 completed units. Data accuracy was much improved in 2009, which explains the increase in gas use. In 2010, gas data was provided for 4 sites and 4 offices. In 2011, gas data was provided for 5 sites and 8 offices.

In 2010/11, gas data was missing for 21% (22/103) of months of reported data. Due to the relatively small data set, assumptions were not used to complete this missing data.

Due to improved data collection methodologies in 2009, we have been able to measure other fuel use on site. Diesel was used on 18 sites in 2009 and petrol was used on one site. In 2010, diesel was used on 39 sites and LpG was used on one site. In 2011, diesel was used on 63 sites, but only 57 sites directly consumed the fuel. LpG was used on 18 sites but only 12 sites directly consumed this fuel. This information is not available prior to 2009.

Data was collected in m3, ft3, litres or kg of fuel converted to kWh. This is then converted to Gj using the GRI conversion factor 0.0036.

In 2010 and 2011 petrol and diesel used for business travel was incorporated into this calculation. We acknowledge that the figures for 2007 to 2009 represent an underestimation of our total direct energy consumption as they do not include petrol and diesel usage from business travel.

Figures for fuel and electricity usage have been drawn from data gathered for submissions against GRI kpIs EN3 and EN4. please refer to collection methodologies for these indicators for notes.

Electricity emissions from 2006/07 to 2008/09 have been restated in 2010/11 to include tCO2 equivalent. Electricity data from 2009/10 has been restated where reporting errors have been identified and corrected during the course of 2010/11.

Emissions arising from business travel have been calculated for all fleet cars owned by the Berkeley Group, and privately owned vehicles owned by recipients of a car allowance.

Emissions from air travel have been calculated using DEFRA’s 2010 guidelines to GHG conversion factors. The distance travelled on each flight is multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor (Domestic = 0.20515 kg_CO2-e per km; Short-haul = 0.11600; Long-Haul = 0.13535) and an uplift factor of 1.09. Indirect emissions, methane and nitrous oxide CO2 equivalent factors were also included in the emissions factor identified above. The 2009/10 figures have been restated in line with the 2010 DEFRA guidelines. A total of 235 domestic, short- and long-haul flights were taken in 2010/11 compared to 103 in 2009/10.

The following figures were used to calculate emissions from business travel:

yEARFLEET CARS

CARALLOWANCERECIpIENTS Average CO2

2006/7

2007/8

2008/9

2009/10

2010/11

250

250

205

205

190

300

300

280

329

421

177g/km

170g/km

167g/km

154g/km – Diesel Fleet Cars

180g/km – petrol Fleet Cars

149g/km – Diesel Fleet Cars

162g/km – petrol Fleet Cars

20,000miles - average distance travelled per year



In 2010, rather than using a previously estimated figure, data was collected on the distance travelled by car fleet users and those who received a car allowance to improve the reporting of car emission data. This resulted in an average distance travelled by car fleet users of 19,969 miles and by car allowance recipients of 5,079 miles.

In 2010, we were also able to identify average CO2 emissions associated with different fuel types. In 2010, approximately 76% of the car fleet and car allowance recipients drive a diesel car, with the remaining 24% driving petrol cars.

The total kg CO2 for petrol and diesel cars was calculated by multiplying the km travelled for each car by the gCO2/km for that car. Where the gCO2/km data was not provided, an average of 152gCO2/km was used. Data on fuel type for car allowance vehicles was not provided, so the percentage of emissions attributable to petrol and diesel vehicles was established by using the average ratio established in one division of the Berkeley Group and applying this to the whole Group - 46% of the cars were diesel and 54% were petrol. The percentage of emissions attributable to petrol and diesel vehicles for fleet cars was provided - 73% were diesel and 27% were petrol. Data for 16 fleet cars was not provided and was therefore excluded from this assessment. Travel distance for 24 company cars was not available and was therefore excluded from this calculation.



2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

OpERATIONAL ENERGy USE (cont.)

Total Indirect energy consumption - purchased electricity (Gj) 50,748(1) 38,344(2) 31,387(3) 26,198(4) 39,384(5)

GRI EN4

broKen DoWn by source: (6)

non renewable energy type

Combustible fuels 41,966 31,709 24,482 20,435 31,507

Nuclear 6,635 5,013 5,022 4,192 5,120

renewable energy type

Hydro 1,304 986 628 524 788

Energy from Waste/Biomass - - 942 786 788

Geo/win/solar/thermal 843 637 314 262 1,182

1 The data for 2007 has been calculated using actual energy data of 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 73% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average energy consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total energy consumption for all construction output.

2 The data for 2008 has been calculated using actual energy data of 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 94% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average energy consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total energy consumption for all construction output.

3 The data for 2009 has been calculated using energy data for 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions and 98% of construction sites (in previous years, this was measured as a % of construction output). Where data was not available, the average monthly energy consumption for the site was calculated to provide the missing data. We felt this to be a more accurate portrayal of our impacts, and which we are now able to provide due to improved data availability.

