Access Association – Supplementary Written Evidence (EQD0202)

Housing Standards Review and Optional Technical Housing Standards for House of Lords Select Committee: the Equality Act.

Submitted by Rachel Smalley

President of the Access Association

The Access Association

The Access Association is a membership organisation for access professionals and experts from a variety of backgrounds, including the private sector and local authorities. The Association’s current membership breakdown stands at:

•              Public Sector: 44.7%

•              Private Sector: 44.1%

•              Voluntary Sector: 8.7%

•              Local Authority: 29.8%

It is a national network of individuals who are passionate about access and inclusive design. The Access Association’s aim is to improve access and facilities for disabled people, and consequently for all people who would benefit from an accessible and inclusive environment.  The Association is about providing peer support, sharing knowledge and having an influential voice. The Access Association website is at:  www.accessassociation.co.uk

Accessible Housing Standards

New homes need to be high quality, accessible and sustainable. To achieve this, the government has created a new approach for the setting of technical standards for new housing. This rationalises the many differing existing standards into a simpler, streamlined system which will reduce burden and help bring forward much needed new homes.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/planning-update-march-2015

In 2010 the Government pledged to cut red tape for businesses and individuals.

By 2012 the Harman Review was established through the House Builders Federation, Local Government Association and the National House Building Council.

In Spring 2012 the housing and construction “Red Tape Challenge” was launched, and in October 2012 the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) launched the Housing Standards Review. The Housing Standards Review set the target of tackling the “untenable forest” of the many differing housing standards which existed in England.

In terms of accessible housing standards, on top of the 2 nationally recognised standards of Lifetime Homes (which had been incorporated into the Code for Sustainable Homes) and Wheelchair Accessible Housing (i.e. the Wheelchair Housing Design Guide), many local authorities and boroughs had composed and introduced their own variations of these standards, applying them via the planning process.

On 27th March 2015 the government announced, via a Written Ministerial Statement,  a new national approach to the setting of technical housing standards in England.

This was accompanied by the publication of a new set of streamlined national technical standards, which included 2 optional building regulations standards covering accessible housing, creating a 3 tier system of standards contained within Volume 1 of Part M of the Building Regulations, which is made up of:

M4(1) Category 1- Visitable dwellings (baseline non-optional standard)

M4(2) Category 2- Accessible and adaptable dwellings (optional)

M4(3) Category 3- Wheelchair user dwellings (optional)

Powers to introduce these optional standards (M4(2) and M4(3)) are now included in the Building Act 1984 (as amended by the Deregulation Act 2015). The Statutory Instrument implementing the regulations has also been laid. These changes are explained in the Building Regulations Circular 01/2015 and accompanying circular letter.

Building Regulations Part M Vol. 1 Category 1 - Visitable Dwellings M4(1)

M4(1) Category 1- Visitable dwellings is not an optional standard, it is a mandatory baseline standard which should be applied to all dwellings where Part M of the Building Regulations applies. This standard has not changed since 2004, and provides a very basic level of access, and homes designed in accordance with this standard may not provide level access into them.

However, some disabled people (depending upon their impairment) may be able to visit someone in an M4(1) home.

M4(1) is applied to all ‘new build’ housing / all housing which Part M of the Building Regulations applies to (See Statutory Instrument 2015. No. 767 Building and Buildings, England and Wales, The Building Regulations &c. (Amendment) Regulations 2015).

Building Regulations Part M Vol. 1

Category 2 - Accessible and adaptable dwellings

M4(2) is an optional building regulation, which can be applied to a development if ‘switched on’ by a planning condition.

As explained in the above performance objectives, the optional technical standard M4(2) provides homes suitable for a diverse population. They are flexible, adaptable, cost-effective to adapt and will accommodate and be sustainable for the majority of the population. Many of the features of an M4(2) home will benefit disabled people, older people, families with young children, people with temporary impairments or injuries or people carrying items or moving objects.

The following table highlights some of the benefits of, and some population groups who could benefit from, an M4(2) home:

Benefits of M4(2) homes

M4(2) Accessible and adaptable dwellings replaces the previously widely used and recognised ‘Lifetime Homes’ standard.

