Building Control, small lean-to roof, rafter replacement

WIAWSNB

Section62 said:

WIAWSNB said:

...

I see it like this; you currently have a clearly not remotely up to current regs lean to, and one that makes this clear - I bet it's bludy freezing! Your choice is to follow BC regs at great cost which, unless you can actually afford it, will mean a compromise elsewhere, such as in the walls. Or, use your builder's evidenced judgement - ie he needs to explain the level of actual insulation he proposes, coupled with an understanding of the roof construction - and use the difference to consider improving the wall insulation. 

For the same money, I'm pretty sure I know which option will improve that room the most, and by a significant margin.

In your boots, I'd only go full compliance if I 'needed' to - eg it could affect an imminent sale - or if the added cost was reasonable and acceptable, and if I also had enough money to update the rest of the room too. 

I would personally not go for full compliance on this roof if it meant I couldn't then update the walls as well. Or it caused any other unacceptable-to-me compromise.

...

Might just be worth reminding folk that compliance with the building regs isn't optional... you don't get to decide to ignore them in order to spend the money on something you personally consider to be more worthwhile.

Non-compliance with the regs is a criminal offence.  With the potential for unlimited fines and/or up to two years in jail.  Plus up to 10 years for enforcement action to be taken.

Sure, lots of work gets done which doesn't comply with the regs. But let's not confuse that with building regs compliance being optional.

Absolutely - I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

Section62

WIAWSNB said:

Section62 said:

WIAWSNB said:

...

I see it like this; you currently have a clearly not remotely up to current regs lean to, and one that makes this clear - I bet it's bludy freezing! Your choice is to follow BC regs at great cost which, unless you can actually afford it, will mean a compromise elsewhere, such as in the walls. Or, use your builder's evidenced judgement - ie he needs to explain the level of actual insulation he proposes, coupled with an understanding of the roof construction - and use the difference to consider improving the wall insulation. 

For the same money, I'm pretty sure I know which option will improve that room the most, and by a significant margin.

In your boots, I'd only go full compliance if I 'needed' to - eg it could affect an imminent sale - or if the added cost was reasonable and acceptable, and if I also had enough money to update the rest of the room too. 

I would personally not go for full compliance on this roof if it meant I couldn't then update the walls as well. Or it caused any other unacceptable-to-me compromise.

...

Might just be worth reminding folk that compliance with the building regs isn't optional... you don't get to decide to ignore them in order to spend the money on something you personally consider to be more worthwhile.

Non-compliance with the regs is a criminal offence.  With the potential for unlimited fines and/or up to two years in jail.  Plus up to 10 years for enforcement action to be taken.

Sure, lots of work gets done which doesn't comply with the regs. But let's not confuse that with building regs compliance being optional.

Absolutely - I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

Sure, it is just that words like "Your choice is to follow BC regs at great cost..." and "In your boots, I'd only go full compliance if I 'needed' to..." might be misinterpreted as suggesting compliance was optional.

Not being able to afford to do the whole project if compliance is achieved is not an excuse or justification for breaking the law.  Likewise, doing the job in compliance with the regs shouldn't involve "great cost" over an above what doing the job properly would cost anyway.  The regs are only there to make buildings safe, durable and comfortable/efficient to live in.

If the budget would be blown dowing the roof then it doesn't make sense to bodge the roof to save a few quid to do the walls.  Do the roof properly, then come back and improve the walls when funds allow.

hatt55's first post in the thread makes it clear they want to do things properly, so advice on how to achieve that is what is needed here.

WIAWSNB

'Breaking the law'. And who's the victim? 

The OP has a choice. If they have a limited budget, then they can choose to follow the regs and get a conforming limited improvement, or can use their limited finances to get a significant one.

That's the essence, with due diligence for both processes.

hatt55

Thanks all. Some insightful comments and stuff to think about. 

To a layperson the Building Control process is quite intimidating. I just want an improvement. I know that BC won't advise me, but it would be nice if my local council were more receptive to just taking a phonecall to help explain the process and or what level of information they might expect. I'll try and give them a call tomorrow.

To pick up on a couple of points. Originally my plans comprised a lot more and included things like re-laying the concrete floor and insulating the walls. I realised that I could be throwing good money after bad because the room just isn't built well enough and the budget is limited. What I want is somewhere a bit warmer and a bit less damp. To get a perfect room it would need to be knocked down and started again. So just doing the roof (plus adding an extractor fan, and a few minor repairs to skirting boards etc. and patches of plaster) was the starting point to get better ventilation and warmth. If this makes an improvement, which it surely will, then other things can follow. 

All of this is making me want to see if the builder can use insulated plasterboard on the ceiling internally and not replace the rafters at all. That might avoid all of this because I wouldn't be replacing any of the roof structure. The replacement of the rafters is just, as I understand it, to allow for the depth of insulation plus an air gap which the current rafters are too shallow for.

