Irish say no to PVC windows

😀
There’d be nothing to whinge about otherwise…

Well from tacking the old onto the new to sticking the new onto the old – here’s a wide view of that lovely terrace in Dundalk.
Look at the ghastly ‘restoration’ job just being finished off on the last house. Fair enough if the render needed redoing (is it lime-based?) but the windows??

And they’ve put in Georgian panelled doors instead of Victorian!
This whole terrace has been wrecked by replacement windows, and look at that painted house. The utter ignorance of the owners. This is what I mean about people not looking at their house as an architectural entity. They rarely consider it part of a collective whole – rather ‘this is my patch’ and I can do what I like with it. The roof’s had the builders on it too…

You see this sort of inconsiderate practice everywhere. Look at the mess of the terrace now.

I note that the very last house in the terrace with original windows has put in an application for works, which obviously include the windows given the absent one upstairs.

What’s the likelihood of them being restored? Much of Dundalk is now ACA designated, but nothing is mentioned at all on the application, including a supposed lack of protected status…

And they’ve only a handful of them in that building anyway!

I never thought I’d say this, but well done to the PVC supplier in the case pictured below – these are the ‘best’ PVC replicas I’ve ever seen – located in a landmark Georgian building on Dundalk’s main street – but only from a distance. And even then the large shiny single panes are blatently evident.
Up close all is truly revealed.

I could not believe it when I saw the original sashes had been removed, having not been around this area for a while.
These PVCs look brand spanking new, indeed the paintwork around the frames hasn’t even been redone since. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were put in in the past few weeks or couple of months – though wouldn’t bank on it…

This is an absolute disgrace – this building simply must be currently protected, and probably in an ACA. I’m very suspicious that they were installed well after these legislative safeguards were introduced.
These would have been one of the finest examples of large Georgian sashes in the whole town 😡

Some very entertaining opinions there folks.

As somebody ‘in the window industry’ I’m not quite sure where to start. It would be tempting to elaborate on the cutting edge strategies for replacement window companies in the UK – that is positioning windows as home décor and encouraging an 8-9 year lifespan – but I think that would cause even further grinding of teeth.

Looking on the bright side though, after viewing the pictures that have been posted – and what a gallery of shame it is – I would be of the opinion that many of the replacement windows illustrated are likely to be illegal.

The 2002 revision of TGD L specifically brought replacement windows under the auspices of the Building Regulations. In the documents guidance for technical risks and precautions it is stated that “the guidance in relation to fire safety in TGD B should be taken fully into account. In particular, it is important to ensure that windows, which are required as secondary means of escape in accordance with Section 1.5 of TGD B, comply with the dimensional and other requirements for such windows as set out in paragraph 1.5.6. of TGD B.”

Turning to TGD B para. 1.5.6b – “The bottom of the window opening should be not more than 1100mm and not less than 800mm (600 mm in the case of a rooflight) above the floor of the room in which it is situated.”

The bottom of the top-hung casements in the photographs look to my eye to be more than 1100mm above floor level and would struggle to provide an acceptable egress opening even if they were at a usable level . The windows with the opening vent in the position of the lower sash would appear to struggle to have a net clear opening of 450mm in height which I would take as the absolute minimum height for an egress opening.

Given that each habitable room has to have an alternative means of escape and this is more often then not the window then you can appreciate the issue at stake.

Anything installed prior to 2002, or in commercial premises, would fall under general consumer protection legislation or Workplace (health and safety) Regulations 1992-Regulation 14. The following references here are to specific UK legislation but I believe we have something very similar;
Section 10 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 provides (amongst other things) that it is an offence to supply goods which fail to comply with the general safety requirement. In determining whether goods fail to comply with the general safety requirement, courts can have regard to various references, including British Standards, and can do so irrespective of whether those standards have been incorporated in safety regulations.
General Product Safety Regulations 1994 (GPSR). Where products are supplied for domestic use they must comply with the ‘general Safety Requirement’ of the above Regulations, which require consumer products to be reasonably safe. Again this may be achieved by conforming with BS6262: Part 4 with reference to the approved Document N of the Building Regulations 1991.
In the light of these two pieces of consumer legislation, for all practical purposes BS6262: Part 4, although nominally a code for recommended good practice, can be regarded as a legal requirement for any glass sold directly to the general public for use in critical locations.

