Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




    • CommentAuthorstorm
    • CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008
     
    Recently had Planning permission come through for an extension to our old Welsh cottage. Still waiting, however, for the Buildings regs to be approved. Received the drawings from our architect on Friday with all the various materials to be used etc, I have not yet signed this though as there are one or two details which I am not quite happy with.

    PVCu gutters have been specified on the plans, yet I have recently had some brand new gulvanised metal gutters added to my property and I wish to have the rest of the property fitted with the same quality gutters. Also Jeld-wen or similar PVCu windows have been specified, yet, if I can afford it, I would like wood framed windows throughout. Celotex / Cetotex has been specified for between rafters and mineral wool or quilt for batts of partition walls. Yet I wish to have Pavetex used and mineral wool is not a particularly pleasent material to work with and, quite apart from other considerations, I wish to save my builders from the misery of working with the stuff ! I do not wish to be responsible for poisoning my builders with ingesting any toxic materials, so it is organic paints, varnishes etc, wherever possible.( incidently, at formation level, proprietry weed killer has been specified, is there any environmentally frindly alternative to this ? ) I wish to have the external walls lime rendered and yet Lime has not been specifically refered to in the Building regs.

    Do I need to return these plans to my architect to insert the specifications that I want ? I do not particularly wish to do so as this will waste time and money both of which are at a premium. I have been told by someone who regards himself as somewhat of an authority on the subject that it is not important to declare these minor changes and that building inspectors will not be bothered if I digress from the exact materials cited. Yet is there a risk that the building work might have to be undone if I use alternative materials ? My cottage is completely isolated, so there are no neighbours to complain about what I do with my cottage, but just how pedantic can these building inspectors be ?
    • CommentAuthorMike George
    • CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008 edited
     
    If is just an extension then you can start with 48hrs of formally notifying Building Control. There are two methods - full plans submission and Building Notice. Even though you have opted for the first method you can still start the work, irrespective of whether the plans are rubber stamped. You are fully entitled to digress from the specification as long as the changes you make are compliant with the relevant requirement. Eg. You can use any [application approved] insulation provided you hit the required u-value [and any other relevant requirements]. Although Building Inspectors sometimes like you to stick to the plans, they cannot force you to. [All of this subject to any Contractual documents you may have signed]

    I think that if you talk through the changes with the Inspector on site you will have no problem at all.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008 edited
     
    Personally given the number of changes you want I would go back to your architect and have him update the drawings. Not so much for the Building regs but for your builders to quote against and work to. Remember these drawings will form part of your contract with the builder. If you send out drawings with a long list of corrections not only are mistakes more likely but it will look like you are a fussy customer. No builder really likes changes half way through the project and you have half a dozen before it's even started. Lets say a mistake is made and the builder bases his quote on the drawing not the correction. Even if it's his fault it will sour the relationship if you hold him to his agreed price. From then on he will be trying to recover the loss by cutting corners elsewhere. The changes your propose shouldn't really take the architect more than an hour to do.

    Building Control won't care particularly about the changes to the gutters or windows (as long as the windows are reasonably standard size and design). They will be more interested in the insulation. I don't know anything about Pavetex and couldn't immediatly Google any. Is that the right spelling? You would need to check you can use the same thickness as Celotex and still achieve the required U-Values. Got a URL for Pavetex?
    • CommentAuthorFred56
    • CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008
     
    Don't get ahead of any inspection points, it's not worth the hassle. For example, the BCO will want to see the foundation trenches before you pour. A project without a proper certification turns into a problem if you want to sell later or borrow against the house.
    Don't rub the BCO up the wrong way. I find the BCO is usually a great ally, he can help you find practical solutions to compliance questions and give a dispensation for minor variances. He is also a great deterent to errant builders, they know they're going to see him again very soon. Often when I get a contractor disputing my instructions I suggest we refer the question to the BCO and the problem usually evaporates.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008
     
    I agree with Fred. Our BCO was very helpful - we had a window that was slightly too narrow to act as fire escape. Only discovered it after it was built. Would have cost thousands to fix due to oak structure. The BCO proposed uprating the interior door instead.
  1.  
    Definitely agree about not upsetting the BCO. Going back to your Architect will likely cost you money, though does have the advantage of tying down the spec and avoiding the problems Fred and Colin mention. Difficult call.

    I wasn't suggestiong you get ahead of any inspection points, just that you are fully entitled to start the work should you choose to do so.
    • CommentAuthorstorm
    • CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008
     
    Sorry for misspelling, Cwatters, Here is a URL
    Will return later for comments ......

    http://www.pavatex.co.uk/warum_pavatex.aspx
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeNov 24th 2008
     
    Just curious, but what happened with your communications with your architect such that you got drawings so different from what you wanted?
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeNov 24th 2008 edited
     
    A quick look at the Pavatex data..
    http://www.natural-building.co.uk/PDF/Pavatex/Pavaroof/Roof_PAVAROOF_PITCHED.pdf
    ..suggests they recommend a "warm roof" construction: 150mm deep rafters with 60-100mm Pavatherm above the rafters and wool/cotton between the rafters (achieves a U-Value of 0.2 to 0.17). That might mean a design detail change if the Architect has specified a "cold roof" design with Celotex between and under the rafters. Probably a trivial but the level of the rafters might need to change depending on how the extension roof connects to existing buiding.

    I've no idea how the cost of Pavatherm and cotton/wool insulation compares with Celotex.

    What wall construction has been specified? Cavity wall with Celotex in the walls?
    • CommentAuthorstorm
    • CommentTimeNov 25th 2008 edited
     
    Thank you, everyone, for all your valid comments. I am most relieved to say that the Building regs are going to be ammended at no extra cost ! :bigsmile: I will have various options at my disposal
    and therefore will not have to worry about the inspection people.
    I have submitted eight ammendments. Including one ( which I doubt
    there is an alternative solution for... but all the same, :neutral: that is the use of weedkiller at formation level. I am not sure quite what to propose in its stead. Any suggestions ? Anyway, I am glad that I brought the whole thing up with my architect rather than waiting until the build was underway before airing my various objections .....
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeNov 25th 2008
     
    Anybody any idea how "environmentally friendly" sodium chlorate is? It seems to me that a fairly simple compound which is water soluble and which breaks down in the process of doing its thing shouldn't do too much long-term harm.

    I used it clearing an area of brambles at the top of my rather steep garden. The replacement grass grew well enough and the existing lawn downhill from it didn't seem to mind. You just have to be careful that your trousers don't explode. Really:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploding_trousers
  2.  
    Why the weedkiller at formation level? Is the site seriously overgrown? Bregs say you must remove organic material from the surface and any root systems in the trenches, but normally a nice sharp shovel or axe will do the job.

    Tree roots are of course a different matter and can cause serious problems.
    • CommentAuthorJackyR
    • CommentTimeNov 25th 2008
     
    Sodium chlorate "will turn shock-sensitive if contaminated with organic materials." http://www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/safework/cis/products/icsc/dtasht/_icsc11/icsc1117.htm

    Hmm, so weedkiller *or* shovel ("Just put the digger in over there, Mr Builder...")
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartian
    • CommentTimeNov 25th 2008
     
    Sodium chlorate is the weedkiller that you can mix with sugar, diesel or other substances to make bombs, but in normal low concentration solutions it will not cause any problems of this sort. Mixing a solution it with organic materials like plants will certainly not cause any "shock-sensitive" products.
    As a BCO myself, I do not really see the need for weedkilling the building foorprint area unless you are using suspended floors above and are not excavating and blinding the area much.
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
 
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press