<!DOCTYPE html><html><head>
<style type="text/css">"body { font-family:'Times New Roman'; font-size:17px"}</style>
</head><body>
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 12:54:10 -0000, Larry Brydon <lbrydon@reliancecomfort.com> wrote:<br><p>Hi,</p><p>The current (2011) review of the English Building Regulations "codes" (approved documents) is expected to <u>insist</u> that all new build buildings and dwellings to have "broadband" connection infrastructure provision. So just perhaps the few new build "work 'n' live" developments will cease to be "odd ball". </p><p>John Bone, <em>MBEng, BSc Hons, ICIOB<br></em>Fire Risk & Building Code Advisor<br>England, UK, Europe<br></p><blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0.80ex; border-left: #0000FF 2px solid; padding-left: 1ex">
<p><font size="2">Hi Guys<br>
<br>
Look at ecohomes, predecesor to the UK code for sustainable housing, it had a credit for making a room "office ready" - primarily smart wiring technologies but no different than "solar ready" - starts the discussion...<br>
<br>
Larry Brydon<br>
Reliance Home Comfort<br>
416 704 0749<br>
Lbrydon@reliancecomfort.com<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org <greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org><br>
To: Green Building <greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org><br>
Sent: Wed Jan 12 20:28:42 2011<br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to thePassive House Standard<br>
<br>
I think it should be obvious that the IDEA of not penalized, in fact, encouraging, stay at home work arrangements, even if it is easy to forget this in a detailed discussion.<br>
The issue of transportation is really what this is about.<br>
However, in housing standards like PH, Energy Star, LEED R2000, etc. it is really tough to come up with workable rules. We should try though.<br>
For example, there should be exemptions to make it easier for homes built or converted near high density urban centers (although rural folks will scream).<br>
It is also not clear that adding a den to home will result in fewer commutes, although it does make it possible to conveniently working at home.<br>
<br>
On 2011-01-12, at 6:04 PM, Gordon Scale wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From an overall energy perspective, can we not take this opportunity to help<br>
turn this around. Somehow I believe new standards of measurement should<br>
try to foster benefits to those considering housing with home based businesses<br>
of substance. The resulting energy benefits in transportation energy are<br>
considerable, especially if married with compact urban form. <br>
<br>
I see no reason to penalize a somewhat larger than average home - if it includes<br>
a reasonably sized retail, professional or service use. Food for thought when<br>
striving for practical energy standards for new housing and infill/renovations.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Dr John Straube, P.Eng.<br>
Associate Professor<br>
University of Waterloo<br>
Dept of Civil Eng. & School of Architecture<br>
www.buildingscience.com<br>
<br>
</font>
</p>
</blockquote><br><br><br><div id="M2Signature"><div>-- </div><div><div>John Bone, MBEng, BSc Hons, ICIOB<br><font color="#00ff00"><small><font face="Viner Hand ITC">Home Email: JohnBone@gateshead.plus.com</font></small></font></div><div>Sent from my 'Laptop' Email:<strong> <font color="#ff8040">John@womackandbone.co.uk</font></strong></div><div>Using Opera's revolutionary email client: <a href="http://www.opera.com/mail/"><small>http://www.opera.com/mail/</small></a></div></div></div></body></html>