FI requst at odds with development plan?

playdoejoe

Hi all,


We currently have a FI request from Laois CC to reduce the size of our South facing glazing.

We had selected the site for it's south facing aspect and had intended to maximise our solar gain through a large glazing area in the main open plan living area and master bedroom.
We had payed very close attention to the development plan when coming up with the design. It is mentioned numerous times in the county development plan, that all efforts should be made to avail of solar gain where ever possible.

We feel that this particular glazing section forms part of the overall energy strategy of the home, and it certainly seems to contribute a lot to our DEAP calculations.

The rest of the house is quite traditional looking and although this section looks more contemporary we feel it's in sympathy with the more traditional aspects of the house.

What they are suggesting will be tiny cottage like windows that would be more in place in a Dickensian era. And we feel it would really compromise the aesthetic of the house.

I guess my question is do we have a snowballs hope in hell with arguing these points with council?


I suspect they are never going to row back on it entirely as they'll probably see that as admitting defeat , but what about a compromise like we make it smaller or or less fussy, by removing vertical and horizontal glazing bars etc.

Perhaps some images would illustrate better:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/skmk6acdr0peaeo/Contemporary.png


vs:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/t89s893skn1eoag/TraditionalStyle.png




A quick scan through the development plan appendix 7 for rural housing
LAOIS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
2012-2018 APPENDIX 7
DRAFT RURAL DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR
COUNTY LAOIS 2012-2018

Reveals The following quotes:
Page 7
"Sustainable Energy
Site selection should be strongly influenced by
energy saving objectives, including being able to
maximise on passive solar heating gains through
site orientation .."

Page 10
"Building Form and Orientation
Traditionally buildings in the countryside were
positioned to take advantage of available
shelter, such as natural folds in the landform,
orientating the building in relation to prevailing
winds and the path of the sun, and using
sheltered areas next to woodlands. Such factors
are equally relevant to present day houses for
energy conservation reasons."

also Page 10:
"A rectangular building with one of the
longer facades facing south can allow for
increased solar heating, day-lighting and natural
ventilation.."

A diagram showing solar gain of living areas etc: (this almost matches our site orientation)


Page 23, under section titled
..omissions that commonly occur include:
"Inappropriate Site
Layout
Not maximising the impact
of solar gain on living areas "

Page 25 under "Site Selection"
"Consider the micro-climate and the
benefits of sustainable energy, south
facing slopes and orientation to benefit
from solar gain.."


Page 26 "Use / Avoid table"
"Identify south facing slopes and orientation to
benefit from solar gain"

As regards Design;
from the same table under "Building Form"
Use:
"A contemporary design that reflects modern
lifestyles while being respectful of the past"

Avoid:
"An over-scaling of traditional form"

archtech

In my opinion neither solution works well. What would work in my opinion would be a large glazed opening on at ground floor level with vertical emphasises and possibly two reasonably sized windows at first floor level.

As part of your response to the FI I would include the DEAP clacs and make the case for the large amount of glazing.

One thing you need to bear in mind with all the glazing is summertime overheating.

Outkast_IRE

With so much glazing shouldnt you aim to have some kind of shading to keep reduce the gain from the summer sun when its high in the sky ?
Or is that only a consideration when your going for triple glazed windows in a passiv home?

muffler

rayfitzharris wrote: »

Thanks, we are aware of the summertime overheating aspect, and would ensure that a sizeable amount of the glazing in that area would be openable and shuttered. I'm of the opinion that's it's much easier to let heat out than to let it in!

The problem is we are not entirely unlimited in the time we can invest in a lot of to-ing and fro-ing with the overlords and some how think it may ultimately leed to nothing only more costs and delays, So the best option might be to just roll over which wouldl be a shame and very disheartening.

Hopefully the architect get some where with them, fingers crossed anyway.

I wouldnt just roll over but if time is a factor you should avoid responding to the FI until you have reached agreement verbally with the planners.

Looking at the 2 designs there is scope for middle ground so to speak. Get your architect to prepare a couple of sketches and he, you or both can meet with the planner and hopefully reach some form of mutual agreement. Follow that up with the detailed response then.