4 The data for 2010 has been calculated using energy data covering 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions and 100% of construction sites. Data includes all corporate offices, 9 sales and marketing suites (18 offices in total) and 59 sites which were in operation in 2010. Where data was not available, the average monthly energy consumption for the site was calculated to provide the missing data.

5 The data for 2011 has been calculated using energy data covering 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions and 100% of construction sites. Data includes all corporate offices and 21 sales and marketing suites (32 office in total) and 96 sites which were in operation in 2011. Where data was not available, the average monthly consumption for the site was calculated to estimate the missing data. In 2010/11, 1.03% of electricity data was based on estimates.

6 In 2009 and 2010, the breakdown of purchased electricity by source was calculated using figures from the International Energy Agency Uk Electricity Statistics (2007). This assumes a mix of:

Combustible fuel – 78% Nuclear – 16% Hydro – 2% Geo/wind/solar/thermal – 1% Energy from Waste/Biomass - 3% Source: http://www.iea.org/stats/electricitydata.asp?COUNTRy_CODE=GB

In 2011, the breakdown of purchased electricity by source was calculated using figures from the International Energy Agency Uk Electricity Statistics (2008). This assumes a mix of:

Combustible fuel – 80% Nuclear – 13% Hydro – 2% Geo/wind/solar/thermal – 2% Energy from Waste/Biomass - 3% Source: http://www.iea.org/stats/electricitydata.asp?COUNTRy_CODE=GB

possible energy losses through grid and efficiency losses, and variations in source due to tariff structure were not taken in to account.

Data was collected through a combination of meter readings, utility bills and accounting downloads.


CONSTRUCTION WASTE

Total waste produced (tonnes) ND 34,486(1) 41,574(2) 40,241(3) 788,243(4)

GRI EN22

broKen DoWn by Disposal meThoD

Composting - - - 110 12

Reuse (5) - - - 145 295,273

Recycling - 5,879 3,806 4,762 124,502

Recovery (5) - - - - -

Incineration (or use as fuel) - - - - -

Landfill (beneficial use) ND ND ND ND 87,999

Landfill (non-hazardous or inert) - 1,692 341 405 125,049



2007 2008 2009 2010 2011INdICATOR

TyPEREPORT

REFERENCE

CONSTRUCTION WASTE (cont.)

On-site storage - - - - -

Hazardous waste treatment facility - 182 102 3,698 1,356

Sent to Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) - 26,733 37,326 31,120 154,052

1 This has been calculated using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste Data Tools, with a coverage of 72% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, average waste per unit completed has been used to calculate total waste produced for all construction output.

2 This has been calculated using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste Data Tools, with a coverage of 95% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group.

3 This has been calculated using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste Data Tools. Construction waste data was received from all construction sites in operation across the Group.

4 This has been calculated using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste Data Tools. Construction, demolition and excavation waste data was received from all construction sites in operation across the Group, including those where the Group is not the principal Contractor. Where there are errors or incomplete data in the waste collection tools, that particular row of data has been omitted from waste analysis. Waste sent to landfill (beneficial use) has been included as a disposal route in 2011. Data for this disposal method was not recorded previously.

5 prior to 2010, waste directly reused or recovered has been reported in recycling figures. In 2010 and 2011, waste directly recovered has been reported in the recycling figures but that which was reused on-site or off-site was reported separately.

From 2008 to 2010, data was gathered in cubic metres and converted to tonnes using the Uk HMRC conversion factor for construction waste (1:0.6).

In 2011, data was gathered in cubic metres and converted to tonnes using conversion factors supplied by the Environment Agency and Uk HMRC based on the LOW of the particular waste stream.

Sources: http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsportalWebApp/channelsportalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_ShowContent&propertyType=document&id=HMCE_ CL_000509#p309_31822

http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/pdf/GEWA0308BNRR-e-e.pdf?lang=_e

percentage of waste reused or recycled ND ND ND ND 82% PI PAGE 49

This has been calculated by assessing the total percentage of waste which was: reused on site, reused off site, recycled directly, recycled via a material recovery facility (MRF), composted or incinerated. A recycling figure of 91% was used to determine the amount of waste which was recycled when it had been sent to an MRF.

OpERATIONAL WATER USE

Total water withdrawal by source m3/year (EN8) 95,200(1) 87,391(2) 67,888(3) 74,481(4) 117,488(5)

PI GRI EN8 PAGE 49

Sites ND ND ND ND 109,612

Offices ND ND ND ND 7,876

Municipal supplies 95,200 87,391 67,888 74,481 117,488

Other sources 0 0 0 0 -

1 The data for 2007 has been calculated using actual water data of 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its Divisions, and 47% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average water consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total water consumption for all construction output.

2 The data for 2008 has been calculated using actual water data of 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its Divisions, and 71% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average water consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total water consumption for all construction output.

3 The data for 2009 has been calculated using actual water data for 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its Divisions and 77% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. All Sales and Marketing suites have been excluded as these are often run off a landlord supply. Where data was not available for certain months, an average water consumption for each individual site has been used. We believe that this treatment of missing data has been made possible by improved data collection methodologies and offers a more accurate portrayal of our water usage.

