New windows for a grade 2 cottage

[Nemesis]

I wonder if this is a Conservation Area also...

 

[DJN]

I do know a bit more about it, but that's up to David to post. It does seem he was told to go ahead by the Chief Planning Officer. I hope he has the correspondence still, as it is possible this could be taken to the Ombudsman.

However, in a case where it is totally new work, probably no idea what was removed originally to make the shop, I suppose it's a matter of interpretation if the windows are single glazed and speculative restoration, or DG and modern ones (although I dislike the sticky on fake leading, I have to say, the windows are simple and timber).

I thought the Parish Council remarks (which have no legal standing) about green oak and infill maybe not the thing to do either, although possibly something like hemcrete blocks would have been a little 'greener' than concrete.

In reply to Nemesis

I have also been engaged and the PC chairman (who has also offered some old timbers for repair) Likes the proposal update so far, and only made original comments because the Council did not give him all the application documents, in June.

I have further spoken to my councillor who and PC who are to Champion this situation.

D

 

[biffvernon]

So if the building is developed sympathetically with window systems fitted with glazing bars aligned above the spacer on each side with a light defracting baffle (duel Double leading reproduction) of the sealed glazing unit, and follow the profile avoiding the concave/convex double reflection.

And the rest of the house is 15mm Double glazed.

Why would this not an acceptable

'Sympathetic' is perhaps subjective - maybe the CO just thought the windows looked crap but couldn't quite find the right word.

 

[Nemesis]

The Parish Council has no real legal standing on this I have to say, and using old timbers for repair is not always considered sound conservation. I'd not take what a Parish Council has to say too much into consideration.

I think all you can do now is get your local councillor (District, not Parish) to try to broker some resolution.

 

[DJN]

So if the building is developed sympathetically with window systems fitted with glazing bars aligned above the spacer on each side with a light defracting baffle (duel Double leading reproduction) of the sealed glazing unit, and follow the profile avoiding the concave/convex double reflection.

And the rest of the house is 15mm Double glazed.

Why would this not an acceptable

'Sympathetic' is perhaps subjective - maybe the CO just thought the windows looked crap but couldn't quite find the right word.

MMM interesting thought........

But CO has not visited site............

As before Quote "was after constructive ideas not ridicule".
We have done the best with what we had to work with, the interior however is a different matter.
The inside joists have been repaired with reclaimed oak and elm timber Joists replacing the rotted softwood 20th C Update Repairs i hasten to add. 17 C timbers and 17c ish for Joists.

 

[middi]

David, if someone has offered you some old timbers for repairs it is not the right timber you should be using from a conservation point of view. Whilst these timbers would make an exellent job, green or seasoned new oak should be used and repair dated.

This approach will in the future be more historically correct as opposed to old timber which may be a few hundred years old already and totally confuse the issue for future historians.

 

[Nemesis]

My serious suggestion at this stage is to get ALL paperwork together, including any from the Chief Planning Officer saying yes start, and seek an appointment with your District Councillor.

Explain the sitaution and ask for him/her to have some discussion with the local authority.

If eventually this cannot be resolved with the CO etc, if you do have recourse to the Ombudsman, you will really need to show that you have explored all avenues to have this resolved.

 

[skier-hughes]

David, if someone has offered you some old timbers for repairs it is not the right timber you should be using from a conservation point of view. Whilst these timbers would make an exellent job, green or seasoned new oak should be used and repair dated.

This approach will in the future be more historically correct as opposed to old timber which may be a few hundred years old already and totally confuse the issue for future historians.

This confuses me, as we have so many posts saying is my house built from ships timbers and the reply is often, no, people used what wood they could get, which would most likely have come from another house rather than a ship.

So, the old house would have had many repairs/works during it's years, many/sopme with second hand wood. Today this is what we want to keep.

So in a hundred or two years time when another generation althogether is looking at the house, they'll be saying - Is this a piece of ships timber? The answer will be , no they used sound conservation practise back in the early 21st century, so instead of cutting down trees to repair a part of the house they'd use a piece that was given them, don't forget they were just beginning to realise what a mess the world was in

Anyway, my point is they rarely used new timber in the past to repair, so why should we have to now?

A proper repair using suitable material is surely the best repair? Then keep a journal of the work to make it easier for the next historian to work our what was done, or don't and leave them guessing as we so often have to do today!!

