LIGHTING

Vulnerable age

Related hazards

Rear elevation

All ages

None

Yes

Yes

No

No

Multiple locations

Secondary hazards

Ground floor rear kitchen/diner

Dwelling: 1960's, 3 bedroom detached house.

LIKELIHOOD & OUTCOMES

a

Obstruction - of windows

3

b

Size, shape and position

-

c

Position of artificial lighting

-

d

Control of artificial lighting

e

Glare etc

-

f

Window view

g

Outlook

# Secondary hazards

none

Key

3

Seriously defective

2

Defective

1

Not satisfactory

-

Satisfactory

HHSRS VERSION 2

SEPTEMBER 2004

HHSRS VERSION 2

DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDS

The dwelling faces almost directly West. It is now let privately (and has been for the last three years)

through the local University accommodation agency. It is currently occupied by four unrelated students.

The height of the Leylandii hedge, which is within the boundary of the property, blocks any direct sunlight

into the ground and first floor rear rooms.

The hedge makes the ground floor kitchen and dining area

particularly dark.

LIST OF RELEVANT MATTERS

Likelihood to

1 in 5,600

Outcomes to

0.1

1.0 10.0 88.9 %

The hedge should be cut down to a height of less than 2 metres or removed and replaced

with a fence. Either of these would remove the obstruction and allow adequate daylight

penetration.

Improved

IMPROVE

Justification

NEW RATING

Av: Nos

A B C D E F G H

I

J

Average likelihood, outcomes and HHSRS score for hazards from inadequate lighting for all

persons in all dwellings, 1995-96

Score

<1

HHSRS VERSION 2

SEPTEMBER 2004

HEALTH AND SAFETY RATING SYSTEM SCORES

1946-79 House

LIKELIHOOD

1 in

32

Low

High

Average: 50,825

Example

32

2400 1300 750 420 240 130

75

42

24

13

7.5

4

2.5

1.5 >

The windows to the rear elevation are of adequate size and are well located so that, if

unobstructed, the dwelling there would be adequate natural lighting. However, the

position and height of the Leylandii hedge obstructs daylight with the result that there is

inadequate daylight penetration into the rear rooms. As one of these is the kitchen/diner,

the likelihood of a harmful occurrence, is significantly increased.

Concerns about

getting the hedged removed/lopped may also add to the psychological harm.

%

Average: 0.1

< 4200

Justification

OUTCOMES

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Justification

RATING

0.1

1.0

10.0

88.9

184

0.1

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 0.9

1.0

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 9.0

10.0

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 90.0

88.9

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

There is nothing to suggest that the outcomes will vary from the average.

Average: < 1

Example

A B C D E F G H

I

J

Score

RATING SCORES AFTER IMPROVEMENT