4 The data for 2010 has been calculated using actual water data for 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions, 100% of construction sites in operation (in previous years, this was measured as a % of construction output) and from 6 Sales and Marketing suites within the Group. Where data was not available for certain months, an average water consumption for each individual site or office has been used.

5 The data for 2011 has been calculated using actual water data for 89% (8/9) of offices owned and/or occupied by the Berkeley Group and its divisions, 100% of construction sites in operation (67) and from 76% of the sales and marketing suites within the Group. Where no data was provided for a site or office, no assumptions were made to complete the data set. Where data was not available for some months, a monthly average water consumption for the site or office has been used to complete the data set. In 2010/11, 4% of water consumption was based on estimates.

100% of water each year was drawn from municipal supplies. Data was collected through a combination of meter readings and utility bills.

pOLLUTION

Total number of significant spills ND ND ND ND 5GRI EN23

Total volume of significant spills (litres) ND ND ND ND 1,075

This covers all construction activities.

A significant spill is classified as a spill of over 5 litres which requires the use of a site spill kit and is reported to the sustainability or Health & Safety team. None of these spills resulted in a pollution incident.


http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_ShowContent&propertyType=document&id=HMCE_CL_000509#P309_31822


GRI COMpLIANCE

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is the leading voluntary sustainability reporting standard. Over 2,000 companies around the world use the standard annually to guide their sustainability reporting and this year we have benchmarked our sustainability report against the G3 edition of the GRI guidelines. The GRI Framework sets out principles and indicators for measuring and reporting economic, environmental and social performance in a balanced and transparent manner.

Our report has been self-certified to Level B. The following pages provide a summary of our compliance with the GRI:G3 guidelines.

application of the gri ‘guidance on defining report content’ and ‘Defining report quality’ and the associated principles

MATERIALITy

We recently updated our materiality review to help us understand our key sustainability risks and opportunities both now and looking ahead. This process played an instrumental role in determining the content of this report. The update included a review of: our key stakeholders and their perspectives on our Vision2020 strategy, our sustainability policies, leading benchmark criteria and all the key policy updates that occurred during 2010/11.

STAkEHOLDERS

Our stakeholders are key to the success of our business and we pay particular attention to understanding perspectives through a number of feedback mechanisms. This feedback proved particularly important and informing in our materiality review detailed above. The full array of stakeholders to whom we deem ourselves accountable are found on our website.

While this report is available to all interested parties, it is specifically aimed at our investors, business partners, employees and National and Local Government. Targeted media and communications will continue to be provided as appropriate throughout the year.

Full information on the ways in which we communicate with our key stakeholders is available online.

SUSTAINABILITy CONTExT AND COMpARABILITy

The success of our sustainability efforts is dependent upon our understanding of the broader context of sustainable development. This report details our key sustainability impacts in light of the wider sustainability context and seeks to understand organisational challenges, including risks and opportunities, informing future strategy.

The historical performance data which forms the foundation of this report now spans five years, allowing readers to reflect on and understand our progress over time. This data enables us to participate in benchmarks, and these provide a key vehicle through which we and our stakeholders are able to better understand our performance in comparison with that of our peers, (see p55 for further details on our performance). In addition, our voluntary compliance with the GRI guidelines, allows our performance to be further compared.

The precautionary approach is addressed by Berkeley through the use of a financial and environmental risk and opportunity assessment process, our materiality review and our evolving Vision2020 strategy. Our Sustainability Management Systems also ensure that the development process and our office operations take sufficient account of sustainability.

THIS REpORT HAS BEEN SELF-CERTIFIED TO GRI LEvEL B



We are conscious that this report should not just detail our successes, but also incorporate any less-favourable aspects of our performance during 2010/11. Through presenting a realistic picture of our sustainability progress we are able to reflect upon the lessons we learnt during the reporting year and communicate properly with our stakeholders the reasons for our performance trends and any factors that influenced these. The extent of our historical data is particularly useful in this regard.

RELIABILITy, ACCURACy AND CLARITy

Validation of the majority of the data within this report is performed by our sustainability consultants, Jones Lang LaSalle. Please see the Advisor’s Statement from Jones Lang LaSalle for their assessment of the reliability and accuracy of the data. For information on the data assumptions and calculations, please refer to our data qualifying notes within the performance section of this report.

This report provides an avenue through which we can communicate our sustainability progress to our key stakeholders and is available both in hard-copy and online to allow it to reach a broad audience with differing accessibility needs. The content is designed to be easily navigable to the reader and avoids complex technical jargon and over-excessive detail.

TIMELINES

The information and performance data presented in this report was collected during the Berkeley financial year May 2010 – April 2011. The sustainability reporting schedule is aligned with our financial reporting schedule.

