Can someone please explain why there are 2.22 points available for ‘Secured by Design Section 2 Compliance’ – what on earth does this have to do with proper sustainable design?
Also – the 4.67pts available for ‘Lifetime Homes Compliance’ is utter madness! Designing homes that people can live in until they are carried out of the suitably wide enough front door in their wicker casket is utter nonsense and frankly unsustainable design.
When first entering the housing market people need smaller affordable houses with minimal bedroom and living space. As they get older and start raising families they need larger houses with more space. As they get older still the vast majority of people want to downsize – you don’t need as many bedrooms as the children leave home, you don’t want the maintenance and bills that come with a larger house and garden.
Where on earth was the common sense when someone decided that is was ‘sustainable’ to require houses to be built with lots of pointless features that will, in reality for the huge majority, never be used – wider stairs for stairlifts in a family home, knock-out panels in floors for hoists.
Honestly, both the ‘Secured by Design’ and ‘Lifetime Homes’ bring the whole CSH approach into disrepute and should be dropped immediately.
I’ve posted these views on the ‘Building’ magazine forum on the Code for Sustainable Homes – let’s see if anyone can explain it in a way that makes any sense at all…..