Planning & Building Regulation Question ... ?

Question

I have met two people who have converted / upgraded a barn and an oast house and in both cases the local council have insisted on single glazed windows all round, their half baked explanation being that 'it is in keeping with the original structure'. Both properties had been fitted with underfloor heating which now, of course, will merely result in heat flying through the single glazed windows. If we are trying to make the planer greener and conserve energy at all costs, why oh why do councils insist on this step back into time ... ??

Answer 1

Every municipality has some historical regulations. If the home or Barn fell under that then they are governed buy those regulations. If they did these conversions/ upgrades with out prior consent from the regulating comities then it is possible they are imposing their will/and legal rights since there was no permit purchased or some other issue regarding regulation or fraudulent practices.

How ever if those are not the case then it a matter of design principal. The  designer or engineer need to submit an RFI regarding the governing municipalities regulations and then submit a CoD (Change of Design) form to the building department and make the changes under review.

So here's the general deal. The building department can force you to remain under the historical guidelines if there was no or is no submittal for improvements on record. Thats the only way they can hold you back on an upgrade that is not only safe...you could always pull the life safety card....but efficient.   I suggest you review with the designer or engineer of record.  

Answer 2

It doesn't make any sense to me either, unless they are also on the local utility board, and are trying to insure their income.

Answer 3

because they are not paying the bill?

Answer 4

That is ridiculous, and goes against the new 'green' charter they are so keen on imposing on new housing.  I should think it a case for secondary glazing inside the house, or just do as they say, and then later change them to double-glazing, and if they bother to turn up and cause trouble, punch them square on the nose.  It's the only language they understand.

Answer 5

Morally financially responsible!

I am sure they will allow it but they will also insist that according the the building codes if you are not just maintaining the building then you are improving it. If you are improving it then you will need the proper building permits so as to maintain the standards of upgrading and thus the new up grades become part of you tax assessment. Question do they know that underfloor heating was put in THE BARN and OUTBUILDING? Furthermore was the proper permits obtained and are they charging more taxes as a result! If you step forward they are responsible to maintain a standard and they want to receive compensation for your gain in value! Vie la vie Taxes!!!

Although it may sound like I agree with them I do not!

However that said; They are still morally and financially responsible to their constituents!

They do their best to make sure building usage is what it is supposed to be. Protecting inhabitants and of course society figures, if you can afford to improve, then you can afford more taxes!

Image they have not heard of a BARN needing In Floor Heat or Thermal-pane Windows either?!

If it has been converted to residential housing I will bet that the council does not know it!

Answer 6

While historical preservation is an outstanding endeavor, it has inadvertently come into conflict with the rapidly growing field of green planning.  The AIA (American Institute of Architects) have been trying to find mutual ground for these two groups to work from.  Once they've worked this out, it will give planning commissions better tools, guidelines and benchmarks to work from when advancing the general green "footprint" of historic insitutions.

Oddly, going green would help improve the bottom line of many organizations preserving historic districts.