Royal Clarence Marina, Hampshire. Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 67



PROFILE dISCLOSuRE dESCRIPTION REPORTEd

CROSS-REFERENCE/ dIRECT ANSwER

1 strategy and analysis

1.1 Statement from the most senior decision-maker of the organisation. 2011 Sustainability Report, p6, Managing Director’s Statement.

1.2 Description of key impacts, risks, and opportunities. 2011 Sustainability Report, p12, The Customer Experience: Risks and Opportunities. 2011 Sustainability Report, p13, Building Greener Homes: Risks and Opportunities. 2011 Sustainability Report, p12, Delivering Sustainable Communities: Risks and Opportunities. 2011 Sustainability Report, p13, Running a Sustainable Business: Risks and Opportunities. Annual Report and Accounts. Website.

2 organisational profile

2.1 Name of the organisation. The Berkeley Group.

2.2 primary brands, products, and/or services. 2011 Sustainability Report, p1, Who we are and what we do.

2.3 Operational structure of the organisation, including main divisions, operating companies, subsidiaries, and joint ventures.

2011 Sustainability Report, p1, Who we are and what we do. Annual Report and Accounts.

2.4 Location of organisation's headquarters. The Berkeley Group Holdings plc, Berkeley House, 19 portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, kT11 1jG

2.5 Number of countries where the organisation operates, and names of countries with either major operations or that are specifically relevant to the sustainability issues covered in the report.

The Berkeley Group operates only in England.

2.6 Nature of ownership and legal form. Annual Report and Accounts.

2.7 Markets served (including geographical breakdown, sectors served, and types of customers/beneficiaries).

2011 Sustainability Report, p1, Who we are and what we do. Annual Report and Accounts.

2.8 Scale of the reporting organisation. 2011 Sustainability Report, p1, Who we are and what we do.

2.9 Significant changes during the reporting period regarding size, structure, or ownership.

Annual Report and Accounts.

2.10 Awards received in the reporting period. 2011 Sustainability Report, p4, Our strategy and achievements.2011 Sustainability Report, p47, 51, Running a sustainable business.2011 Sustainability Report, p37, 38, 40, Delivering sustainable communities.

3 report parameters

3.1 Reporting period (e.g., fiscal/calendar year) for information provided. This report covers the period from May 2010 to April 2011, unless otherwise stated.

3.2 Date of most recent previous report (if any). The previous Sustainability Report was published in july 2010 (covering the period May 2009 to April 2010).

3.3 Reporting cycle (annual, biennial, etc.) published annually in july, to cover the financial year May to April.

3.4 Contact point for questions regarding the report or its contents. 2011 Sustainability Report, p2, About this report. [email protected]

3.5 process for defining report content. 2011 Sustainability Report, p2, About this report. 2011 Sustainability Report, p 15, Reviewing Vision2020 and defining our report contentWebsite: Stakeholders.

3.6 Boundary of the report (e.g., countries, divisions, subsidiaries, leased facilities, joint ventures, suppliers). See GRI Boundary protocol for further guidance.

2011 Sustainability Report, p2, About this report.

3.7 State any specific limitations on the scope or boundary of the report (see completeness principle for explanation of scope).


3.8 Basis for reporting on joint ventures, subsidiaries, leased facilities, outsourced operations, and other entities that can significantly affect comparability from period to period and/or between organisations.


3.9 Data measurement techniques and the bases of calculations, including assumptions and techniques underlying estimations applied to the compilation of the Indicators and other information in the report. Explain any decisions not to apply, or to substantially diverge from, the GRI Indicator protocols.

2011 Sustainability Report: performance Report, p58-65, key performance indicators.

GRI COMpLIANCE (CONTINUED)

pROFILE DISCLOSURE





3 report parameters (cont.)

3.10 Explanation of the effect of any re-statements of information provided in earlier reports, and the reasons for such re-statement (e.g.,mergers/acquisitions, change of base years/periods, nature of business, measurement methods).

2011 Sustainability Report: p58-65, key performance indicators.

3.11 Significant changes from previous reporting periods in the scope, boundary, or measurement methods applied in the report.

2011 Sustainability Report: performance Report, p58-65, key performance indicators.

3.12 Table identifying the location of the Standard Disclosures in the report. 2011 Sustainability Report, p68, performance report.

3.13 policy and current practice with regard to seeking external assurance for the report.

We do not currently have full external assurance for our sustainability reporting but our Advisor’s Statement can be found on p74 of our 2011 Sustainability Report.

4 governance, commitments, and engagement

4.1 Governance structure of the organisation, including committees under the highest governance body responsible for specific tasks, such as setting strategy or organisational oversight.

2011 Sustainability Report, p14 Our Vision2020 Governance Structure.Annual Report and Accounts

4.2 Indicate whether the Chair of the highest governance body is also an executive officer.


4.3 For organisations that have a unitary board structure, state the number of members of the highest governance body that are independent and/or non-executive members.


4.4 Mechanisms for shareholders and employees to provide recommendations or direction to the highest governance body.


4.5 Linkage between compensation for members of the highest governance body, senior managers, and executives (including departure arrangements), and the organisation's performance (including social and environmental performance).