The concept of Lifetime Homes was developed in the early 1990s by a group of housing experts, and has been described as “ordinary homes” designed to incorporate 16 design criteria that can be universally applied to new homes at minimal cost, with each design criterion adding to the comfort and convenience of the home, supporting the changing needs of individuals and families at different stages of life. Lifetime Homes aim to create and encourage better living environments for everyone.

The optional technical housing standard M4(2) has replaced / is widely seen as a replacement for the previous Lifetime Homes standard; many of the arguments ‘for’ the provision of Lifetime Homes, therefore, also apply to M4(2).

DCLG in their 2007 publication ‘The future of the Code for Sustainable Homes’ highlighted many of the benefits of providing Lifetime Homes:

Where they are adopted they ensure that homes are better able to adapt to the needs of their occupants at different stages of their life – as they grow and as they age. They also ensure that, when faced with a sudden crisis such as an incapacitating accident, injury or illness, the families living in these homes are able to make short-term adaptations to allow

time to consider future needs, and longer-term adaptations should their wish be to remain the family home.

…

Currently the home building market is not reacting as quickly as necessary to meet these dramatic changes. If we do not act now to make sure that the homes we are building will meet the needs of an ageing population we will face increasing difficulties in meeting our population’s needs over the coming decades.

DCLG. 2007. The future of the code for sustainable homes. www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/greenerbuildings/sustainablehomes/consultations

Cost Savings

The 2007 DCLG publication also highlighted potential cost savings associated with the provision of Lifetime Homes:

The cost of adapting homes which were not built to Lifetime Homes standards, for example for use by disabled people, is substantial. Encouraging greater uptake of the Lifetime Homes standards from the design stage will reduce the cost of adaptations, as and when they are needed, and also reduce care costs.

DCLG. 2007. The future of the code for sustainable homes.  www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/greenerbuildings/sustainablehomes/consultations

The DCLG commissioned report (2012) “Assessing the health benefits of Lifetime Homes”, by the Building Research Establishment, highlighted cost savings associated with Lifetime Homes:

The total cost of building-related hazards is calculated to be approximately £2.48bn per annum in direct health costs or £40bn as a potential cost to society.

Homes built to current building regulations offer significant health advantages over the average stock, and may provide direct NHS health cost savings per dwelling in excess of £4,000 during a 60-year expected lifespan. Building to the Lifetime Homes Standard could provide an extra £194 of savings over 60 years, or £700 if the potential adaptations to bathrooms and access to a bedroom/bathroom were made.

When considering the potential cost to society, the savings are likely to be much higher.

Using the model, it is suggested that a home built to current building regulations could save £83,000 during a 60-year lifespan, compared to the average for the current stock.

Building to the Lifetime Homes Standard could provide a further £1,600 in savings, or £8,600 if the potential adaptations were made.

DCLG 2012. Assessing the health benefits of Lifetime Homes. www.agenda-efa.org.uk/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Health_benefits_of_Lifetime_Home_Standards.pdf

Leonard Cheshire’s 2014 publication “The hidden housing crisis” quantified the costs of adapting a standard home, versus a lifetime home:

Lifetime Homes are ordinary houses and flats which incorporate 16 design criteria that can be universally applied to new homes with an average cost £1,100 or less [29]. These standards actually save money in the long run, by ensuring that things like grab-bars and stair-lifts can be easily and cheaply installed if people’s needs change.30

Unless all new homes are built so they can be easily adapted to disabled people’s needs (i.e. Lifetime Homes standards) the demand for adaptations will only continue to grow. Councils will struggle to meet this demand as they are asked to stretch their budgets further.

Ensuring that as many new homes are built to Lifetime Homes standards as possible will help to reduce both the need for adaptations, and the cost for when they are needed.

The costs of making simple adaptations to a standard home could be more than £20,000 - more than five times the cost of building a home to Lifetime standards and carrying out the same adaptations (estimates below).

