Just a quick update for anyone interested.
Structural engineer been round this morning and checked the footings.
Although they are not very deep, they are sitting on clay and he is
happy with them. Unfortunately, the planners may have a different
idea - so over to them.
Will keep you posted - and thanks for the help so far....
The planners won't give a damn - they're only interested in the appearance.
However, you *will* need to satisfy the Building Inspectors on all
structural issues - including foundations.
[Sorry if this sounds nit-picking, but you will need to get involved both
with planners and BCOs on this project - and it's important to understand
the role of each of these].
It doesn't sound nit-picking at all... my structural engineer is
looking after both for me - so fingers crossed. he did say that no
new build would ever get away with it - but as it is a barn - and
there are so few in the area, they may not be so strict - but who
well good luck to you, we have a barn that at present is on the entrance to
the village but it its current state it will have less then 2 yrs left,
unless it is knocked down or converted. But at present the "planners" are
saying that converting the barn for residential would:
a) create too much traffic, although converting it to business would not
(Which is what they said they woudl allow)
b) detract from the appearance of the village, well apart from one or tow
houses most are f***ing awful.
Who knows what they are going on about, but its all in the hands of a
planning expert now so fingers crossed....
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:36:31 +0000, Simon Hawthorne
For both the planners and the BCOs the issue, for different reasons is
going to be what you want to use it for.
With BCOs, the issues are mainly about stability, safety and energy
aspects of the structure, especially if third parties are involved.
However things that are done and decided are based on fairly clearly
laid down principles. It's worth looking at the Approved Documents
to have an appreciation (they are on jag+=2 's web site). However,
these are good practice and advice and are not the *only* way of
meeting the legislative requirements. A lot then depends on the BCO
and engineer relationship and what can be negotiated.
The planners work on a totally different set of principles and there
can be arbitrary decisions. Generally the officers recommend to the
councilors so you want them on your side as well.
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
I guess a lot will depend on how much extra loading you are putting on the
structure. The existing foundations (if any!) appear to have stood the test
of time as far as the existing structure is concerned - and may continue to
be ok as long as the loading doesn't change too much.
On about one topic in 100 IMM actually has somethiung relevant and
useful to say, but in every case someone else does as well, so the
safest way to regard IMM is an amusing troll, who is to be completely
disregrarded in matters DIY.
During last summers extra-ordinary dry/hot spell, weren't there
considerable numbers of properties showing movement even with deep
footings based on clay substrate ?
Local BCO have gone to the other extreme here, requiring nothing less
than 1200mm no matter what substrate, and heard of quite a few
extensions requiring 2100/2400mm footings next to pre-existing
footings of about 225mm
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 16:55:37 +0000, a particular chimpanzee named
Nothing to do with the planners. Building Control will (or should)
only require you to make sure that the structure is no worse after the
conversion than it was before (i.e. if you increase the loading or
undermine the foundations).
"The fact that no-one on the internet wants a piece of this
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.