Annual Report and Accounts describes the relationship between compensation for the Board and organisational performance. There is currently no formal process to remunerate the Board or senior management on the basis of social and environmental performance alone.

4.6 processes in place for the highest governance body to ensure conflicts of interest are avoided.


4.7 process for determining the qualifications and expertise of the members of the highest governance body for guiding the organisation's strategy on economic, environmental, and social topics.

When Board Members are appointed their expertise is taken into account on a case-by-case basis.

4.8 Internally developed statements of mission or values, codes of conduct, and principles relevant to economic, environmental, and social performance and the status of their implementation.

Vision2020 sets out our key sustainability objectives related to our environmental, social and economic performance. The strategy is fully embedded within the organisation. Our Vision is support by a number of policies which can be viewed on our website.

4.9 procedures of the highest governance body for overseeing the organisation's identification and management of economic, environmental, and social performance, including relevant risks and opportunities, and adherence or compliance with internationally agreed standards, codes of conduct, and principles.

2011 Sustainability Report, p14, Our Vision2020 Governance Structure.

4.10 processes for evaluating the highest governance body's own performance, particularly with respect to economic, environmental, and social performance.

judged by achievement of external awards (NextGeneration, FTSE4Good) and performance against publicly stated commitments which form part of our Vision2020 strategy.2011 Sustainability Report, p14, performance Report.

4.11 Explanation of whether and how the precautionary approach or principle is addressed by the organisation.

The precautionary approach has informed and is reflected in our Vision2020 strategy, specifically when setting our objectives and commitments. The precautionary approach is also applied at a project level in respect of an assessment of each project against our sustainability commitments to ensure that they are met and no project provides a risk to the Group.

4.12 Externally developed economic, environmental, and social charters, principles, or other initiatives to which the organisation subscribes or endorses.

2011 Sustainability Report, p47, Running a sustainable business.

4.13 Memberships in associations (such as industry associations) and/or national/international advocacy organisations in which the organisation: * Has positions in governance bodies; * participates in projects or committees; * provides substantive funding beyond routine membership dues; or * Views membership as strategic.

Website2011 Sustainability Report, p57.

4.14 List of stakeholder groups engaged by the organisation. Website

4.15 Basis for identification and selection of stakeholders with whom to engage.

Website

4.16 Approaches to stakeholder engagement, including frequency of engagement by type and by stakeholder group.

Website

4.17 key topics and concerns that have been raised through stakeholder engagement, and how the organisation has responded to those key topics and concerns, including through its reporting.

2011 Sustainability Report, p15, Reviewing Vision2020 and defining our reporting content.

Fully achieved partially achieved





economic

Disclosure on management approach including reference to: economic performance, market presence and indirect economic impacts.

Annual Report and Accounts.Managing Director’s Statement.2011 Sustainability Report, p12, How we manage risks and opportunities through Vision20202011 Sustainability Report, p47, Reporting to our investors.Sustainability Report 2011, p10 Vision2020.Website.Sustainability policies.

ECONOMIC pERFORMANCE

EC1 Direct economic value generated and distributed, including revenues, operating costs, employee compensation, donations and other community investments, retained earnings, and payments to capital providers and governments.

Annual Report and Accounts.2011 Sustainability Report, p60, key performance indicators.

EC2 Financial implications and other risks and opportunities for the organisation's activities due to climate change.

2011 Sustainability Report, p9.2011 Sustainability Report, p48, Running a sustainable business.2011 Sustainability Report, p27-28, Building Greener Homes.2011 Sustainability Report, p12-13, Risks and Opportunities.Carbon Disclosure project Submission 2010, available online:

MARkET pRESENCE

EC6 policy, practices, and proportion of spending on locally-based suppliers at significant locations of operation.

2011 Sustainability Report, p50, Running a Sustainable Business.Website – Sustainable procurement policy.

INDIRECT ECONOMIC IMpACTS

EC8 Development and impact of infrastructure investments and services provided primarily for public benefit through commercial, in-kind, or pro bono engagement.

2011 Sustainability Report, p38-40, Delivering Sustainable Communities.

EC9 Understanding and describing significant indirect economic impacts, including the extent of impacts.

2011 Sustainability Report, p37-42, Delivering Sustainable Communities.2011 Sustainability Report, p50, Running a Sustainable Business.2011 Sustainability Report, p15, Reviewing Vision2020 and defining our reporting content.Website: Stakeholder Engagement.

environmental

Disclosure on management approach including reference to: materials, energy, water, biodiversity, emissions, effluents and waste, products and services, compliance, transport and overall impacts.

2011 Sustainability Report, p10, Vision2020.Sustainability Report, Running a Sustainable Business p49-50, 52.2011 Sustainability Report, p27, Building Greener Homes.Website, Environmental policy.

ENERGy

EN3 Direct energy consumption by primary energy source. 2011 Sustainability Report, p63, key performance indicators.

EN4 Indirect energy consumption by primary source. 2011 Sustainability Report, p64, key performance indicators.