Investing in Lifetime Homes also saves councils money by reducing unnecessary social care costs. As stated previously, disabled people who can live in their homes independently will need less social care. Moreover, many disabled people who want to live in their own homes are currently prevented from moving out of costly residential services because they cannot find disabled-friendly homes.

Leonard Cheshire. 2014. The Hidden Housing Crisis  www.leonardcheshire.org

There are clear cost savings represented by M4(2) homes as opposed to a standard home, which would now be referred to as an M4(1) visitable dwelling.

Health and Social Benefits

The following population projections are provided by Age UK’s 2016 report “Later Life

in the UK”:

Population projections

•              The number of people aged 60 or over is expected to pass the 20 million mark by 203010

•              The number of people aged 65+ is projected to rise by over 40 per cent (40.77%) in the next 17 years to over 16 million11.

•              By 2040, nearly one in four people in the UK (24.2%) will be aged 65 or over 12

•              The percentage of the total population who are over 60 is predicted to rise from 24.2% at present to over 29% in 2035.13

•              The number of people over 85 in the UK is predicted to more than double in the next 23 years to over 3.4 million.14

•              The population over 75 is projected to double in the next 30 years 15

•              Nearly one in five people currently in the UK will live to see their 100th birthday (see section on life expectancy below)16

Age UK’s 2016 “Later Life in the UK”: www.ageuk.org.uk

The link between Lifetime Homes (now M4(2)) and an ageing population is clearly illustrated on the Lifetime Homes website which explains:

Most older people live in mainstream housing. A minority live in specialist housing. As we get older, more of us live alone, especially women. As we get older we spend more time at home. So it is important we can get full use out of it. Yet more than two million older households live in non-decent homes. And although most older people own their home, many are on low weekly incomes. If they want to make adaptations to their home – which can prevent falls and reduce the need for expensive hospital and social care -   they won’t be able to afford it without funding.

Good housing design – built into all new housing from the start – can free up the housing market, making it easier to move. It can reduce the need for adaptations and reduce the likelihood of falls. Good, accessible housing – Lifetime Homes – radically reduces the costs to health, social care and other public services and allows people what they want: to live in their own homes, comfortably and safely, for as long as possible.

Good housing design is vital in promoting well-being and improving quality of life, both in general housing and in sheltered and supported housing or housing with care. Lifetime Homes design offers a way to improve and extend housing for an adaptable and sustainable future for older people.

www.lifetimehomes.org.uk/pages/lifetime-homes-and-older-people.html

DCLG have also highlighted the benefits of the provision of Lifetime Homes in terms of the supply chain of housing, and shortages of family homes:

There is also some evidence that the undersupply of inclusive homes for older people is leading to people being unable to move into more suitable accommodation and that in turn is leading to under-occupation of family homes. This blocks the supply chain, reduces flexibility and movement in the market and drives prices up. Wider uptake of Lifetime Homes standards would allow older people to release large family homes into the market thus increasing the supply of family homes and affordability.

DCLG. 2007. The future of the code for sustainable homes. www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/greenerbuildings/sustainablehomes/consultations

There are clear health and social benefits to the provision of lifetime homes:

Where they are adopted they ensure that homes are better able to adapt to the needs of their occupants at different stages of their life – as they grow and as they age. They also ensure that, when faced with a sudden crisis such as an incapacitating accident, injury or illness, the families living in these homes are able to make short-term adaptations to allow time to consider future needs, and longer-term adaptations should their wish be to remain the family home.

…

Ultimately, the indirect health benefits associated with the Lifetime Homes Standard focus on improving the quality of life of occupants. The Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment (PRIA) – Lifetime Homes7 suggests that implementing the Lifetime Homes Standard would have the following impacts on health and costs attributed to health:

•              reduce, or delay the need for people to move to residential care

•              reduce the demand for temporary residential care

•              ensure that people are discharged from hospital into suitable accommodation

•              instead of remaining in hospital in much needed acute hospital beds because their

•              accommodation is unsuitable

•              reduce the need for home care for disabled people.

