Help with maths

Rollinghome

SD-253 wrote: »

As if the majority of roofs were aesthetically pleasing in the first place. There not there just roofs.

I was asked why I wouldn't want them on my roof and gave the reason. You seem to have bit of a chip on your shoulders.

Lots of people would agree with you, they're just roofs, just windows, just houses, who cares? I happen to disagree.

bigadaj

Rollinghome wrote: »

I was asked why I wouldn't want them on my roof and gave the reason. You seem to have bit of a chip on your shoulders.

Lots of people would agree with you, they're just roofs, just windows, just houses, who cares? I happen to disagree.

There was a property show on last year, think it was following planning decisions.

Two retired GPs in their 80s applied for permission for solar panels on the roof of their garage/ outhouse and there were objections and the planning officers recommendation was to refuse. They were just beside the roman and medieval wall in Chester and it was approved, I think largely because of who they were, and looked a complete eyesore in the context of the surrounding architecture and historical context.

Rollinghome

bigadaj wrote: »

They were just beside the roman and medieval wall in Chester and it was approved, I think largely because of who they were, and looked a complete eyesore in the context of the surrounding architecture and historical context.

I remember reading about that at the time. There are probably lots of people around like SD-253 who can't find anything pleasing in a building unless it's got a Beatrix Potter style thatched roof - and some of them are on planning committees. Must be frustrating to be a planning officer in Chester.

I'd agree with Lokolo that shiny panels can look 'lovely and modern' and very often enhance the architecture of a modern building. I tend to think that's less often the case with most older buildings.

It's a pity when people think that the houses they live in have so little to value that nothing they do to them to make them even worse.

Like this house. They don't come more modest and it's already had the window and satellite dish treatment but the roof panels do nothing to help. Even subconscientiously people notice the ugliness and quickly these roads spiral down to tips where no one would want to live.



In contrast, I used to drive past a terrace of similar terraced houses on the North Circular which has trucks thundering past all day but had been beautifully maintained and painted identically in Jacobethan style and looked marvellous despite being cheap 1930 spec builds .



Again, not a building that would ever find its way into the Architect's Journal but hardly enhanced by those panels. I find it almost as much a pity when modest homes that are everywhere are uglified as when plonkers in Chester hit the headlines by messing up listed buildings. But not a view shared by everyone.

vectistim

You can always get ones that look like this:

lisyloo

Thanks all for your comments.
Our roof is a bit unusual.
It's mainly an L shape.
As you approach the driveway, the biggest part of the roof you will see will have no panels on it at all (that's because there are 2 big dormer windows and a velux).

There will be some on the top but it's set back behind a porch and you won't see this unless you stand on a wall or go to the extreme edge of the driveway.
There will also be some panels on a side roof but again you'd have to walk some distance down the driveway and look at the side roof which under normal circumstances you wouldn't do.

I appreicate that some people still won't like them even though they will hardly be visible, but equally they might not like our kitchen, carpets, curtains or garden.
I have heard of people not liking the curtains even though the curtains wouldn't be stying in the house !!!

Our garden which doesn't suit either gardeners or families is much more likely to be a problem, but like most people we've decided to live in the house as it suits us rather than make it a showroom for selling.

If someone doesn't like it they will offer accordingly, but I'm not overly worried about it because I just can't control what other people think about my house.
Given it's merits I think someone will like it.

Rollinghome

lisyloo wrote: »

Our garden which doesn't suit either gardeners or families is much more likely to be a problem, but like most people we've decided to live in the house as it suits us rather than make it a showroom for selling.

I'm sure that's the best way. Our house originally had just one 6'x8' bathroom with two claustrophobic wc's. We converted one of the bedrooms into a 12'x13' bathroom which leaves us with a titchy 6'x8' room which most would consider a boxroom rather than a bedroom.

Will that reduce the house's value? Quite possibly, but it didn't occur to us to do the sums. It's what suits us and the next owner can rip it all out if they choose. We aren't going to live with beige walls either just in case they appeal to the next buyer.

I haven't seen your house and if you think the panels will look fine then so will someone else. And in 20 years time you can come back and gloat.

jimjames

We got panels in 2011 just before the FIT got cut. They are installed to the rear of the house so not visible from the road.



Observations from the purchase process were that a number of installers tried to massively flatter the returns by using one year fuel price inflation for the whole 20/25 year term. So 15% electricity price rises compounded every year - hopefully not realistic!

Over the first two and a bit years we've comfortably exceeded the estimates, was 2400kWh and we've done over 3000kWh both years. Other note - shade matters - a lot! Make sure you have no shade or trees that could cause shade or design the panels layout to take account of it. Otherwise output will be massively affected.

I think when we come to sell it will be an enhancement to the house - something that saves £150+ per year plus pays out £2000 a year I'd expect to be something that a buyer of a larger house would appreciate.

SD-253

Rollinghome wrote: »

I remember reading about that at the time. There are probably lots of people around like SD-253 who can't find anything pleasing in a building unless it's got a Beatrix Potter style thatched roof - and some of them are on planning committees. Must be frustrating to be a planning officer in Chester.

I'd agree with Lokolo that shiny panels can look 'lovely and modern' and very often enhance the architecture of a modern building. I tend to think that's less often the case with most older buildings.

It's a pity when people think that the houses they live in have so little to value that nothing they do to them to make them even worse.

Like this house. They don't come more modest and it's already had the window and satellite dish treatment but the roof panels do nothing to help. Even subconscientiously people notice the ugliness and quickly these roads spiral down to tips where no one would want to live.



In contrast, I used to drive past a terrace of similar terraced houses on the North Circular which has trucks thundering past all day but had been beautifully maintained and painted identically in Jacobethan style and looked marvellous despite being cheap 1930 spec builds .



Again, not a building that would ever find its way into the Architect's Journal but hardly enhanced by those panels. I find it almost as much a pity when modest homes that are everywhere are uglified as when plonkers in Chester hit the headlines by messing up listed buildings. But not a view shared by everyone.

As stated the majority of houses wouldn't in anyway be affected aesthetically some houses and some areas would. Obviously to anyone of minimal intelligence I was using a thatched cottage as an example.

" Even subconscientiously people notice the ugliness and quickly these roads spiral down to tips where no one would want to live. " Staggeringly unlikely that if a house/houses have solar panels the road becomes a tip. Do you have the same views on different races moving into a street?

SD-253

jimjames wrote: »

We got panels in 2011 just before the FIT got cut. They are installed to the rear of the house so not visible from the road.

[IMG]http://solar-panels-review.321web.co.uk/images/solar-panel-faq03.JPG[/IM I think when we come to sell it will be an enhancement to the house - something that saves £150+ per year plus pays out £2000 a year I'd expect to be something that a buyer of a larger house would appreciate.[/img]

How can it not enhance the value to believe otherwise is foolish beyond belief.

SD-253

Rollinghome wrote: »

I was asked why I wouldn't want them on my roof and gave the reason. You seem to have bit of a chip on your shoulders.

Lots of people would agree with you, they're just roofs, just windows, just houses, who cares? I happen to disagree.

Any particular statement that lead you to believe I had a chip on my shoulder? Doubt you can come up with one. As stated i disagree with them on environmental grounds so clearly I wouldn't have them. So surprise me and explain your reason for thinking I have a chip on my shoulder.
The original poster was asking for help with the maths not your views on aesthetic.