EN6 Initiatives to provide energy-efficient or renewable energy based products and services, and reductions in energy requirements as a result of these initiatives.

2011 Sustainability Report, p27-28, Building Greener Homes.

EN7 Initiatives to reduce indirect energy consumption and reductions achieved.

2011 Sustainability Report, p48-49, Running a Sustainable Business2011 Sustainability Report, performance Report, p63, key performance indicators.

GRI pERFORMANCE INDICATORS





environmental (cont.)

WATER

EN8 Total water withdrawal by source. 2011 Sustainability Report, p65, key performance indicators.

BIODIVERSITy

EN12 Description of significant impacts of activities, products, and services on biodiversity in protected areas and areas of high biodiversity value outside protected areas.

2011 Sustainability Report, p31, Building Greener Homes (land use target, ecological plans, habitat conversion)2011 Sustainability Report, p49, Running a Sustainable Business (pollution prevention)

EN14 Strategies, current actions, and future plans for managing impacts on biodiversity.

2011 Sustainability Report, p31, Building Greener Homes. (ecological plans target, Code Commitment, land use target)2011 Sustainability Report, p49, Running a Sustainable Business. (assess management of project ecological specific risks)Website: Environmental policy

EMISSIONS, EFFLUENTS AND WASTE

EN16 Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. 2011 Sustainability Report, p62, key performance indicators.

EN17 Other relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. 2011 Sustainability Report, p62, key performance indicators.

EN18 Initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reductions achieved. 2011 Sustainability Report, p48, Running a Sustainable Business.

EN22 Total weight of waste by type and disposal method. 2011 Sustainability Report, p64, key performance indicators.

EN23 Total number and volume of significant spills. 2011 Sustainability Report, p65, key performance indicators.

pRODUCTS AND SERVICES

EN26 Initiatives to mitigate environmental impacts of products and services, and extent of impact mitigation.

2011 Sustainability Report, p24, Building Greener Homes.

COMpLIANCE

EN28 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations.

2011 Sustainability Report, p60, key performance indicators.

TRANSpORT

EN29 Significant environmental impacts of transporting products and other goods and materials used for the organisation's operations, and transporting members of the workforce.

2011 Sustainability Report, p48, Running a Sustainable Business.

social: labour practices and decent work

Disclosure on management approach including reference to: employment, labour/management relations, occupational health & safety, training and education and diversity and equal opportunities.

2011 Sustainability Report, p50-51, Running a Sustainable Business, (employee well-being, H&S, training, procurement)2011 Sustainability Report, p42, 46, Delivering Sustainable Communities, (employment)Website, Employee policyWebsite: Organisational Responsibility

EMpLOyMENT

LA2 Total number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, and region.


LA3 Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or part-time employees, by major operations.

Benefits provided to our full time employees for all of our operations are: health care to senior staff, eye tests for all staff, life insurance to all staff, disability/invalidity coverage to some senior staff, maternity/paternity leave, retirement provision to all staff, stock ownership to senior directors

OCCUpATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETy

LA7 Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days, and absenteeism, and number of work-related fatalities by region.


TRAINING AND EDUCATION

LA10 Average hours of training per year per employee by employee category. 2011 Sustainability Report, p61, key performance indicators.

DIVERSITy AND EQUAL OppORTUNITy

LA13 Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity.

2011 Sustainability Report, p61 key performance indicators. Annual Report and Accounts






social: human rights

Disclosure on management approach including reference to: investment and procurement practices, non-discrimination, freedom of association and collective bargaining, abolition of child labour, prevention of forced and compulsory labour, complaints and grievance practices, security practices and indigenous rights.

The majority of the issues are not relevant to ourselves directly as we operate solely in the United kingdom. We do however recognise that issues are pertinent to our supply chain and details of our requirements can be found within our Sustainable procurement policy.2011 Sustainability Report, p50, Running a Sustainable Business, Website: Employee policy, Sustainable procurement policy, Business ethics policy.Website: Organisational Responsibility

INVESTMENT AND pROCUREMENT pRACTICES

HR1 percentage and total number of significant investment agreements that include human rights clauses or that have undergone human rights screening.

We do not work or invest in regions where human rights are a concern as our development activities are all based in the Uk, and predominantly in the South East of England. Therefore, this is not an investment risk and our investment agreements do not include specific clauses on human rights or undergo human rights screening.

HR2 percentage of significant suppliers and contractors that have undergone screening on human rights and actions taken.

2011 Sustainability Report, p50, Running a Sustainable Business.All of our contractors and suppliers are required to comply with the Sustainable procurement policy which is incorporated within the Berkeley Group Management Rules, under which all our contractors are contracted. For those goods and services being sourced from developing countries, we expect suppliers to demonstrate that minimum supply chain labour standards have been met. This policy states that we use the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Base Code and the standards adopted by the UN through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the ILO Conventions.Based on our total spend on suppliers and contractors, materials that are associated with a human rights risk would be insignificant as a proportion of this spend, but we recognise the importance of this issue and have monitored compliance on a case-by-case basis. We have prioritised those materials which have human rights risks associated with them and the country of origin. Where we feel specific materials could have human rights issues associated with them, we have sought more detailed information from suppliers on the management of human rights issues.