DCLG. 2007. The future of the code for sustainable homes. www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/greenerbuildings/sustainablehomes/consultations

The DCLG publication “Assessing the health benefits of Lifetime Homes”, which references [4] Cobbold, C. (1997) Cost-benefit analysis of Lifetime Homes. York: JRF, identifies the impact suitable, accessible housing can have on health and wellbeing, as well as hospitals and demand for temporary residential care:

Many of the design criteria associated with Lifetime Homes seek to maximise the level of independence for occupants within the dwelling and the immediate external area. The health benefits of this will vary depending on the type of occupants. For the elderly, the ability to return home after hospitalisation would help to increase their level of independence and quality of life. Cobbold notes the difficulties faced by some that are discharged from hospital to dwellings that do not fit their needs.4 A systematic review and meta-analysis noted the importance of complex interventions including community-based care after hospital discharge for this group, suggesting that some form of intervention can help elderly people to continue living at home as an alternative to admittance into a nursing home. Merely being at home was one factor that promoted independence but other studies reviewed focused on empowerment, autonomy, independent decision making, and improved self-esteem and self-confidence as an outcome of intervention.

…

Ultimately, the indirect health benefits associated with the Lifetime Homes Standard focus on improving the quality of life of occupants. The Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment (PRIA) – Lifetime Homes7 suggests that implementing the Lifetime Homes Standard would have the following impacts on health and costs attributed to health:

•              reduce, or delay the need for people to move to residential care

•              reduce the demand for temporary residential care

•              ensure that people are discharged from hospital into suitable accommodation

•              instead of remaining in hospital in much needed acute hospital beds because their

•              accommodation is unsuitable

•              reduce the need for home care for disabled people.

DCLG 2012. Assessing the health benefits of Lifetime Homes. www.agenda-efa.org.uk/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Health_benefits_of_Lifetime_Home_Standards.pdf

Family Benefits

As illustrated in Table 1, accessible and adaptable homes also provide a range of benefits for families with small children:

•              ensuring that homes are suitable for people using prams or push chairs, through the provision of step free access and sufficient hallway space / storage.

•              The requirement for a larger downstairs WC will allow assisted / accompanied use for those with young children.

Building Regulations Part M Vol. 1 Category 3 - Wheelchair user dwellings

As explained in the above requirements, the optional requirement M4(3) requires that reasonable provision must be made for people to gain access to, and use, the dwelling and its facilities, and that this provision must be sufficient to allow simple adaptation of the dwelling to meet the needs of occupants who use a wheelchair.

M4(3) homes are therefore designed to be either:

              - wheelchair accessible (M4(3)(2)(b)); or

              - wheelchair adaptable (M4(3)(2)(a))

Planning Practice Guidance has been provided on the subject of ‘wheelchair accessible’ and ‘wheelchair adaptable’ homes:

A local authority should therefore only require wheelchair accessible homes (as opposed to wheelchair adaptable homes), where they are responsible for allocating or nominating the end user of the dwelling. Generally, M4(3) homes are therefore likely to be wheelchair adaptable, as opposed to accessible.

Habinteg and TCPA (via Habinteg’s wheelchair accessible housing toolkit) provide the following summary data on wheelchair accessible housing:

Data on wheelchair accessible housing

Aspire research (2014) found that:

Fewer wheelchair accessible homes were built in 2013 than in 2005

•              There are around 24,000 wheelchair users in England waiting for appropriate social or affordable housing.

Habinteg research (2010) found that:

•              The majority of homes in England (84%) do not allow someone using a wheelchair to get to and through the front door without difficulty and only 0.5% of homes are reported to be ‘accessible and adaptable’.