Although the example refers to safety glass the principle applies equally to fire-safety. No glazier in his right mind would install non-safety glass to a critical location. Likewise nobody in their right mind should be installing a window at variance with the requirements set out in TGD B.

If such installations are brought to the attention of the local building control office then they would be extremely foolish to ignore the situation.

I saw mention of ACA’s being a partial solution. If the O’Connell St ACA is anything to go by I’d have me doubts. I have been observing one prominent façade having the original (post 1916) sash-windows replaced over the course of the last year and double-glazed windows installed. I’d be very surprised if anybody in Wood Quay new anything about it.
As to the suggestion of making the reinstatement of windows a planning condition I think the fenestration debacle of the ‘renovated’ St Columba’s hospital in Sligo is an example of how seriously this is taken. To the best of my knowledge it was Freddie O’Dwyer of all people who provided the Duchas input on this project. (I would commend Westport and its activist planning dept as a notable example of how successful this strategy can be).

I would be in favour of zero VAT to encourage the take up of energy efficient windows in general – there are ratings schemes available. Furthermore I would also recommend tax credits for suitable replacement windows in designated locations. The stick of enforcement should also come with a few carrots.

Is mise le meas,

Monty

@Graham Hickey wrote:

Monty, surely all replacement windows do not have to conform to such regulations, especially considering such a huge, allbeit minority amount, of existing windows do not conform simply by virtue of the size of the wall openings, or the position of the window.
Surely in such cases, i.e. with the majority of older buildings protected or not, these regs do not apply, as some if not all window openings would have to be changed in every single case.
Likewise how the current requirement of double-glazing in new-builds as far as I know does not apply in the restoration or re-insertion of sash windows….?

Monty what building on O’Connell St do you refer to with PVC. There is a myriad of buildings with shiny PVC that are not but a few years old, much of which is borderline in terms of ACA and protected building legislation introduction, a lot of which more than likely tips well over into the post-intro period but it’s difficult to prove just by looking…

I would contend that all replacement windows in dwellings have to be cognisant of the requirements of TGD B. Even if the building was constructed prior to the enactment of the Building Regulations the windows originally would have served an escape function even though this had not been codified. Now that the escape function has been codified there is an explicit recognition that escape routes are required for all buildings.

A defensible case could be made for replacing like with like, in terms of a vertical slider for vertical slider – the escape function has not been diminished. What can not be defended is diminishing the escape function to the point where escape is impractical. This I would contend is the case with most of the windows in the photos. Either the unobstructed opening is too small or the opening section is too high above the floor level. I would also note that there is wide spread misunderstanding about the dimensions necessary for safe-escape. TGD B 1.5.6 currently provides ‘guidance’ of 500 x 850mm. England & Wales and Scotland allow for a minimum area of 0.33m2 with a minimum of 450mm in both height and width. The draft – now 2 years old – revisions to TGD B propose a similar area approach (0.35m2) but ludicrously only for vertical sliders and only then when they are in the vicinity of existing ‘period’ buildings!

The overriding requirement from a safety perspective is that any works do not make the situation worse then already exists. If the building is a protected structure or in a conservation area, I would still maintain the safety requirement takes primacy. Apart from fire safety the other issue here is generally one of guarding – many vertical sliders may have the bottom of the opening section below 800mm above floor level. This can be dealt with by thoughtfully designed barriers inside the window.

Low E glass is required in all new windows. If you repair or re-glaze a window it is not required. If the window – sash and frame – is replaced then Low E glass is required – even for a vertical slider. If the building is important enough to have been a listed building then an exemption to TGD L is understandable. I don’t support a blanket exemption for ACA’s either. I’ve come across situations in Dublin where DCC has been using this specious argument to obstruct double-glazing in areas of Ranelagh that are merely zoned Z2. There are modern double-glazed windows on the market that are suitable for both ACA’s and D6. Energy conservation is to important to give an exemption to vast swathes of red-brick Dublin.

I said the building was in the ACA and I didn’t say it was PVC. Wynns Hotel. I’ll try and attach a photo. The windows are timber and to my eye look pretty good. Meeting rail is slightly heavy and those of them with horns have the wrong profile. Minor details when one considers the history of the façade. Unless this building was protected specifically for the windows, which I doubt, I don’t have a problem with this kind of sympathetic substitution – assuming it was approved. I would actually hold the installation up as an example of how modern windows can work in such a situation. The benefits of energy savings, greater comfort & increased property value will be more persuasive then a legislative stick.

