Loft conversion of a bungalow

[Hugo Nebula]

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:48:50 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named "Mary Fisher" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

The additional loading on most foundations from a loft conversion is usually minimal compared to what's there already. Unless there is an arrangement of beams and columns which concentrates a load at a particular point, the foundations aren't usually checked by the BCO.

Building Control don't "allow" work to be carried out; their role is to determine whether the work being carried out complies with the technical requirements of the Building Regulations. I often put it as, "Planning determine the who, what and where; Building Control determine the how".

If the existing property is showing signs of movement, that's a matter that should be addressed _before_ any loft conversion is considered. One would presume that if the conversion was being paid for by a secured loan, even a valuation survey would pick it up.

[Hugo Nebula]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 02:09:27 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named John Rumm randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

Come on, how long have you lurked here? Don't you know by now IMM is on the same planet; it's just that the universe it's in is parallel to this one.

[Mary Fisher]

When there ARE foundations! But while the new load of the structure might not be any greater there'll be a greter face to winds and when the extension is loaded with furniture and people, possibly storage and the like it will add to the whole load.

Thanks for that explanation.

I suspect, knowing the family, that there won't be a loan. They're also doing the work 'in-house'. Very well, I must say, from what I can see.

Mary

[Mary Fisher]

Sounds like Time Team ...

Mary

>

[IMM]

Yep. I have seen it done, even in parts of Little Middle England too.

[John Rumm]

Since you want to stay in the property, and the current one is nice, it sounds like loft conversion could be a good way forward.

That makes it easy...

4x2" is good by comparison to most. Not much of an issue either way since you can just install a real floor structure beside them - then all they have to do is hold up the ceiling below.

Chances are you could add a rear dormer without needing PP if you wanted = depending on the slope of the roof it it can make a huge difference to the usable floor space (especially if specimins in your rug rat infestation has grown to be sizeable!)

If you are not hacking the rrof structure about (sans adding some roof windows) then much / all of it is DIYable if you are feeling brave and have the time. Getting a decent set of plans drawn up, assistance from a chippie to put in the floor structure and add the roof windows would then put you in a position to carry on by yourself for pretty much most of the rest.

Sticks finger in the air...

6 - 7K would take care of all of the above (depending on floor area and how esoteric the design of the floor joists needs to be)... another 4 to 5K would see it decorated if you DIY the rest.

[Hugo Nebula]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:23:57 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named "Mary Fisher" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

There are always foundations, by the very definition of the word. Whether they would be regarded as adequate if a new building was being built on the same site is another issue. For instance, they may be bearing on clay at a shallow depth, which means they could be susceptible to shrinkage, but this wouldn't affect the ground's bearing capacity.

The increased loads I mentioned included 'live' or 'imposed' loads for most domestic floor loads, and the roof loads include a figure for snow or wind loading. Doing some back of envelope figures for a typical bungalow, I doubt that the loads on the foundations would increase by more than 10-15%, well within most structure's factor of safety.

...And maybe not a Building Regulations application?

[Mike Mitchell]

Dormers that are "stuck on" afterwards look absolutely awful, in my opinion. If you do go ahead with the conversion, I suggest only Velux-style windows. That way, you have a light, airy room, but the roofline is maintained. I had them in my new-build flat in Germany and they were great. If a property was designed from the outset with dormer windows, then it *may* look okay, but those add-ons oftenlook cheap and tacky.

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

Start planning your marital canoodling with the other half on the sofa in the front room. Nothing gets the sprogs shifted more quickly. They'll be down at the bank, asking to borrow money, quicker than you can say pass the tube, dear! :)

MM

[IMM]

Read this report of house design, then build a new house.

[David W.E. Roberts]

[IMM]

No. best rip it down and build a proper one that looks good. Waste of time fannying around.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

organisation.

**********************

"Membership of ACE is limited to twenty-four UK based companies which have substantial interest in energy conservation equipment and services. Current members include controls manufacturers, energy service companies, and manufacturers and distributors of insulation materials."