•              There were around 607,200 wheelchair users in England, living in some 586,700 households (figures updated), spread across all tenures. The estimate of wheelchair user households in England with unmet housing needs is 78,300, which translates to 240 households in an ‘average’ local (housing) authority with a total of 68,064 households

www.habinteg.org.uk/toolkit-data-on-wheelchair-accessible-housing

Aspire (a charity supporting people with spinal injury) commissioned research with Loughborough University to examine the impact on spinal cord injured adults and their families of living in adapted and unadapted homes.  The research found that people living in unadapted properties were less likely to be employed or see their friends, have poor health and be more likely to suffer from depression and have suicidal thoughts. The report also highlighted:

Findings
Housing needs

The results of the research revealed that, for all the people with SCI and their families, a main priority upon leaving rehabilitation was to ensure that they had appropriate housing in terms of meeting their new physical needs. It was also important that the transition from rehabilitation into an appropriate house…

Aspire is calling for:

• To enable spinal cord injured people to remain in their own homes whenever practicable, by improving the processes to enable them to obtain grants and have adaptations approved much more quickly. 
   

• The lack of suitable housing results in more spinal cord injured patients unnecessarily spending additional weeks in hospital waiting for adaptations to their own home, or for a wheelchair accessible home to be found.  It costs the NHS £960 per day for a bed in a Spinal Injury Centre.  This avoidable cost is also incurred when spinal cord injured people are readmitted for treatment for bladder infections, pressure sores or falls brought about by living in unadapted housing. 

• Providing more adapted housing for disabled people will also benefit the increasing ageing population and is therefore an investment that will significantly help the current and future UK population. 

Aspire and Loughborough University 2016

Examining lives in adapted and unadapted homes: The impact of housing spinal injured people in inaccessible housing:

www.aspire.org.uk/examining-lives-in-adapted-and-unadapted-homes

The following statistics have been provided by DCLG in their March 2015 publication “Guide to available disability data” (www.gov.uk)

Habinteg and the TCPA (Town and Country Planning Association) have produced “Towards accessible housing - a toolkit for planning policy”, which provides the following (national) data on unmet wheelchair housing need:

Habinteg and TCPA
Towards accessible housing a toolkit for planning policy
http://www.habinteg.org.uk/toolkit-about

Policy background

The Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) provides the following guidance to local authorities on the introduction and implementation of new optional technical standards:

The optional new national technical standards should only be required through any new Local Plan policies if they address a clearly evidenced need, and where their impact on viability has been considered, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Guidance. Neighbourhood Plans should not be used to apply the new technical standards.”

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/planning-update-march-2015

The National Planning Policy Framework provides the following guidance on the optional technical standards and access and inclusion:

Housing- Optional Technical Standards

Introduction

Paragraph: 001 Reference ID: 56-001-20150327

What are the new optional technical housing standards?

 The Government has created a new approach for the setting of technical standards for new housing. This rationalises the many differing existing standards into a simpler, streamlined system which will reduce burdens and help bring forward much needed new homes. The Government set out its policy on the application of these standards in decision taking and plan making in a Written Ministerial Statement, which also withdraws the Code for Sustainable Homes aside from legacy cases.

Revision date: 27 03 2015

Paragraph: 002 Reference ID: 56-002-20150327

What optional technical housing standards can local planning authorities set?

Local planning authorities have the option to set additional technical requirements exceeding the minimum standards required by Building Regulations in respect of access and water, and an optional nationally described space standard. Local planning authorities will need to gather evidence to determine whether there is a need for additional standards in their area, and justify setting appropriate policies in their Local Plans.

Revision date: 27 03 2015

Paragraph: 003 Reference ID: 56-003-20150327

How should local planning authorities assess viability concerns for setting optional Building Regulation requirements and the nationally described space standard?

Local planning authorities should consider the impact of using these standards as part of their Local Plan viability assessment. In considering the costs relating to optional Building Regulation requirements or the nationally described space standard, authorities may wish to take account of the evidence in the most recent Impact Assessment issued alongside the Housing Standards Review.

Revision date: 27 03 2015

http://planningguidance.communities.gov.uk

Paragraph: 012 Reference ID: 26-012-20140306

Planning should promote access and inclusion

An inclusive environment is one that can be accessed and used by everyone. It recognises and accommodates differences in the way people use the built environment.

Good design can help to create buildings and places that are for everyone. Planning can help break down unnecessary physical barriers and exclusions caused by the poor design of buildings and places.

