Summerhouse foundations inspection

[shapeshifter]

Hi,

i'm building a timber summerhouse. Because its over 15m2 (its 26m2) and within 1m of the boundary I require build controls approval.

We are using precast concrete pads as our foundations for our timber subframe. We dug pits to sit these in so the floor frame can be close to the ground.

The inspector said because of the type of soil and tree roots he'd like to see the pits deeper to a more compacted soil and some concrete in there, let me know when this is ready for inspection. No other detail... thats what he said.

So we dug down further and poured some concrete in to leaving just enough room for our concrete pads to finish at ground level.

He sent and email to the client explaining what he'd asked us to do but said I have asked them to contact him when they are ready to backfill.

Now i'm worried he means ready to backfill with concrete and not the soil to fill he pits back up.

Its only that the client forwarded the email to me I know about this. The inspector also turned up on the wrong day which wasn't arranged. He was informed it was Thursday but came on a Wednesday and told us he was told work was stating today so thought he'd come along. Reading the email the client sent, it clearly said Thursday.

What do you guys think? Can he make us dig up all the concrete to see the depth?

Seems mad he wants concrete under the pads as the pads themselves are blocks of concrete tested to 5 tonnes each and there are 9 of them.[/b]

 

[angelboy]

He might make you dig out next to the concrete to see the depth.

 

[shapeshifter]

is it possible to continue and get an engineers report to say its suitable? do building control accept this?

100mm of laid concrete with a 200mm concrete pad (accepts 5 tones each x 9 in total) for a 5m x 5m room.

What is actually classed as 'a more compacted type soil'? it was virtually impossible to dig.

 

[tony1851]

This inspector is going way over the top; it's only a timber summer house.
The foundation is not going to be a big issue - timber is very light and it's flexible, so it will accommodate some differential movement of the footings anyway. And it's only a summrhouse, not a permanently-inhabited building.

The main reason this needs a building regs application is because it's timber and close to the boundary. That's only a fire-spread issue and there's really no need to be applying other building regs in this case. OP needs to speak to the inspector or his line manager.

 

[shapeshifter]

it does feel over the top. They said they have to treat it like any other building project.

Would he really ask me to dig next to the pit to see the depth of concrete?

The pits are probably 45 deep 10 - 15 of which is concrete.

I no the soil and near by trees were his concern

 

[tony1851]

They said they have to treat it like any other building project.

Every building is different, with different loadings, and therefore with different foundation requirements, and your inspector should consider this.

A 5x5 timber structure, subject to occasional use, has minimal loading and those 9 pads would be more than adequate. OK - if it settled slightly in one corner, the timber will accommodate it - that's the beauty of timber.

You could get an SE involved, but they would charge £££. Might be easier to offer to dig down the side of one of the pits to reveal the concrete.

Frankly, your inspector is an a*$e. Your client should have gone with a private inspector instead of involving the council - you'd have had none of this nonsense then.

 

[noseall]

Frankly, your inspector is an a*$e. Your client should have gone with a private inspector instead of involving the council - you'd have had none of this nonsense then.

Why is he an erse?

He gave very simple and explicit instructions which the builder ignored, and is now bleating about it.

Why on earth did they not wait until the BCO inspected before pouring the conc?

It baffles me.

 

[noseall]

Seems mad he wants concrete under the pads as the pads themselves are blocks of concrete tested to 5 tonnes each and there are 9 of them.[/b]

Irrelevant if the ground beneath is like pudding.

 

[tony1851]

Why is he an erse?

Because a) the OP said the gound was very difficult to dig and
b) because it's a poxy summerhouse, not a 10-storey block of flats.

 

[noseall]

Why is he an erse?

Because a) the OP said the ground was very difficult to dig and
b) because it's a poxy summerhouse, not a 10-storey block of flats.

Yes, but he ignored a VERY simple request.

Dessicated clay can be difficult to dig but a wet winter will turn it into the nightmare substrate from hell.

 

[tony1851]

But it's only a glorified garden shed!

 

[noseall]

But it's only a glorified garden shed!

So why involve them in the first place!

If you are gonna do it then do it right.

 

[tony1851]

So why involve them in the first place!

He had to involve them because it was within 1m from the boundary (fire issue only). If it was further away, there wouldn't have been any of this nonsense.

 

[noseall]

Darn them pesky BC mofo's!

You wanna see what a guy down in the roofing section is up to. Don't think a BCO has been anywhere near his extension yet.

 

[clifford1]

If you are gonna do it then do it right.

You could start with spelling:

"Dessicated clay can be difficult to dig"

The word is "desiccated"