CHILD LABOUR

HR6 Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of child labour, and measures taken to contribute to the elimination of child labour.

The Berkeley Group only operates in the England, which is governed by Uk and European legislation in respect of child labour. Therefore, none of the Berkeley Group's direct operations pose a significant risk in relation to child labour.

social: society

Disclosure on management approach, including reference to: community, corruption, public policy, anti-competitive behaviour and compliance.

Annual Report and Accounts.2011 Sustainability Report, p37, 40, Delivering Sustainable Communities.2011 Sustainability Report, p50, 57, Running a Sustainable Business.Website: Organisational Responsibility.Website: Business Ethics policy.

COMMUNITy

SO1 Nature, scope, and effectiveness of any programmes and practices that assess and manage the impacts of operations on communities, including entering, operating, and exiting.

2011 Sustainability Report, p40, Delivering Sustainable Communities.

CORRUpTION

SO2 percentage and total number of business units analysed for risks related to corruption.

All – see Annual Report and Accounts.Website - Whistle blowing policy. Business Ethics policy.

pUBLIC pOLICy

SO5 public policy positions and participation in public policy development and lobbying.

2011 Sustainability Report. p57, key performance indicators.2011 Sustainability Report: p6-9, Managing Director’s Statement.policies. (All).The Berkeley Group’s Vision2020 strategy and sustainability policies do not differ from any public policy positions that are taken.

ANTI-COMpETITIVE BEHAVIOUR

SO7 Total number of legal actions for anti-competitive behaviour, anti-trust, and monopoly practices and their outcomes.


COMpLIANCE

SO8 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with laws and regulations.






social: product responsibility

Disclosure on management approach including reference to: customer health & safety, product and service labelling, marketing communications, customer privacy and compliance.

2011 Sustainability Report, p20-21, The Customer Experience.2011 Sustainability Report, p27, Building Greener Homes.2011 Sustainability Report, p55, performance summary.Website: Customer Charter.Website: Business Ethics policy.Website: Organisational Responsibility.

CUSTOMER HEALTH & SAFETy

pR1 Life-cycle stages in which Health & Safety impacts of products and services are assessed for improvement, and percentage of significant products and services categories subject to such procedures.

All stages of the product lifecycle are analysed for H&S through CDM practices. Additionally, Health & Safety audits are conducted at all of our construction sites.2011 Sustainability Report, p51, Running a Sustainable Business.2011 Sustainability Report, p57, key performance indicators.

pRODUCT AND SERVICE LABELLING

pR5 practices related to customer satisfaction, including results of surveys measuring customer satisfaction.

2011 Sustainability Report, p20, 22, The Customer Experience.2011 Sustainability Report, p55, key performance indicators.

MARkETING COMMUNICATIONS

pR6 programmes for adherence to laws, standards, and voluntary codes related to marketing communications, including advertising, promotion, and sponsorship.

Website: Customer Code.2011 Sustainability Report, p20, The Customer Experience.




advisor’s statementFor Berkeley’s 2011 Sustainability Report, Upstream Sustainability Services has been involved in the following ways:

• providing assistance on reporting to Global Reporting Initiative Level B

• Validating and analysing environmental and social performance data

• Undertaking an assessment of progress against the Vision2020 commitments set in 2010

Jones Lang LaSalle has been working with Berkeley as a strategic sustainability advisor since 2002, and provides a range of consultancy advice to help Berkeley both set and achieve its sustainability objectives. This statement does not therefore represent a fully independent viewpoint and does not provide independent verification of the report contents. The following statement may instead be understood as an external, objective opinion of the Berkeley Group’s sustainability performance and management of its key impacts over the past year.

DATA VALIDATION AND pROCESS REVIEW

The validation of the environmental and social performance data handled by Upstream Sustainability Services was limited to checking performance trends and highlighting potential errors in data reporting. Quarterly environmental performance reports were provided throughout the year to determine whether the environmental commitments were likely to be met.

We also completed a process review at half year to verify performance against Berkeley’s Vision2020 commitments. The review assessed the procedures in place and evidence available to validate the performance results. The outcome of the review indicated that Berkeley has good processes and procedures in place to both meet its commitments and provide accurate data to report its progress. A number of recommendations for improvements were highlighted during this review.

2010/11 VISION2020 REVIEW

Last year, Berkeley set 40 commitments to run from May 2010 to May 2012. Of those, 73% (29) have already been met or are on track to be met in 2011/12, 22% (9) require further work to ensure they will be met in 2011/12 and 5% (2) were not met in 2010/11. The overall good performance demonstrated by Berkeley, in the context of a year when production levels have almost doubled, is testament to its continued commitment to sustainability. Notable achievements during 2010/11 include:

• The Customer Experience: 96% of customers would recommend Berkeley to a friend. Berkeley also commissioned and completed market research with 26% of its customers to understand how sustainability influences their buying preferences.

