Posts by Ray Hodgson

10 Jan 2007

Code for Sustainable Homes

Code for Sustainable Homes signals the future for Building Regulations

At the end of December 2006 the government formally published its long awaited Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH), which becomes effective in April 2007.  This is widely regarded as an important tool for achieving ‘zero carbon’ status in housebuilding, building homes which are both thermally efficient and which generate locally their own low energy requirements (eg using solar panels on the roof). 
The government has made it clear that the Code signposts the direction that future changes to Building Regulations will take.  In other words, the concepts, tools and standards in CSH will be encompassed in future changes to Part L.
The CSH is a voluntary tool for both public and private housing developers.  To access central government funding, however, all public housing will need to achieve at least the minimum rating (1 star).
As we all know, achieving carbon reduction has been one of the government’s top priorities for some time - and it is using three main ‘levers’ to effect change:

Regulation
For example, the April 06 changes in requirements to Part L. 
Tax
The chancellor announced in his pre-Christmas speech that the government’s ambition is to provide a time limited exemption on stamp duty for the vast majority of new zero carbon homes.
Government as a customer
Where government is funding housing developments it can set higher standards of performance than the minimum levels set in regulations.  This is the logic behind the CSH. 

The government also hopes that the Code, with its maximum 6 star rating scheme, will provide a marketing tool for private developers.  Consumers have responded very well to energy rating schemes for electrical white goods and the government hopes that by informing customers of the overall energy ratings of houses it will lead to the same positive changes in spending decisions.

How will the scheme work?

Developers can achieve ratings from one to six stars.  The lowest level, 1 star, demands an improvement on the minimum requirements given in Part L1A, calculated on a ‘points out of 100′ basis across nine categories (see table below).  The higher star ratings naturally require higher point scores.  There is flexibility in how points are achieved, but some performance aspects are compulsory, as the chart below simply summarises.

Categories
Commentary on the flexibility
1 Energy / CO2
2 Water
These 2 areas are considered the most important and are therefore the least flexible.
Minimum levels of performance are set for each star rating.

3 Materials
4 Surface water run-off
5 Waste 
Minimum performance levels are set for 1 star performance only.

6 Pollution
7 Health and well-being
8 Management
9 Ecology 
No minimum standards are set. 

Certification for Code compliance

To gain certification for code compliance there is a four-part process:

1. The developer produces an initial design for appraisal
2. A trained and certified Code Assessor conducts an initial assessment on the design, recommends a sustainability rating and issues an interim Code Certificate.  This is carried out for each house type (but not each dwelling)
3. The assessor performs a post completion check on a sample of the development to verify the rating
4. The assessor produces a final Code Certificate of compliance.

The concept of the Code is a positive move towards improving sustainable housing and should promote the greater use of sustainable materials.  Further details of this will be laid out in a revised Green Guide, scheduled to be ready by this April.  The guide will provide sustainability ratings for generic materials and products with a methodology for appraising specific manufacturer’s products.
 

For full details of the Code - visit this site 

1 Dec 2006

CDM 2007

 I attended the first of two seminars organised by the Association of Project Safety (APS) in respect of the new CDM 2007 Regulations to come into force in April 2007.  The timescale is as follows:-

17 October 2006            Consideration of the regulatory package by HSC

                                    Update:  The HSC formally approved the draft CDM

                                    Regulatory package for formal proposal to Ministers.

November 2006             Deadline for Ministerial response on new CDM.

January 2007                 ACoP published(date to be advised)

6 April 2007                   Regulations come into force

Interesting items are:

1           The change in Clients duties and the removal of Clients Agents, in recognition of the large influence Clients have on a project, particularly time wise. Note – If Client fails to appoint CDM –Coordinator or Principal Contractor, Client takes on role by default!

2           The Proposed Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) no longer contains any ‘guidance’ material.

3           New phrase introduced to notifiable projects ‘Initial Design Period’ during which it is acceptable for CDM-Co-ordinator not to be appointed.  Period is legally undefined – APS opinion is that this could relate to initial RIBA design stages, say A to C.  Note – On notifiable projects, no designer should commence work, other than ‘initial design’ work unless CDM Co-ordinator has been appointed by the Client.  Reg 18 (1). Remember, Designers Duties apply on all projects regardless of size or status, not just when notifiable.

4           The important duty of advising the Client that CDM Regs. apply to a project and a Client is aware of his duties is still there.  The wording is ensure that the Client is aware of his duties.  I consider this is best achieved by the sending of a letter and advice leaflet at the time of appointment in order that there can be no doubt that we have ensured that the Client is aware of his duties, as per our present procedures.

5           The clarification of designers risk assessments as ‘project specific and concentrating on significant risks not obvious to those who use the design’.  However, APS point out that this appears to be at odds with the CDM Regulations.  My view is that we should, as designers, be aware of all risks, as recorded in our generic risk assessments, and only highlight the significant non-obvious to avoid excessive paperwork which is likely to be ignored.

6           Definition of design now includes calculations for design, and workplaces to be designed to comply with the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations.

7           Competence – note definition and assess yourself against this in Appendix A of the ACOP.

I will send an email advising where this latest information can be viewed on our system.