Is mise le meas,

Monty

Well much of Dundalk is ACA designated now – i.e post 2000, ACA ‘proper’. There was at least four areas proposed in the draft Dev Plan for the town; at least some if not all are now enacted, I think all are.

Agreed Monty about not disimproving the situation with regard to safety and replacement windows. With those new windows pictured above, there is simply no way any adult could fit through those openings without severe amputation…
With the others with higher opening lights, it is an impossibility full stop.
Sash windows have so many advantages over hinged windows on virtually every front, perhaps with the exception of security – if not properly secured they’re just as easy to get in through as to escape out…

Double glazing in old sashes is a thorny issue alright – I’d say a complete no no in the case of Georgian sashes unless the appearance of double glazing improves, but with Victorian plates it can look equally bad with the shiny metal strips between the panes brazenly evident. If this issue can be resolved (perhaps it has already) it would be a major step forward aesthetically – (this all based on the assumption that there’s no original glass left)Must have a look at Wynns tomorrow and see their double glazed panes – perhaps it can be done well.

You say Monty that “a defensible case could be made for replacing like with like” – is this your opinion or is it the actual legislation? Thanks

Yes – it pains me to have to say it but they really are quite excellent from a distance! Up close though is not pleasant.
But the major flaw in their design as always is the single pane of glass in each sash – as flat as a pancake in spite of the grid.

And to think the ground floor occupier is the swankiest, most contrived, most expensive home interior shop in the North East, priding itself on ‘quality’…

Yes DCC’s lack of action on the spreading of ACAs is extraordinary – maybe because they’re a major headache administratively? Protection of streetscapes can be nearly more important than individual strutures in many cases.

I love these houses below.
Isn’t it ironic that in spite of the half-century effort of the Victorians to rid themselves of cluttered Georgian grids, and their triumphant attainment of plate/sheet glass, the owner of the left-hand house here has decided to chuck this achievement out the window, preferring instead to reinsert an antiquated and incongruous feature – the Georgian grid.

It really says it all about window treatment in this country:

What a pity – esp regarding the glazing bars which were very fine and delicate.
And they appear to be in an excellent state of repair (glass aside) in the first image 🙁
What a shame that they slipped through the system.

The new ones are quite bizarre as they go backwards with the thickness of the glazing bars, indeed they almost look Queen Anne, yet go forward to the late Victorians with the horns!

Have you seen the glazing bars on the pink houses on St. Stephen’s Green? They are without doubt the thinnest bars known to mankind :). You’d wonder how the glass is even holding in the windows – really the very peak of Georgian refinement.

Here’s Wynns’ windows – they look very well, although no doubt they originally featured lots of shimmering early 20th century glass similar to Eason’s 🙁
But the dead glazing aside, the double-glazed units are simply indistinguishable from single glazed from street level – really good, and without compromise on the slenderness of the bars.
Perhaps the peripheral frames of the arched windows are a teeny bit too wide?…but that could just be down to an unfair comparison with the Georgains, and their obsession with concealing the frame.

These windows look magnificent – and are painted a soft not-in-your-face shade of white.

I’ve parted with a lot of cash for a house where the dope of a vendor saw fit to install the most offensive bright white sash windows in a red brick Victorian, two up two down, just before selling. The house has beautiful grantite insets over each of the three front windows, which thankfully he hasn’t touched.
Any help as to what my options are in terms of replacement with original sash? Reconditioned salvaged? Replica?

I know I’m contributing nothing to the intellectual value of this discussion but I’d really appreciate any advice, which would be put to good use.

Thank you

@Graham Hickey wrote:

salvaged glass may be available which could be cut to size

Is it possible to get replica antique glass?

Sorry, just to clarify, the glass used by the OPW was specifically chosen to look as authentic as possible, but is unlikely that it was laser treated – I’ve no idea as to where that concept came from 😮

However it is possible that they used an in-between ‘period style’ glass that features waves, but no imperfections (such as bubbles) as described in the link below.
Either method used, one may be sure that it was pretty pricey – on this site alone there’s nothing genuine below £100 sterling per square metre, or £55 psm for ‘period style’ 😮

http://www.londoncrownglass.co.uk/Types.html