• Building Greener Homes: A total of 5,980 homes which entered planning in 2010/11 committed to meet Code Level 3. Of the homes completed during the year, 832 (34%) were certified to Code Level 3. In addition, Berkeley began its first Code 4 development in Shoreham-by-Sea.

• Delivering Sustainable Communities: A Building for Life Gold Standard was achieved at Stanmore place and all developments in planning committed to achieve at least the Building for Life Silver Standard.

• Running a Sustainable Business: Achieved a RIDDOR Accident Incident Rate of 3.63, which is a reduction on the previous year’s performance and remains below the industry average.

Berkeley’s 5% year-on-year commitments to reduce operational carbon emissions and water consumption were behind target in 2010/11 but like others who are engaged in this area, they realise what a challenge this is and have made strong progress. Berkeley will be reassessed against all of its commitments at the end of the 2011/12 financial year.

UpSTREAM SUSTAINABILITy SERVICESjONES LANG LASALLE



advisor’s review2010 was a turning point for Berkeley with the launch of Vision2020. The Group must be commended for the efforts that were made during 2010/11 to ensure that Vision2020 was a success within the business, as well as continuing to focus on delivering carbon efficient homes. The decision to adopt Vision2020 as a strategy for the whole business demonstrates that Berkeley has fully integrated sustainability into its business operations and can identify the value this generates.

The Coalition Government’s introduction of the Localism Bill, which raises the challenge of social sustainability higher up the political agenda, is likely to have a significant impact on UK housebuilders. Berkeley’s Vision2020 strategy and its first place ranking in the NextGeneration 2010 benchmark prove that it places social and economic well-being at the heart of the business. Within this context, Berkeley has an opportunity to further measure and articulate the socio-economic impact of its developments, and the value that it generates in the community.

We suggest that Berkeley should address the following important challenges in 2011/12, in order to meet its Vision2020 commitments.

• To consistently deliver the Vision2020 strategy across the whole Group and ensure that those projects which have not met the commitments in 2010/11 meet them in 2011/12.

• To adopt a more proactive approach to managing energy and water consumption so that the commitment can be met in 2011/12. A more detailed understanding of the costs and benefits of each of Berkeley’s sustainability commitments would facilitate the allocation of resources to achieve them.

• To look further ahead, moving beyond resource efficiency to tackle more challenging issues, such as embodied carbon and zero carbon design, materials sourcing and supply chain impacts.

We look forward to seeing Berkeley achieve its Vision2020 commitments over the next year and move a step closer to achieving its Vision2020 objectives. We are confident that an equally impressive period of performance lies ahead.

emma hoskyn, Senior ConsultantUpstream Sustainability Services, Jones Lang LaSalle.

Edenbrook, Fleet.


“OUR VISION IS THAT By 2020 BERkELEy WILL BE ONE OF THE MOST

SUCCESSFUL AND SUSTAINABLE BUSINESSES IN BRITAIN.

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS By CREATING BEAUTIFUL pLACES THAT MAkE

IT EASy FOR pEOpLE TO LIVE SUSTAINABLE LIVES”.


CONTENTS

Our vision for 2020 24–25Progress against Vision2020 commitments 26Progress review 27–31Case Study: An ecological legacy 32Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 33

Our vision for 2020 34–35Progress against Vision2020 commitments 36Progress review 37–40The Berkeley Foundation 41Case Study: An employment success 42Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 43

Our vision for 2020 44–45Progress against Vision2020 commitments 46Reporting to our investors 47Progress review 48–51Case Study: Interview with Lorraine Cooper, Sustainability Manager 52Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 53

Vision2020 performance summary 54–57Key performance indicators 58–65GRI compliance 66–69GRI performance indicators 70–73Upstream sustainability services – Jones Lang Lasalle 74–75

Our vision for 2020 16–17Progress against Vision2020 commitments 18The customer focus 19Progress review 20–21Case Study: What our customers think about sustainability 22Vision2020 commitments and ambitions moving forward 23

INTRODUCTION

THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE




PERfORMANCE REPORT

Who we are and what we do 1About this report 2Chairman’s statement 3Our strategy and achievements 4–5Managing Director’s statement 6–9Vision2020 10–11How we manage risks and opportunities through Vision2020 12–13Our Vision2020 governance structure 14Reviewing Vision2020 and defining our reporting content 15

Front Cover: Stanmore Place.


BERKELEY GROUP SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2011

Berkeley Group sustainability report 2011

The Berkeley Group Holdings plcBerkeley House19 Portsmouth RoadCobhamSurrey KT11 1JGUK

Telephone +44 (0)1932 868555Facsimile +44(0)1932 868 667Website www.berkeleygroup.co.uk

Design by Hunter Design

Printed in England by Alito GroupThis report is printed on Greencoat Silk

Documents

BERKELEY GROUP SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2011...Berkeley Sustainability Report 2011 1 WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO The Berkeley Group is a residential-led property developer with a passion