Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

DEAP Part L - BER Assessor Recommendations Westmeath

  • 14-05-2013 09:13AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30


    Hi There,

    I am getting plans drawn up by my brother in law for a storey and half house, which have almost got thru pre planning approval.

    He is an Architectural Technican but has not worked in the area for a few years, but still handy with CAD. But he wouldn't be much good when it comes to DEAP testing or energy efficiency.

    I was wondering if any one had good recommendations of where/who to get this done by, and what sort of fee to expect.

    I have a price from a large National Group for a New Build Improvement Report for 500 euro including VAT.

    They can also just do a Part L Compliance Check or a Part L Specification for a lower fee.

    I expect the fee is probably in or around what to expect, but I wonder are they any good.

    Thanks for any input or feedback you might have.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30 05Mav


    Trying to bump the thread and see if anyone has any inputs.

    Thanks


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 558 ✭✭✭beyondpassive


    There is no such thing as pre planning approval, pre planning has no statutory function.

    Sounds very Celic tiger esque. It is better to approach compliance though good detailing and design. Often BER assessors have little practical experience of building and simply use deap as a tick box exercise. You then get solutions like 100 insulation in a 120 cavity augmented by 50mm drylining which is not a good idea fro a number of reasons. The building should be designed using DEAP iterativly, to verify all design decisions. Design then deap assesment no longer works Handy with CAD does not mean a good designer or technically proficient. I'd rethink your strategy completely. Focus on compactness, orientation, good thermal bridge detailing and airtightness with MHRV.


Advertisement