Inclusive design acknowledges diversity and difference and is more likely to be achieved when it is considered at every stage of the development process, from inception to completion. However it is often mistakenly seen as a Building Regulations issue, to be addressed once planning permission has been granted, not at the planning application stage. The most effective way to overcome conflicting policies and to maximise accessibility for everyone is for all parties to consider inclusive design from the outset of the process. This is particularly important when considering historic buildings and conservation, and highways. Thinking at the design stage about how the completed building will be occupied and managed can overcome many barriers experienced by some users. Too often the needs of users, including disabled people, older people and families with small children, are considered too late in the day.

Inclusive design should not only be specific to the building, but also include the setting of the building in the wider built environment, for example, the location of the building on the plot; the gradient of the plot; the relationship of adjoining buildings; and the transport infrastructure.

Issues to consider include:

• proximity and links to public transport;
• parking spaces and setting down points in proximity to entrances;
• the positioning and visual contrast of street furniture and the design of approach routes to meet the needs of wheelchair users and people with visual impairments; and whether entrances to buildings are clearly identified, can be reached by a level or gently sloping approach and are well lit.

Revision date: 06 03 2014

http://planningguidance.communities.gov.uk/blog/guidance/design/what-planning-objectives-can-good-design-help-achieve/#paragraph_012

The written Ministerial statement was published March 2015.

The new optional Building Regulations came ‘into force’ in October 2015.

Very few local planning authorities have introduced policy to require the optional accessible housing standards.

The Greater London Authority led the way in terms of amending existing planning policy (the London Plan), to incorporate the new optional technical standards.

The London Plan Policy 3.8 was amended to read:

POLICY 3.8 HOUSING CHOICE

Strategic

A. Londoners should have a genuine choice of homes that they can afford and which meet their requirements for different sizes and types of dwellings in the highest quality environments.

LDF preparation and planning decisions

B. To inform local application of Policy 3.3 on housing supply and taking account of housing requirements identified at regional, sub-regional and local levels, boroughs should work with the Mayor and local communities to identify the range of needs likely to arise within their areas and ensure that:

a. new developments offer a range of housing choices, in terms of the mix of housing sizes and types, taking account of the housing requirements of different groups and the changing roles of different sectors in meeting these

a1. the planning system provides positive and practical support to sustain the contribution of the Private Rented Sector (PRS) in addressing housing needs and increasing housing delivery.

b. provision of affordable family housing is addressed as a strategic priority in LDF policies

c. ninety percent of new housing is built to ‘The Lifetime Homes’ standards meets Building Regulation requirement M4 (2) ‘accessible and adaptable dwellings’

d. ten per cent of new housing meets Building Regulation requirement M4 (3) ‘wheelchair user dwellings’, is i.e. is designed to be wheelchair accessible, or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users

www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/minor-alterations-london-plan/minor-alterations-london-plan-2015

The Mayor of London and the Greater London Authority have led the way nationally in introducing planning policy to require the new optional technical standard on accessible housing.

Their altered London Plan policy requires 90% of all new build housing to be built to the new optional building regulation standard M4(2) accessible and adaptable dwellings, and 10% to be built to be wheelchair accessible or wheelchair adaptable dwellings.

The Secretary of State has signed off the Mayor of London’s proposed alterations to the London Plan subject to monitoring, and they have been approved and passed by the London Assembly (February 2016).

This document has highlighted the guidance available to local authorities on the optional building regulations in terms of accessible housing.

However, relatively few local authorities outside London are working on introducing planning policy via their local plans or development frameworks. 

This could potentially lead to the provision of accessible housing being geographically inconsistent, with need not adequately addressed in some locations.

The optional Building Regulations and the Written Ministerial Statement provide the opportunity for local authorities to introduce planning policy which requires accessible housing to be built in accordance with the new optional building regulation standards M4(2) and M4(3).

The Access Association is keen to see local authorities assessing the need for accessible housing, and introducing planning policy to achieve the provision of accessible housing (either accessible and adaptable, or wheelchair accessible or adaptable) via the optional Building Regulations M4(2) and M4(3).

12 February 2016