Hi all

Walking around Sheffield city centre over the past few months I have become very aware of some of the new buildings (large offices and large high rise flats) building systems and standards. Yesterday I decided to do some proper looking/noseying(!) around. Now I have a 'basic' grasp of approved documents, and have copies of them. I also know how difficult it is for us at work to achieve L2 / CSH / AECB standards, and the efforts we go to to minimise U/Y/psi/solar gains and glazing losses....

So, taking one of the new office blocks as a case study:

1: This block has near floor to ceiling glazing, unbroken except at corners or service runs (maybe 2.5m in height, 30m wall with 2 breaks for service runs), absolutely no shading whatsoever, no tinted/solar film/reflective glass.

2: The 'wall' areas (0.75-1m in height) between the glazing is at floor level, and 50mm of rigid foam insulation is being badly (with gaps) installed directly on the concrete and steel frame between steel studs at 400mm centre/steel studs at base and head of the area/extra steelwork at vents/corners/service penetrations - this is then being clad in steel panels.

3: At various corners / floors / columns / service runs there is steel work that is directly fixed to the concrete or steel main structure, with no insulation between, and it is then clad in steel panels.

So:

1: we have non-shaded windows, that are outside the 32-50% external glazing area permitted. (i.e. massive overheating in summer, excessive heat loss in winter)

2: if I run a U value calc taking into account the level of thermal bridges from the steelwork, I get a U-Value of 0.9w/m2/k or worse...(in excess of the 0.35w/m2/k as 'standard' or 0.7w/m2/k 'maximum permitted' when trading-off elements. And poor workmanship meaning the building is not constructed as designed...

3: we have huge and obvious cold bridges visible, with no attempt made to minimise them.

So, my questions are:

Am I wrong - is there a way of 'off-setting'(!) these losses/gains somewhere else in approved documents?
How and should I complain to building control about non-compliance - and would they be able to provide evidence of compliance?
Is it worth the hassle and am I being a NIMBY!

Matt




for reference approved documents L2a:

1: [i]In the Secretary of State’s view
requirement L2 (d) will be met by the
appropriate combination of passive measures,
such as limiting the area of glazing which is not
shaded and providing external building fabric
that limits and delays heat penetration, with
active measures, such as night ventilation, so
that the effects of solar heat gains are kept
within limits that are reasonable in the
circumstances.[/i]

2: [i]Reasonable provision shall be made for the
conservation of fuel and power in buildings or parts
of buildings other than dwellings by –
(a) limiting the heat losses and gains
through the fabric of the building;[/i]

3: [i]Thermal bridging at junctions and around
openings
1.9 The building fabric should be constructed
so that there are no significant thermal bridges
or gaps in the insulation layer(s) within the
various elements of the fabric, at the joints
between elements, and at the edges of
elements such as those around window and
door openings.[/i]

Nope, they are clear glass, double glazed units.

cheers Fred - as I suspected. Wondering if its worth kicking up a fuss.

Go on, go on, kick up a fuss!

If all else fails, try the media monster? Your case study, plus Fred's cogent summary of the situation, plus a few indignant taxpayers/Sheffieldians/people-most-affected waxing outraged on "the government tells us to insulate and save, yet allows these XXX to wantonly create a problem-building - for profit".

If you can chuck in some stats about the future energy consumption/cost of the building versus better and then best practice, so much the better.

Good luck!

I agree - kick up a fuss. Do a search on the council public access database for the development and check out the submitted building warrant and compare to what is actually being done. If they don't match up then ask the developer why not. if you don't get any joy contact the local paper.

shoddy construction? point it out.

it is worth noting re. U values, that most large office blocks go into cooling mode by about 9.30am. regardless of the time of year, due to the huge heat gains from IT equipment and people.
Better insulation in many cases will increase the energy bills to meet the larger cooling load.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: TheDoctor</cite>shoddy construction? point it out.

it is worth noting re. U values, that most large office blocks go into cooling mode by about 9.30am. regardless of the time of year, due to the huge heat gains from IT equipment and people.
Better insulation in many cases will increase the energy bills to meet the larger cooling load.</blockquote>

I don't think thats really true is it? I've been working in [different] large office blocks for years. In winter they still use the heating - you can feel it. The only rooms that need cooling are the comms rooms, and even then sometimes just bringing fresh air in is good enough in winter.


Matt - Take photo's and send it in to the local paper explaining what's wrong. And the Daily Mail.

Simon

Interestingly I how now spoken to an M&E consultant who worked on one of the buildings I am concerned about. He claims it failed all basic emissions calcs at design stage. Then his company was 'let go' in favour of a company who managed to get the building through with nothing other than glazing over the balconies...The build was started before BC had approved the work to start and as he understands it the building still fails.... :| An he agrees with me that a good few of the new buildings just cannot meet emissions/energy conservation - mainly due to the excess glazing/size of plant being installed - he was unaware of cold bridging issues/crap insulation.

I am going to pop out with a camera tomorrow lunch and go get some pictures.

RE: cooling on at 9:30, that I could believe - one of the buildings is a matching 'pair' to one finished last year. In a meeting last October, we had 20 people in a board room - with 60+ halogen lights on (in daylight), AC on by 9:30-10:00am, and the shading on the south facing window consists of vertical fins about 2' deep. Funnily enough it was a meeting to discuss climate change strategy for the city - where we were all asked what *we* would do to do our part. I turned off the lights and A/C and pulled the blinds about 1/3 down... ;-)

I need to be careful that my employer is not drawn into any fuss made as well...

One of the buildings - thats the south face. Greenhouse anyone?:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2487355328_7542f5fb8f_b.jpg

lol

I realised this morning that one of the buildings actually faces the BC officers offices in Sheffield - like their windows are 20m from the building going up... :0

There is clearly a big problem -- virtually no enforcement goes on and of that it is almost 100% on LA controlled jobs as far as I know.

In my area an example would be , somebody wanting to play it by the book and goes to the expense
of drawings etc to do say a loft conversion to current regs. then realises that what the end up with is
to expensive and unusable, say with the loss of a bedroom for the stair/fire escape corridor shelves the project.
then they see there neighbour do it on the sly and they think ,how come he can do it and I cant.
This situation usely has a race related element and the inability of the authority to act stimulate the problem
Giving bigots what they believe to be justification for there views
put your head above the water and they'll hit you with a hammer , playing in the grey and they wont see you

Mind your own business , isnt it our business to make sure people ( the local goverment) do what we pay them for, or should we just refuse to pay them for the shoddy workmanship.

cheers Jim