Exempted Development

Exempted Development

Postby lmu » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:03 pm

I am planning to build a ground floor extenstion to the rear of a Victorian terraced house in Dublin 8. We did consider obtaining planning permission for a 2 storey extension but were advised by the planners that there are restrictions in the area and we were unlikely to get planning. The street is not listed in the Record of Protected Structures and it is not an architectural conservation area. Can anybody tell me what type of restrictions could be involved? I cannot get a response from the planners for the area.

In particular, it may be easier to actually rebuild the original annex to the house and the extension rather than reinforcing it and supporting the original chimney breast etc. Could there be restrictions on doing this? Would the extension still be exempt?

Once more thing, is it permissible to replace existing sash windows with double glazed sash windows or would we have to repair the existing?

Any comments would be grately appreciated.

LMU
lmu
Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:51 pm

Re: Exempted Development

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:10 pm

Given that it is possible to have single glzed windows converted to double glazed you would be mad to replace the windows if much of the original glass is still intact as these would contribute significantly to the character of the features:

Your first move should be to contact some of these contractors for estimates:


http://www.irish-architecture.com/cgi-bin/igs/register/search/register.cgi?col_search=conservation_category&key_words=joiner%20cabinet%20maker&block=2

You can also have the paint removed close to Harolds Cross bridge for a nominal sum

In relation to your extension I would at least consult with an architect who has undertaken similar projects in the recent past
PVC King
 

Re: Exempted Development

Postby hutton » Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:10 pm

Thomond Park wrote:Given that it is possible to have single glzed windows converted to double glazed you would be mad to replace the windows
:rolleyes:

It is likely to work out many times more the price to do it that way. Unless the windows are particularly rare, its far better & more effecient to rip them out and replace them with good solid wood sash, double glazed - which arnt too cheap in themselves anyway:(

Rip them out, rip them out, rip them out:p
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Exempted Development

Postby Andrew Duffy » Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:38 pm

Please ignore the above advice and have the windows restored. Contrary to the misinformation above, restoration is considerable cheaper than replacement, and will add value to the building. I also strogly advise NOT converting the windows to double-glazed as this will restrict airflow into the building's structure and will eventually damage it.
Andrew Duffy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Exempted Development

Postby hutton » Wed Feb 01, 2006 5:02 pm

Re replacing windows -

I am happy to be corrected, but a recent experience where the costs were weighed up led to the realisation that restoration, at least in that instance, was not viable.
While I strongly back conservation/ retention where appropriate - eg PVC windows on the Phoenix Park gatelodge pain me every time I see them - at the same time, distinctions should be drawn in so far as Imu clearly wants to do the right thing with a vernacular home, and personally I believe its pointless to create impractical hurdles. I am also unconvinced by the suggestion to hold off on double-glazing, in so far as single-glaze can can lead to 15 - 20% heat loss. That said A Duffys concerns as to ventalation should be considered, and double glazing should only go in where an appropriate air movement/ ventalation plan has been put in place. (Otherwise mould, dampness, etc can be an unforeseen side effect - yuck :eek: )

Imu, let us know how you get on and what way the costs compare re replacement or restoration with a second glaze (which I suspect will be a pane :p ). I'll buy you a pint T Park & A Duffy if it works out cheaper :)
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Exempted Development

Postby lmu » Wed Feb 01, 2006 5:27 pm

Thanks for the advice.

I will keep you posted!

L
lmu
Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:51 pm

Re: Exempted Development

Postby PVC King » Wed Feb 01, 2006 5:38 pm

hutton wrote: I'll buy you a pint T Park & A Duffy if it works out cheaper :)


I think Andrew will be getting the pint but I would still contend that a typical late Victorian house could cope with double glazed windows if a venting system were installed
PVC King
 

Re: Exempted Development

Postby GrahamH » Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:17 am

There are two issues being confused here: heat and air.
Double-glazing does not prevent the existing flow of air from seeping through the windows - glass is glass, whether it be single-glazed or double. However it does help prevent heat loss.

What does prevent the flow of air is entirely different, sealed replacement frames like PVC or aluminium, and indeed timber in many cases - models that can completely seal up the edges of the window frame and the opening parts.

Fitting double-glazing will not necessarily cause any changes to the house's 'eco-system', however the usual sealing up in the form of rubber seals around the sash frames could; it depends on the severity.

Personally I don't understand this drive for double-glazing in old sash windows - often done in an eco-saving frame of mind as part of a house renovation, and then the owners go cap it off by adorning the new patio with a gas heater. Of much greater importance is adapting heating systems in homes, with the installation of more efficient boilers and crucially, room thermostats.
I'd love to know the true statistics surrounding double-glazing and its installation in older sashes where ventilation must be maintained regardless. I suspect the environmental and economic benefits are neglibible, while the damage done to architectural heritage is enormous.

For my part Imu, I'd strongly suggest you do not install double-glazing if the original Victorian glass is intact. It is a priceless feature that adds character and individuality to your home and is a part of engineering and social history. Obviously not everything can or should be preserved for such reasons, but if it is doing little harm and is a pleasure to own and value, and for others to observe, why meddle with it?

This is one of the unseen aspects of damage to architectural heritage in this country - increasingly windows are being preserved so on the face of it it looks like a certain building has been saved from PVC, but then you see spanking new, often double-glazed, flawless panes in place of the original glass.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Exempted Development

Postby publicrealm » Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:50 am

IMU,

If you wish to stay within the exempted regulations look at Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development Regulations - this gives detailed advice as to what is exempted. If you are still in doubt you can request a formal declaration by the Planning Authority for a fee of €80.00 (see Section 5 of the P&D Act). This is a swift(ish) process and could be completed in about 8 weeks - can also be referred to the Board if necessary.

With regard to the planners advice that 'restrictions' apply - they should explain what these are. If not an Architectural Conservation Area (or a Protected Structure) then it is possible that it is in a Residential Conservation Area (RCA)? You can tell by viewing the zoning map - an RCA is a darker yellow than a standard Residential area.

If none of the above then the planners are trying it on and you should go for full planning permission.

(p.s. keep the old windows unless they are beyond redemption)

Best of luck.

P.
publicrealm
Member
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:50 am
Location: D6

Re: Exempted Development

Postby HAS » Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:41 pm

I have an existing dwelling house under construction. I want to convert the attic space to bedrooms. I will not be altering the front elevation of the house or the height in any way. Permission was granted for a bungalow. Do I require planning permission to carry out these works?
My concern is that I will not get a Certificate of compliance with planning for the bank. The height etc of the space in the attic allow me to fully comply with the building regulations.
HAS
Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:24 pm

Re: Exempted Development

Postby tyrrp » Mon Jul 31, 2006 2:18 pm

HAS wrote:I have an existing dwelling house under construction. I want to convert the attic space to bedrooms. I will not be altering the front elevation of the house or the height in any way. Permission was granted for a bungalow. Do I require planning permission to carry out these works?
My concern is that I will not get a Certificate of compliance with planning for the bank. The height etc of the space in the attic allow me to fully comply with the building regulations.



Most attic conversions do not comply with building regulations and are not actually allowed to be included in your living space. What usually happens is that you can only call it "Storage Space" with the bank and if ever selling.

As regards planning you usually do not need planning permission once:-
1. You are not raising the roof level.
2. You are not changing the front elevation of the house.
3. You are only using Skylight type windows to the rear only.
4. It is OK to put Skylights on the ends of the house if you have a double pitch.

Check you local councils web site for information. There is a leaflet that tells you what is exempt and some councils have this scanned on their sites. I know South County Dublin site does.
tyrrp
Member
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:44 pm


Return to Ireland