Response 867076291

Back to Response listing

Understanding and quantifying the problem

8. Do you agree that the problem is adequately established?

Please select one item
Yes
No

9. In general, do you agree the Consultation RIS adequately describes the extent of these problems?

Please select one item
Yes
No

10. The impact of a lack of accessible housing on equity, dignity and employment outcomes is difficult to fully measure. How does a lack of accessible housing contribute to these issues?

Please describe how and to what extent:
My interest is in equity and dignity for the aged and they are usually retired so no issue there.

11. Are the assumptions made to estimate the costs to the community from a lack of accessible housing (set out in Appendices A to H) appropriate?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer below and what other evidence could be considered:
I don’t think cost should be addressed.

12. What other information could be used to estimate the costs associated with a lack of accessible housing to make estimates more reliable?

Please provide your response below:
We don’t need the “estimates”. What good is an “estimate”?

13. Do you have information about the type and cost of home modifications that are made to improve the accessibility of a home?

Please select one item
Yes
No
If yes, please provide sources below:
Just finished doing the work in my own home. Because my choices are different to everyone else's, my costs are irrelevant to anyone but me.

14. In your opinion what is main contributor to a lack of uptake of universal design principles in new dwellings:

Please select all that apply
buyers failing to think about their future accessibility needs
volume builders being reluctant to deviate from standard plans
other barriers

Objectives of intervention and Options

15. Of the options considered by the Consultation RIS, select from the list below those that are feasible:

Please select all that apply
Status Quo: No change to the NCC.
Option 1: Accessibility standard, broadly reflecting LHDG silver standard, in the NCC applying to all new Class 1a and Class 2 buildings.
Option 2: Accessibility standard, broadly reflecting LHDG gold standard, in the NCC applying to all new Class 1a and Class 2 buildings.
Option 3: Accessibility standard, broadly reflecting LHDG gold standard (with some platinum features), in the NCC applying to all new Class 1a and Class 2 buildings.
Option 4: Accessibility standard, broadly reflecting LHDG Gold standard, in the NCC applying to all new Class 2 buildings only.
Option 5: A subsidy program to encourage additional availability of accessible rental properties.
Option 6: An enhanced approach to voluntary guidance, which includes turning the current proposals into a non-regulatory ABCB handbook and other measures to encourage additional uptake of universal design principles, including: a search engine for dwellings certified as complying with the LHDGs and provision of information at the point of sale.

16. Are there other feasible regulatory or non-regulatory options with the potential to meet the objective that should be considered?

Please select all that apply
Applying the accessibility standards to only residential Class 1a (single detached house, row house, town house, terrace house or villa unit) or Class 2 (multi-storey residential) buildings?
Applying the accessibility standards to only a proportion of residential Class 1a (single detached house, rowhouse town house, terrace house or villa unit) or Class 2 (multi-storey residential) buildings?
Applying a different combination of the LHDG elements?
Applying a subset of the LHDG elements (e.g. step-free entry, wider doorways only)?
Another option?
Please provide additional information to support your response (for example, how these options would be delivered in practice) below:
Why is a “step-free” entrance taken as an almost automatic requirement? Not only some houses will need steps (most even) but some people should encounter steps in their homes. A “step-free” entrance should NOT be an automatic requirement.

17. Which of the options, in your opinion, have the ability to meet the objective? (select all options which in your opinion can meet the objective from the list below)

Please select all that apply
Status quo
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Option 6
Other Option

18. Are there any less intuitive or unintended consequences likely to arise from the adoption of any of these options?

Please select one item
Yes
No
If yes, please elaborate below:
House prices will increase but the way in which compliance must be achieved will not be as open to personal selection as it should be. Standards have ALWAYS, for example, required bathroom handrails to take a very limited form that does NOT always suit a user’s particular and changing needs.

19. Which option is your preferred option?

Please select one item
Status quo
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Option 6
Other Option

Estimating the cost of the proposals

20. Are the scenarios of possible impact (as described in the DCWC report) broadly representative of the scale of adjustments required to comply with the proposed accessibility standards (Options 1-3)?

Please select one item
Yes
No

21. For each of the building types, are the weighted average cost estimates broadly representative of the additional construction costs to comply with the proposed accessibility standards (Options 1-3)?

Please select one item
Yes
No

22. Do you agree with the approach taken to valuing the opportunity cost of the additional space required?

Please select one item
Yes
No

23. Are additional excavation costs likely to be required in order to provide homes that comply with the regulatory options (Options 1-3)?

Please select one item
Highly unlikely
Unlikely
Likely
Highly likely

24. Are the excavation cost estimates presented in table 5.12 reasonable?

Please select one item
Yes
No

25. Are there any other costs (e.g. transition costs) not identified for builders to transition to a new accessibility standard under the regulatory Options (Options 1-3)?

Please select one item
Yes
No

Estimating the benefits

27. Are the assumptions relating to the occupation of accessible housing by owner occupiers and renters over time reasonable?

Please select one item
Yes
No

28. Do you agree with the assumption of the extent features are currently not provided in new dwellings?

Please select one item
Yes
No

30. Where dwellings have some accessibility features but not others, would this reduce the size of the problem?

Please select one item
Yes
No

31. Do you agree with the assumption that additional features required under accessibility standards in Option 2 and Option 3 would increase the number of beneficiaries compared to Option 1?

Please select one item
Yes
No

32. To what extent would better information provision and promotion of an enhanced non-regulatory approach (Option 6) be effective in encouraging the voluntary uptake of universal design principles in new dwellings?

Please select one item
Not effective
Somewhat effective
Very effective
Unsure