Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Will Planning Rules Outwit London's Intelligent Buildings?
Will Planning Rules Outwit London's Intelligent Buildings?
INTRODUCTION
Although water was the dominant theme that ran through a wide-ranging
unit exploring Ventilation and Cooling; Water, Sewage, and Flooding; and
Solar Hot Water Systems, a conundrum that lies at the heart of Ben Abel’s
lecture, Clear Air Architecture, inspired this essay.
In mid 2004, the planning system in England and Wales was significantly
amended by the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. From this
flowed Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS), one of which was the Mayor’s Plan
for London. Furthermore, local authorities (excluding County Councils) are
now required to produce and maintain a Local Development Framework
(LDF), which consists of many documents relating to their community’s
ideas and plans for the future of their environment. (Appendices 1 and 2
contain detailed information on authorities and LDF documentation.)
• passive design;
• solar water heating;
• combined heat and power for heating and cooling;
• community heating and cooling;
• heat pumps;
• gas condensing boilers.
INTELLIGENT BUILDINGS?
Pictured below are examples quoted by Abel in his lecture which fall into
this category, as do the two buildings in London mentioned earlier. From
left to right: Post Tower, Bonn; Commerzbank, Frankfurt; RWE
Headquarters, Essen.
KEEPING COOL
Given the limited range of temperatures, humidity levels and air speeds at
which human comfort is assured, the demands placed upon these facades to
maintain optimum operating conditions within buildings are high. With
double the glazing requirement of traditional facades, the construction and
installation costs, and levels of embodied energy utilised in their
manufacture, are significant.
The diagram (below) from Loncour et al’s (2004) paper shows how DVF
airflows may be used in a variety of cooling (and heating) modes. Depending
on whether additional energy is required, DVFs can function in natural,
mechanical or hybrid ventilation modes.
And as business centres and cities grow ever larger, the negative impact of
the Urban Heat Island effect on temperature differentials that support night
cooling, may lessen the opportunity to reduce the building’s internal
temperatures overnight.
Which begs the question? Who will be responsible for paying for the
additional running costs, or the provision of additional renewable energy
sources to meet the 10% provision condition of operation? Will it be the
planning authority who granted permission to the later buildings? The
operators of the new development? Or will it fall to the owner of the
‘intelligent building’? No case law exists in this sphere.
On the other hand, the Mayor’s Energy Strategy does list several proposals
that make reference to siting of buildings that utilise passive design, and
the risks of overshadowing. The Corporation of London’s 2002 Unitary
Development Plan also holds out some promise in that
‘the Corporation will ensure that new development enhances the City’s
metropolitan setting and respects the City’s skyline. These strategic
policies are advanced by protecting and enhancing significant views of
historic landmarks which are prominent in the City’s skyline.’
The 1959 Rights of Light Act details the various conditions and remedies
available that circumscribe this important issue: compensation being one
alternative open to those whose rights are being diluted by another
building’s presence in the vicinity. This legislation, though, would surely not
have taken account of the additional, renewable energy, benefits of a Right
of Light, when it was first drafted. Perhaps, though, it may offer some
solace to the overshadowed owner of an ‘intelligent building’ - settlements
have resulted in plaintiffs receiving 50% of the developer’s profit on the
floors affecting their right to light. Currently, however, there is no Right to
Wind under planning or property law.
Translating these results into the world of ‘intelligent building’ may require
caution but does indicate a need to confirm the validity of modelling
assumptions used in CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) software in the
development of these buildings: and suggests that the wind and buildings
may interface in unexpected ways.
CONCLUSION
With very high land values in densely built cities, there may be few ideal
locations in which to site them, and given the longevity of buildings it is
essential for those that are built to be certain that their integrity will not
be compromised by lack of foresight in future planning decisions.
LIMITATIONS
WIDER CONTEXT
This is imperative as third-party right of appeal does not exist under current
planning rules, which means that an individual (or organisation) must
request a judicial review of the planner’s decision if they are unhappy with
granting of planning permission to another development.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/pub/477/DetailedmapshowingEnglishLocalAuthoritesPDF138mb_id1139477.pdf
Area Action Plans (AAPs) will set out the vision, objectives and planning
policies for specific areas of change or areas of conservation within the
borough or district. The Area Action Plans will have the same status as the
Development Plan Documents.
OTHER
http://www.kingston.gov.uk/browse/environment/planning/planningpolicy/local_development_framework.htm
IMAGES
Loncour, MSEng, X., Wouters, Ph.D., P., Flamant, MSEng, G. and Blasco,
MSEng, M. (2004). ‘Impact of Double Ventilated Facades on Buildings’.
CIBSE National Conference, London, 2004.
Wong, J., and Heng, L. (2006). ‘Development of a conceptual model for the
selection of intelligent building systems’. Building and Environment. 41,
pp.1106-1123.
Zhen, C., Clements-Croome, D. J., Ju, H., Heng, L., and Qian, X. (2006).
‘IBchoice: a decision-making model for innovation and environmental
sustainability in the design and construction of intelligent buildings’. CIBSE
National Conference, London, 21-22 March 2006. Paper 75.