**********************

So a broad range of independant views, then?

[Owain]

"N. Thornton" wrote | Let me take a wild tack here, something I've always wondered. | Usable area depends on available height, which is often deficient | or at best tight. If one added a foot onto the brick wall height | it would make a great difference to what one could do up | there. So... here goes: is it possible to jack up the entire | roof structure - or perhaps one side at a time - and build | up the brickwork course by course?

It is possible to jack up the entire roof structure (NOT one side at a time, or it will go squint) and rebuild underneath and this is not unusual in renovation work. However the costs and difficulty in doing this are only worthwhile where it would be extremely expensive or impractical to rebuilt the roof. You might not get any extra height, because the joists holding up the ceiling of the storey below are often an integral part of the roof structure, preventing spreading, so you couldn't remove them. You would also have the difficulty of matching the existing wall finish or having a band of different colour wall all round the house. And because you would be building above the existing ridge line you would need full planning permission.

For a loft conversion, the structural work involved in modifying the roof mean that it's as easy to rebuild the roof with alterations as it would be to lift it; if it can't be rebuilt it probably won't be much use after lifting.

What can sometimes be done, where the ceilign joists aren't part of the roof structure or their function can be replaced, is drop the ceiling level in the first floor bedrooms a couple of ft to gain extra headroom in the loft.

Owain

[Owain]

"David W.E. Roberts" wrote | The plot is not particularly large - the floor area is roughly the | same as the ground floor of our current 4/5 bedroom house and the | garden is smaller. | The small cul-de-sac has nothing but bungalows on it (all the same | design) - so planning for a new 2 storey property may be an issue.

Yes.

| The bungalow is 1930's - which means that it has a huge high loft | with real wood beams and no cheap crap cross braced supports as | found in most modern builds. So there is an obvious potential to | make more of this loft area. The downside is the 2" * 4" joists. | Other properties in this street have already had loft conversions | (but no dormers).

That sounds /very/ promising, but dormer would add some very useful headroom. One advantage of loft-converting a bungalow is you don't have the fire safety regulations which come into force when you take a property into three storeys.

| There are 4 downstairs rooms (excluding kitchen/bathroom) which really | makes it a 2 bedroom bungalow, although it is currently used as a 3 | bedoom bungalow with a 16' lounge/diner. This would do us fine as a | 'mature couple' but unfortunately we are currently infested with | adult super-rugrats (in urban environments they can grow to 6' 2" | or more) and need a minimum of 3 bedrooms until the poisoned bait | (my cooking) or the lure of the great blue yonder clears some space | for us. | So I am looking for ways in which a modest outlay (£25k or less) | can expand the accomodation to cope with occasional peaks (Lord help | us all if they ever breed) and still leave us with some cash to spend | on ourselves.

A lot will depend on the site and this might not make you popular with your neighbours, but £25k will get you an ex campsite static caravan. A lot less will get you an ex building site static caravan. Planning permission is not normally needed for a caravan provided it is not used as a self-contained dwelling (ie it's part of your own household). It might be a blunt reminder to the super-rugrats that you're not expecting them to be a permanent fixture. Further encouragement to fly the nest could be provided by giving them only a 5A electricity supply in the depths of winter. Of course, it wouldn't add value to the house like a loft conversion, but it also wouldn't permanently rob you of garden like a ground level extension.

Owain

[Mary Fisher]

I agree 100%

Mary

[Mary Fisher]

It didn't work with ours ... and STILL they come back at inconvenient moments.

Mary

[Mike Mitchell]

Even better, lift the roof with a crane hired for the day, insert pit props/struts/scaffolding as necessary, then fill in the gaps. If the struts are the screwed sort, you might not even need to get the crane back to lower the roof onto the new courses.

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

I bet those Huf Haus builders could do it in a day!

MM

[Mary Fisher]

Methinks there's a tongue in someone's cheek ...

:-)

Mary