What do you think of these plans?

[indus]

Sorry, one more question please?

As mentioned before, in the proposed amended plans the gf element projects forward 3m as compared to the ff.

It had been suggested by your good selves that a mono pitch front to back, or to the side might be best. Both dimensions of the gf element would be 3m, ie it is virtually a square.

I estimate the rise of the roof to be just under 1m. I've estimated this as being a pitch of circa 14 degrees.

Given this shallow pitch I presume using the identical tiles to those on the main house would be impossible?

Therefore the gf element would end up having different tiles to existing house?

I presume therefore that in design terms this would look poor?

Thanks again

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Don't know Indus we've not had a chance to design it so not worked out the pitch. Maybe you'll have to raise the cills or have less than 3m, or maybe find an alternative tile that looks a good match yet works on a lower pitch or maybe that solution doesn't work if your 3m is precious. That's what your designer does; works out what can and cannot be achieved and presents you with a workable scheme.

What's your priority? 3m or roof tiles that match? You'll have to compromise somewhere.

No offence Indus but there are people out there who deliberate on whether they can afford a 3m or 4m extension on its own right, IMO your persistence on getting every possible m2 addition on what is already a big extension on an already good sized house is getting a little tiresome.

 

[indus]

Hi Freddy, believe me I can understand how this is getting tiresome, I feel the same way

However to be clear I'm not trying to bleed out every last m2. Quite the opposite, I want to understand whether this gf element can ever really work. If it can't then I'll
scrap it.

I understand what you mean about accepting compromises but I can only do that if I fully understand what the options available are.

My current agent and I have been fiddling around with these plans for about a year. We've had so many conversations and tweaks about this that I've lost track and got myself into a muddle.

I feel that we may have arrived at the 'bag of spanners design' because every other option with regards to having a gf element would have also meant a compromise ie mismatched tiles etc.

As a result it could well be my fault (read my demands) that have led to this less than desirable design outcome.

I'm now very happy to lose the gf space for a design that looks the best aesthetically.

All I'm trying to get to the bottom of is whether even a 3m projection can ever work. You guys suggested a mono pitch roof, and now I recall my agent and I considered this but we felt the mismatch tiles due to the pitch would look poor.

Now, I can bring in a new agent but I don't want to shell out £2k just to be told what we may already know ie the staggered design will for one reason or another always look poor.

I hope that makes sense and I'm sorry that this is becoming tedious

 

[indus]

Quick question for you guys please?

After some very good (but sometimes slightly harsh ) advice here I've decided to completely redesign the extensions. This time aesthetics are the primary concern and extra space achieved is secondary.

The new agent has provided some sketches in the first instance. He has lowered the eaves height of the proposed side extension as compared to the original property.

It looks very nice but it will require a step down into the extended part of the house at first floor level. The original ceiling height there is 2.56m and to retain this in the extension would then require a step down.

I suggested that if we could have vaulted ceilings in the extension this might remove the need for a step down. His reply was that it could be possible and that it would depend on the head height of the windows.

I didn't understand this last statement and he is now away for a few days and I'm dying to know what he meant.

Could somebody explain what he meant by the head height of the windows being critical in determining whether a vaulted ceiling would remove the need for a step down?

Many thanks as always

 

[noseall]

Eaves height v's lintel depth etc

Mebbe?

 

[indus]

Eaves height v's lintel depth etc

Mebbe?

Can you please elaborate Noseall as I don't quite understand. Do you mean that the reduced eaves height will push the top of the window down. As a result the window will end up too far down the wall and this will contravene some kind of building regs?

Thanks

 

[noseall]

Means of escape dictates the window sill height will be located at approx 800mm - 1000m up from the ffl and the heads will generally be at 2100mm up from ffl.

So, as long as the window depth looks ok and that you can accommodate the lintel and wall plate and the depth of the rafter and accommodate eaves detail (i.e. soffit overhang v's fascia depth) , within the parameters of the dropped floor, then i can't see why not.

 

[indus]

Thanks Noseall.

In the existing house at ffl the window sills are just 600mm off the finished floor and are about 1.8m tall. The ceiling height is 2.56m from the finished floor.

Is it possible to calculate how much the eaves could be dropped compared to original and still allow the windows to 'work' with a vaulted ceiling and hence no resultant step?

Many thanks

 

[indus]

Some sketches put together by another agent, what do you think of this design then?


On the second sketch the profile marked 'existing application' is the one that was informally rejected, and the plan is to present this one as an amendment to it.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Yay!

 

[indus]

Thanks Freddy but guess what?

Planners have informally rejected them saying they 'are out of keeping with the area'

So in other words they prefer the 'bag of spanners' look and feel that would look better

The officer that has been dealing with my case has been very good and was very happy with the design. He pushed for it but was 'out voted' by the other three members on the planning forum.

He even suggested that I should submit this plan, let it be rejected and then do a fast track appeal as he felt there was a chance of success.

I'm not quite sure what to do, I'll have a ponder....

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

On a job I did once, I was informally told by the planner that if I could get a 3 or more letters of support from neighbours it would be discussed in more detail by the Parish and would likely end up before the planning committee where you (or your agent) can have your 5 minutes if the planners were still minded to reject it. Whilst the Parish do not have any legal powers in terms of support or refusal for a PA, depending on the area (ie local 'politics' etc) their 'influence' can sometimes be useful. Sometimes planning do not want things to go to committee if they are being awkward or if it is considered an appeal may be supported.

 

[indus]

Thanks Freddy.

I've decided not to pursue the plans which have been informally rejected.

The new agent then feels that on balance the approved plans are probably the best aesthetic alternative. He feels (like some on here suggested maybe the case) that they were made to look much worse than they are by poor quality drawings and proportions.

So he has tidied up the drawing, made the windows more proportionate and also dropped the eaves level on the ground floor element to give a more subservient feel.

The only thing he has suggested that is a bit 'contentious' in my mind is to have a dormer out the front (like the rejected design)

He feels it looks right and picks up on the 'turret' but in a subtle way. I'm slightly worried as many people on here before said 'there was too much going on' with the property and I wonder if this might do that.

So as a reminder

Existing property and approved original plans

New agents amendments. The footprint is exactly the same. As mentioned the changes are mainly 'cosmetic' but includes dropping the eaves at gf level, changing the window sizes and a dormer of sorts coming out.

I'd be interested in what you guys think about the amended plans (especially whether to have the dormer or just a plain window)

 

[indus]

Sorry amended front elevation missing!

 

[indus]

Hi guys

I would really appreciate your thoughts on this as I need to finalise the drawings with the planners.

The question is whether on the first floor I should have that 'half dormer' thing or just stick with a traditional window.

I know it may well be a matter of personal taste but I'd be interested in feedback.

Many thanks for your help