Fascias and soffits question - need some help!

[Coops85]

So basically our architect presumed that the eave at the ridge would be 200mm depth however the timber company do a 375mm depth eave.   We will increase our ridge height a little so that it doesn’t compromise the rooms in the roof.  

However the timber company have now asked us to decide on what to happen to our fascias and soffits due to this change... here are the options: 

 

 

Option 1: Would you prefer the soffit to move up the building by equivalent to the ridge height change

Option 2: Would you like the fascia depth to increase equivalent to the ridge height (I don’t recommend this as the fascia will be very deep. Approximately 440mm)

Option 3: We could combine options 1 and 2 and raise the soffit by say 119mm and increase the fascia depth by 100mm

Option 4: Extend the overhangs slightly to compensate for the increased ridge height, which would minimise the increased soffit height requirement.  This option would change the architect’s sun position lines, could make the house darker, and might raise flags with planning, so I don’t recommend.

 

anyone have any thoughts on these options and what would be the best option.  We have quite a bit of first floor glazing on the south side so would probably have chosen option 4.  But that is not recommended due to planning.

 

Thought I would post this in here before replying in case there is anything I should know before answering in the question. I really can’t picture it at all. 

[Mr Punter]

I don't know why the t/f co. are not able to make this work with the approved plans?

 

175mm ridge height increase means a new application for the amendment or risk being in breach.

 

Do your planning drawings show any heights, datums or reference points?

[Jeremy Harris]

Best bet might be to ask your architect to resolve it, as it seems to be his/her error.  Assuming only 200mm deep roof buildup (which is I assume the main problem) seems a bit tight to me.  Our roof buildup is over 500mm from inside face to outer face of the slates (we're also room in roof).

 

I deliberately extended the soffits/eaves overhang out to provide a bit of shading and weather protection for the cladding, but designed this in at the early stages so that the function and appearance was OK.  Our frame builder also used thinner ladder frame extensions out over the edges of the roof all around, so that the barge boards and fascias are about 200mm deep, rather than the full depth of the roof buildup.

[Coops85]

Oops I think I meant to put rafter depth rather than eave depth being extended. 

 

 

Our house is not on a main road and is at least 25 metres back from the private road  so hoping a small increase in ridge height will not be too noticeable! 

 

 

[ToughButterCup]

2 hours ago, Coops85 said:

[...]

so hoping a small increase in ridge height will not be too noticeable! 

 

In all probability it won't be. But there'll always be a niggle until it's signed off. We had a similar issue, but 10 meters from the road....  and our roof build up is the same as J's. 

 

Are you tall enough to worry about the internal soffit height? I am, so - for us - it's become another of those compromises that everyone makes when self-building. We've rearranged the room furniture to make the necessary allowance.