Simple improvements to the design of every new home built in Britainwould make them easier to live in for families with children as well as elderly or disabled people while saving money for owners and taxpayers.
Building to Lifetime Homes standards - developed over five years by a Joseph Rowntree Foundation task force - would add between £100 and £300 to the cost of a typical three bedroom house. But this would be offset by long-term savings on adaptations, according to the results of a cost-benefit analysis published today.
Owners and tenants would, meanwhile, enjoy the advantages of living in homes that were safer and more accessible for children, older people and wheelchair users - and which could be readily adapted if one of the inhabitants became infirm or disabled.
The Lifetime Homes standards identify 16 features designed to make homes more flexible and accessible. They include: level access to front and back doors; a car parking space that can be enlarged if necessary; wider interior hallways and doors; enough turning space for a wheelchair; easy-to-open windows with low sills; and sockets and switches at heights that are convenient to reach. The specification also ensures that handrails, hoists and lifts can be easily installed, if necessary.
Over 50 designs which the Foundation commissioned from architects demonstrate that Lifetime Homes standards can be achieved in almost any type of house, provided the concept is properly understood and applied imaginatively. Also published today, a survey of residents living in some of the 1,000 Lifetime Homes already built finds 90 per cent support for incorporating the same standards into every new home.
The 'ordinary' appearance of properties meant that most occupants had not noticed anything different about their homes. But when the specifications were explained, nine out of ten thought them flexible enough to meet changing needs during their lives.
Step-free paths and level entrances were especially welcome as a contribution to the safety of children and older people.
Nearly all residents agreed that it would be worth paying more in rent or on the purchase price for a property incorporating the Lifetime Homes standards. Most thought an extra 1 per cent would be reasonable - an amount that equals the estimated maximum additional cost to builders.
Estimates by chartered quantity surveyors Walker Richardson, suggest that many of the Lifetime Homes standards - for example, level access and windows at a lower level - could normally be adopted at no extra cost. The additional cost of building a two or three bedroom house would only rise above £300 if a ground-floor toilet was not already part of the specification.
A cost-benefit analysis by Christopher Cobbold of research consultancy Pieda goes on to show how the immediate costs of building all homes to Lifetime Homes standards over the next 30 years would be offset against long-term savings averaging £250 per property.
Over £350 million a year is currently spent in England alone on adapting the homes of people who become disabled - 60 per cent of it from public funds. That figure is expected to rise significantly during the next half century as the elderly population increases. The report finds that future growth in spending on adaptations would be significantly reduced if Lifetime Homes standards were introduced as normal.
Calculating the average added value of introducing Lifetime Homes features at £248 per dwelling, the report concludes that they should be made mandatory for all new housing where the extra cost of incorporating them is under £250. But it adds that there would be other, unmeasurable benefits, in terms of quality of life, if the standards were adopted for every new home.
Richard Best, Director of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said: "France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden have already introduced regulations that require building standards comparable with those for Lifetime Homes. Is the United Kingdom prepared to do the same?"
He added: "Developers unfamiliar with the Lifetime Homes concept sometimes wrongly assume it adds excessively to space requirements and cost. Today's reports show how far this is from the truth. Not only would it be inexpensive to incorporate these standards into all new homes in the future, but there would be compensating savings for owners and for taxpayers.
"As well as giving a sense of spaciousness, the distinct features of Lifetime Homes make them highly adaptable to different needs over time - from parenthood to any temporary or permanent incapacity. With an ageing population, investment in good design at the outset will save heavy expenditure in the years ahead."