I've been waiting for the work to start for a long time having been let down by another builder. I'd thought that I could just submit a Notice, so didn't need a huge lead time. Things might be tight if I went down the full plans route or had to get someone to do calculations. Sigh.

stuart45

You still need regs for the roof window, but insulated plasterboard is an option for the ceiling.
What size are the rafters, 4x2 ? You can put insulation on top of the rafters.

hatt55

stuart45 said:

You still need regs for the roof window, but insulated plasterboard is an option for the ceiling.
What size are the rafters, 4x2 ? You can put insulation on top of the rafters.

I'm not sure - I've only got a few photos from when some repairs work was carried out a few years ago (wasps nest) but not dimensions. If that's a 'standard' kind of dimension for a small roof then quite possibly.

At the moment its just plasterboard, rafters, membrane, battens, tiles. I had a look again earlier and am trying to recall what the builder said. It might also be that an issue with working from the inside was that there is some boiler pipework right up close to the ceiling where the wall plate would be, so perhaps putting something under the existing rafters might be getting tight for space on that front. 

 In the configuration I've described, can I ask what you mean by putting insulation on top of the rafters? I can't see that there would be space but I may be misunderstanding. If PIR insulation was just put between the rafters, then there would be no air gap to the battens (unless it was really thin insulation.

And in terms of the roof window - that was just an add on to make it feel a bit fancier. I'd also scrap that if it meant I could avoid less hassle! I find all this kind of stuff very stressful, which is why I don't get things done. 

WIAWSNB

Hatt, could you describe, as fully as you can, what your builder's proposals are? 

And, what is he saying about BC? Is he suggesting it isn't required, or that there's a cheaper and easier way to get the actual result you want, or that he simply doesn't want to get bogged down in such detail for this job, or what? 

The simple fact is, you can transform that room - walls and all - with little effort and cost to make it easily the equivalent of the rest of the house, or most likely beat it - if you DIY. The next level is to have a reliable & trusted builder do this work to a similar 'DIY' standard as you would have done, but you add on his labour charges - so at least double. And then there's the proper way, with full regs, to conform with the latest guidelines, which will not make a noticeable difference, but will almost certainly cost - ooh - three times as much. Or more.

That's all I'm pointing out.

I would NOT, remotely, suggest such a thing if safety were an issue - say, taking down a wall, converting a loft where fire egress or other risk were an issue, or for a new extension which will nobble you when it comes to selling on. I would not.

But - to me - there are jobs that should be looked at for the best outcome. 

I converted the garage I am sitting in for around £1k, and that included the bespoke set of 2.4m French doors, with one side panel having a sloping top. Ok, that was back in 2005, and these doors were around £750 of that. The remaining £250 covered all the insulation and p'board and stuff. And the result is - genuinely - the easiest room in the house to heat. 

Would I have done this via BC?* If I wasn't a DIYer, my choice would likely have been based on whether I could have afforded it. So, either I'd have left it - and so had a room that drained heat from the house - or paid 2-3 times the amount to have it done 'properly'. And 'properly', in my case, would mean an already narrow - 8' wide - room shrunk by around another 4-6 inches, just in order to 'conform', but one that would not feel any different, or cost any less to heat.

That is all I am saying. Sometimes the answer is achieved by examining the possible outcomes. 

*The funny thing is, I did actually include this garage conversion in an overall application which mainly covered a loft conversion and new garage build I was going through BC for, and it 'all' got passed together 

WIAWSNB

hatt55 said:

At the moment its just plasterboard, rafters, membrane, battens, tiles. I had a look again earlier and am trying to recall what the builder said. It might also be that an issue with working from the inside was that there is some boiler pipework right up close to the ceiling where the wall plate would be, so perhaps putting something under the existing rafters might be getting tight for space on that front. 

 In the configuration I've described, can I ask what you mean by putting insulation on top of the rafters? I can't see that there would be space but I may be misunderstanding. If PIR insulation was just put between the rafters, then there would be no air gap to the battens (unless it was really thin insulation.

I think Stuart meant that you can transform a ceiling or roof by simply screwing insulated p'board to its visible underside - that's what 'on top' means

But, you have suggested that this wouldn't be easy due to the presence of pipework? That's a shame. 

I don't know what system your current roof follows, whether it's 'warm' or 'cold'. But your builder should be clear in his own head about his proposals, hence me asking if he can explain them. One type is 'sealed' with no air gaps, and requires no ventilation, but that also means that no moisture must get through to it from the house. The other requires ventilation, so that must be provided. 

It ain't rocket science, but he mustn't mess up. 

stuart45

The insulation boards can go on top of the rafters. I put the lot on top of my extension because my wife wanted the rafters seen. It's harder to do as you need to hammer the fixings through the counter battens, insulation boards and into the rafters.

WIAWSNB

Stuart... Tsk tsk. I have to ask - do you have this covered by BC?

Honestly, now.