Comments on: The Code for Sustainable Homes in the United Kingdom: A Review

By: Ashley Roberts

Ashley Roberts — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:57:57 +0000

I know that level 3 is mandatory for all publicly funded housing (where the majority of my experience lies) and as far as I was aware the government had set out a timeline to continue this into the private sector – perhaps this has changed as a result of recent austerity measures and the removal of HIPs.

I’m not saying that you can’t be innovative with the code, just that with pressure from clients and developers the code is quite often used as an easy option, allowing people to hide behind ticking the easy to gain and cheaper sections of the code.

From personal experience the issue with rainwater harvesting was an annoyance, perhaps there was another way round it.

Thanks for your comments, all feedback is much appreciated!

Ashley

By: Ollie Westover

Ollie Westover — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 20:02:35 +0000

Hi there,

A couple of clarifications are needed. Code 3 is not mandatory for new housing (except publicly funded) and there are no plans for it to become so.

Secondly, I think it is unfair to blame the Code for stifling innovation, without something to back it up. I have designed a Code 6 scheme, and at no time felt the design was dictated by the Code (except the roof form, with the requirement for lots of PV)

Lastly, the comment about rainwater harvesting is wrong. The input of RWH is factored into the calculations, and there is benefit to be gained. In any case, the Code is just an extension of the Part G requirements (only more onerous), so the same would be true of Building Regulations.

Absolutely agree that the Code is not perfect, but it is getting better…

Hope that’s useful

Ollie