Bridging a Private Sewer Pipe?

[Footsoldier888]

Well as I read it Woody was saying you should seek advice from your designer before doing any more works.

Why don't you talk to the BCO tomorrow before you do any more digging? It sounds downright dangerous to me.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Only if he's paying for advice, I'll bet my leotard the OP's doing this on a Notice.

 

[iDIY]

FFS get over yourselves, It’s a sewer pipe that has been fine for nearly 90 years. Like I said, I will dig the trench as suggested by woody and then it’s up to the BCO to decide if it’s safe and compliant with regs.
Yet again this diy forum has resulted in good replies surrounddd by smart arse ill informed assumptions.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Err if you don't like the free advice feel free to go. You'll not be missed.

 

[iDIY]

Err if you don't like the free advice feel free to go. You'll not be missed.

What advice have you contributed ? All you have done is make incorrect assumptions and make totally useless snipes at those who were trying to be helpful. So feel free to not bother if that’s the best you can do.

 

[Footsoldier888]

FFS get over yourselves, It’s a sewer pipe that has been fine for nearly 90 years. Like I said, I will dig the trench as suggested by woody and then it’s up to the BCO to decide if it’s safe and compliant with regs.
Yet again this diy forum has resulted in good replies surrounddd by smart arse ill informed assumptions.

I was only trying to help by raising the question that the drain may have to be changed to meet current regs.

https://www.drainageconsultantsltd.co.uk/about-drains/drainage-gradients-falls/

Hopefully not but it is my understanding BCO's do have powers when it comes to foul drains.

 

[John D v2.0]

I want to get the trench right before my BCO comes to sign it off prior to poring

I will dig the trench as suggested by woody and then it’s up to the BCO

to be fair, although woody is always excellent with his advice, he did say various things can affect the design. I think your first post quoted above was sensible, check things are correct before doing a load of digging and requiring a load of concrete.

It’s been draining fine since the 1930’s so I can’t see why it would need changing now.

the whole point of this thread is about you laying foundations that conflict with the drain, that's why it would need changing now. (to save on digging and concrete perhaps)

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

What advice have you contributed ? All you have done is make incorrect assumptions and make totally useless snipes at those who were trying to be helpful. So feel free to not bother if that’s the best you can do.

So you've paid your architect for regs drawings then? It's the internet, if it's too offensive for your little kitten persona then clear off.

 

[iDIY]

I was only trying to help by raising the question that the drain may have to be changed to meet current regs.

https://www.drainageconsultantsltd.co.uk/about-drains/drainage-gradients-falls/

Hopefully not but it is my understanding BCO's do have powers when it comes to foul drains.

Thanks for the link, thats very helpful and my existing drains are well within the 1:40 and 1:110 range stated.

 

[iDIY]

to be fair, although woody is always excellent with his advice, he did say various things can affect the design. I think your first post quoted above was sensible, check things are correct before doing a load of digging and requiring a load of concrete.

the whole point of this thread is about you laying foundations that conflict with the drain, that's why it would need changing now. (to save on digging and concrete perhaps)

I take the point John, but hanging the drain would be a massive task compared to bridging it where it is and given the start and end points would have to be the same and the fall needs to be in the 1:40 to 1:110 range its not really an option anyway.

Those who suggest it should have been in the plans the architect did must think he has a crystal ball. We both knew the pipe crossed the line of the foundations but at what height was only an estimate until you actually expose it and also when you know how deep you need to go to firm ground, which is where i am at now. If it was a 200mm or so higher it would be level with the concrete strip, if it was 500mm higher it would be above it and bridged in the normal fashion. As it is the base of the concrete strip would be 50mm above the pipe so its just a question of what the BCO is going to accept as an acceptable solution.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

But was he paid to do the regs drawings?

 

[John D v2.0]

Those who suggest it should have been in the plans the architect did must think he has a crystal ball.

that's what revised plans are for. some matters are subject to discovery on site, and once discovered the design would be updated to suit by the architect.

As it is the base of the concrete strip would be 50mm above the pipe

now that you know that, the architect should update the design.
An architect is not like a normal contractor, just do something and get it signed off by the client and then that's that. The are professionals, so they have a responsibility to achieve the result required. A bit like the doctor, if you go in for an operation and then it turns out you have a blood clotting issue, they don't just soay "oh sorry I didn't know that until I started the operation, so I'll just stitch up as normal and leave it at that."

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

FFS he hasn't appointed his architect or anyone else to do any regs drawings!