Hugo Nebula wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:36:03 +0000, a particular chimpanzee named
parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Hugo Nebula wrote:

For new-builds, there are requirements that at least one entrance door
(ideally, the one closest to the parking) is wide enough for a
wheelchair and has a level threshold.

Another piece of blanket legislation that, seemingly, has no scope for
flexibility to allow it to be applied sensibly in a given situation.

Does he know if any of those friends or relatives will never find
themselves in a wheelchair? Is he or they immune to disease or
accidents? What about the people who live in the house after him?
For significant periods of their lives a great many people are
disabled by a lack of reasonable access to 'conventionally designed'
dwellings, such as mothers with push chairs, temporary disability or
even old age. The requirements for access to dwellings are there to
allow more people the freedom to leave their own house and visit
others.


I see these regulations as a money saving scheme by the Govt. It will
save them money by not having to pay (through grants and benefits) for
modifications to houses for people with special needs. That is what the
Welfare State is about. Don't anyone get me wrong, I'm not advocating
discrimination against the disabled but I object to have restrictions
imposed for these reasons. It's another sympton of a creeping malaise
thats pushing this country down the toilet.

There is flexibility in the Approved Document for split level houses
and those on steep sites.

Well, they weren't flexible in my neighbours case (or maybe that was
just our LA, North Wilts).

If you bought a plot of land to build a house on that would have
stunning views from the first floor, you may well wish to build the
house "upside down" with the reception rooms upstairs and the bedrooms
downstairs. How flexible would the regulations be in that situation?