 

[DJN]

My serious suggestion at this stage is to get ALL paperwork together, including any from the Chief Planning Officer saying yes start, and seek an appointment with your District Councillor.

Explain the sitaution and ask for him/her to have some discussion with the local authority.

If eventually this cannot be resolved with the CO etc, if you do have recourse to the Ombudsman, you will really need to show that you have explored all avenues to have this resolved.

Just

Got off the phone with councillor who is having a meeting with the Planning Chairman with further PC backing.

 

[Nemesis]

Good. It seems to be the best approach.

 

[Flyfisher]

Anyway, my point is they rarely used new timber in the past to repair, so why should we have to now?

Perhaps conservation was not such a well developed institution so they had less 'guidelines' and just used whatever came to hand?

A proper repair using suitable material is surely the best repair?

An interesting point - but what's 'best' ?

I have a very large beam (the ceiling beam of a roof A-frame) that is going to need major repair. Assuming it's one of the original beams (and there's no indication to the contrary) then it dates from around 1550. Given the ages of all the timbers any movement in the building surely ceased a long time ago. So, is it best to make the repair with a piece of oak of comparable age - i.e. something that is dimensionally stable, to match the existing stable beams - or is it better to use newish oak that will likely move over the next 50 years or so and, possibly, cause unwanted stresses on the existing timber frame?

I'm thinking purely of the mechanics of the job and its effect on the rest of the building, rather than any convention regardng 'honest repairs' - not that I'm dismissing that out of hand, but I'm interested to know what's best for the building rather than what's best to help future historians.

 

[skier-hughes]

Pinching one of Nemesis much used sayings as it is very apt here, what is best differs for each individual building and in fact repair, as each building and each repair will be totally different and need looking at in detail.

If you don't do a proper repair, will there be a building for historians to look at in the future? It may well have fallen down!!

 

[Nemesis]

what is best differs for each individual building

A blatant lie of course.

One of my many.

 

[skier-hughes]

Why? Edit - This was to Nemesis' unedited post

 

[Nemesis]

And just a bit of hearsay - or was it heresy?

Hard to tell.

Anyhow, I wouldn't believe anything I say about conservation, as I am apparently the reason so many of our historic buildings are vanishing. And according to you a liar to boot.

I know nowt.

 

[skier-hughes]

I've always thought it was a good piece of advice and as I like to give credit where it is due I named you as the originator of the "piece".
Sorry if it offended you.

 

[DJN]

Just a snippet for interested parties

English heritage Guidance Notes

Interim Guidance on Building Regulations Part L
Building Regulations and Historic Buildings
Balancing the needs for energy conservation with those of building conservation : an Interim Guidance Note on the application of Part L
The Government is committed to reducing global warming by cutting the emission of greenhouse gases. Almost half the carbon dioxide produced in the United Kingdom derives from the burning of fossil fuels to provide energy for heating, lighting, ventilating and air-conditioning buildings.
The revised Part L of the Building Regulations, which came into force on April 1st 2002, seeks to improve the energy efficiency of all buildings. For existing buildings, including historic buildings, this means reducing heat losses - particularly through windows - and also means introducing much higher standards of insulation. To try to ensure that implementing the revised Part L does not harm the special interest and appearance of historic buildings.

5.2 What triggers the Part L Requirements?
For existing buildings, Part L generally requires energy conservation upgrading only for elements which are to be ‘substantially replaced’ as part of the works.

 

[Nemesis]

No. you stopped offending me many rants ago Graham. But just in case anyone reading the forum believes anything I say could have some basis in knowledge, I thought I had better warn them.

Graham says I am a liar. He has said a great deal of other things about me over time, but liar I must be as Graham says so.

He's never wrong.

 

[Nemesis]

David - we've debated this at length many times, but in the end it's guidance and subject to interpretation.

I have posted the latest doc from EH on climate change in another thread.


http://www.helm.org.uk/server/show/nav.9255

 

[skier-hughes]

Nemesis you want to carry on do you, don't know why when you say you always have better things to do, never want to reply to anyone.........

But please quote me in context.

In this thread I said your ideas were good.


In this thread,
http://periodproperty.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9001

Totally different, totally different situation and you were saying totally different things and I was countering what you were saying about me and discussing different problems.


I will carry on discussing the merits of repairs with Flyfisher and others, if they wish.

Please do not post about me personally.