Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've just had an extension built in Worcestershire where I moved to from East Dulwich. My building quote was also for 1 metre. When they dug out the hole for the foundations they found that the house foundations went down 1.8 metres. Building control insisted that the builders match the depth of the house foundations. The builder said that the fear is that the extension "pushes" on the house foundations if the depths don't match. You therefore won't know until the foundations are dug. Best of luck.

bargee99 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Building control

> insisted that the builders match the depth of the

> house foundations.


The majority of the Victorian houses around here don't have foundations in any modern sense. Our (1 storey) extension was required to have 2.4m foundation trenches dug but the rest of the (3 storey) house sits on fewer than half a dozen stepped-out bricks!

Every situation is unique, I've known houses in the same street have totally different foundation designs for near identical extensions, so one should always employ a structural engineer to design the foundations and structural framework to suit the local conditions, rather than rely on what other people have done. A SE will carry out preliminary checks/tests on the soil conditions, for instance a common problem in London is tree roots causing the clay soil to 'dessicate', thus making it unsuitable for standard deep foundations, and instead requiring a series of very deep pile foundations. A SE will also allow for differential movement between the old and new, as should any decent builder e.g. movement joints...

Yes as DB says, there are all sorts of rules and regs unique to specific situations (depth of foundation, proximity and type of tree, soil type & water content, requirement for compressible clay boards). In any case you can't just do what you like (or what other people have done) because the building regs guy won't sign if off unless he's satisfied it complies with the regs.


Furthermore, it would be great if structural engineers and buildings regs people are unanimous in their agreement as to the interpretation of those regs, but IME they are not always so.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • But we’re not in Canada so why celebrate their recent election? Wasn’t their winner our Bank of England director up until his defection to his homeland of Canada? He caused chaos  in this country with his put down of everything British and his many dismal words about the effects of Brexit on this country.
    • I expect that they consider it should be a free choice what to do with your waste, and that segregating it is a waste of money, no doubt it's all a woke conspiracy.  I expect that others are more up to speed with Reform policies. I should have asked Nigel when I was drinking with him.  Well within the vicinity of him in Westminster pubs a couple of times.
    • Let's see how a Leader and party that thrive on division and demonising elements of our society actually do when they have to deliver. Let's hope that the two main parties don't consider that the best way to fight Reform is to become like then. Even less reason to visit the small town where I grew up.  Not a cause for any joy or celebration. Happy to celebrate the Canadian result.
    • The Reform Party has surely taken the Conservatives and Labour by surprise? I’ve been a Conservative voter since the age of 18 and voted for them in the General Election last Summer. Sadly Labour were elected but their policies on so many issues have been their downfall as they did not stick to them.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...