[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down! Builder went up to look and apparently went white and said he'd get
onto it tomorrow. I know this guy and he's not the teeth-sucking "oh dear
that'll cost yer" type: if he says it needs fixing it needs fixing.

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.

Now Bobski the builder will probably rebuild the damn thing for less money
than a S.E. would charge for a report, so Mr & Mrs N.O. are inclined to
just get Bobski onto it asap.

Q is: what bureaucratic misfortune could council jobsworths wreak on them
if they're not happy with this? Assuming chimney is rebuilt as it was
before?

--
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

I used to be forgetful but now I ... um ....

On 26 Jan, 20:43, YAPH wrote:
[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down! Builder went up to look and apparently went white and said he'd get
onto it tomorrow. I know this guy and he's not the teeth-sucking "oh dear
that'll cost yer" type: if he says it needs fixing it needs fixing.

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.

Now Bobski the builder will probably rebuild the damn thing for less money
than a S.E. would charge for a report, so Mr & Mrs N.O. are inclined to
just get Bobski onto it asap.

Q is: what bureaucratic misfortune could council jobsworths wreak on them
if they're not happy with this? Assuming chimney is rebuilt as it was
before?

Listed building malarkey can be a right pain, hopefully this will
help, it's from a district council's website:

"Altering or demolishing a listed building without consent can attract
heavy penalties, a fine of up to £2,000 or three months’ imprisonment,
with a possible twelve months’ imprisonment on indictment and an
unlimited fine. An offence is committed unless works have been
specifically authorised. Only if works are essential because of public
safety can a case be made for demolition, but even then a Dangerous
Structure Notice has to be served by the District Council. Remember,
it’s always better to ask first!"

Loopholes that spring out are if the council bods didn't see it when
complete, homeowners could claim it was exactly as it was before, but
you know the Council - I hate to agree with them, but as it says above
"it's always better to ask first".
Not worth the hassle of trying it on.

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 12:53:32 -0800, Lino expert wrote:

Listed building malarkey can be a right pain, hopefully this will
help, it's from a district council's website:
....
Not worth the hassle of trying it on.

These folks aren't trying it on: they don't want to demolish or alter
anything without permission, just to rebuild something that's patently
dangerous* so it doesn't crash down through their house causing 10s of
£1000s of damage and possibly killing themselves or their children.


* in the opinion of an experienced builder who's been up on the
roof and actually looked at it close up, if not to the council drongos who
looked from 3 storeys down at street level at a poor angle through
binoculars



--
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

Lino expert wrote:

"Altering or demolishing a listed building without consent can attract
heavy penalties ..."


Says nothing about repairs, especially emergency repairs.

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:04:54 GMT, a certain chimpanzee, YAPH
randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

These folks aren't trying it on: they don't want to demolish or alter
anything without permission, just to rebuild something that's patently
dangerous* so it doesn't crash down through their house causing 10s of
£1000s of damage and possibly killing themselves or their children.

* in the opinion of an experienced builder who's been up on the
roof and actually looked at it close up, if not to the council drongos who
looked from 3 storeys down at street level at a poor angle through
binoculars

Which particular Council drongos? The Listed Building ones or the
Building Control ones?
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed"?

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:36:54 +0000, Hugo Nebula wrote:

Which particular Council drongos? The Listed Building ones or the
Building Control ones?

Listed building, I think. The local BCOs are IME OK.



--
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

A backstreet vasectomy left me sterile

On 26 Jan, 21:04, YAPH wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 12:53:32 -0800, Lino expert wrote:
Listed building malarkey can be a right pain, hopefully this will
help, it's from a district council's website:
...
Not worth the hassle of trying it on.

These folks aren't trying it on: they don't want to demolish or alter
anything without permission, just to rebuild something that's patently
dangerous* so it doesn't crash down through their house causing 10s of
£1000s of damage and possibly killing themselves or their children.

* in the opinion of an experienced builder who's been up on the
roof and actually looked at it close up, if not to the council drongos who
looked from 3 storeys down at street level at a poor angle through
binoculars

Indeed, a poor choice of words on my part.

Looks like they'd need the "Dangerous Structure Notice" referred to.

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:32:03 +0000, Bruce wrote:

Lino expert wrote:

"Altering or demolishing a listed building without consent can attract
heavy penalties ..."


Says nothing about repairs, especially emergency repairs.

Like for like repairs should be completely acceptable, but
Conservation Officers all seem to have a mind of their own so you cant
assume that what one CO will OK the next CO will too

I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

And much as it may be galling they should get the Conservation Officer
on side. COs tend to be much more picky when they see new owners with
no track record of listed building repairs. If they do this one right
they will have less hassle with the CO when the next problem arises

Anna

YAPH gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.

Might also be worth them talking to SPAB - http://www.spab.org.uk/ -
they've got plenty of real-world experience of "Look, it might be listed,
but it's going to be listed rubble unless we actually bloody fix it and
NOW"

In message , Anna Kettle
writes
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:32:03 +0000, Bruce wrote:

Lino expert wrote:

"Altering or demolishing a listed building without consent can attract
heavy penalties ..."


Says nothing about repairs, especially emergency repairs.

Like for like repairs should be completely acceptable, but
Conservation Officers all seem to have a mind of their own so you cant
assume that what one CO will OK the next CO will too

I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

And much as it may be galling they should get the Conservation Officer
on side. COs tend to be much more picky when they see new owners with
no track record of listed building repairs. If they do this one right
they will have less hassle with the CO when the next problem arises

I agree, it really is worth taking the long term view here. Getting a
'bad name' with the listed building dept at the beginning probably isn't
a good idea. Having them be suspicious of everything you do in the
future doesn't seem worth it.

Whilst the OP's friends could probably legally get away with going with
what the builder wants to do - as a like for like reapir (as long as it
is like for like, with as you say Anna, use of the correct materials),
IMO it's worth going along with the conservation officers and getting a
SE to look at it.

I've always tried to involve the CO when ever I done any significant
maintenance, basically they come round, we have a look and a chat, he
says OK, we exchange letters to that effect and everyone is happy. It
avoids the questioning of work in the future, and builds a good
relationship, which might be useful in the future.

Yep it will cost more, it will take longer, welcome to the world of
owning and maintaining a listed building :-)
--
Chris French

In message , YAPH
writes
[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down!

I'm guessing that they had not spoken to the Listed Building dept before
starting any of this work?

You mention roofing work, whilst it could easily be necessary
maintenance and like for like repairs, if doing stuff like this it's
really worth talking to them first, even if not strictly necessary. That
way they know that you will use a suitable material for repairs etc.

--
Chris French

On 26 Jan 2009 21:56:26 GMT, Adrian wrote:

YAPH gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.

Might also be worth them talking to SPAB - http://www.spab.org.uk/ -
they've got plenty of real-world experience of "Look, it might be listed,
but it's going to be listed rubble unless we actually bloody fix it and
NOW"

Yes they should get a structural engineer with experience of old
buildings. A general purpose structural engineer will cover their own
back by over specifying

SPAB will come up with names and I expect the Conservation Officer can
too

Anna

YAPH wrote in message
...


I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down! Builder went up to look and apparently went white and said he'd get
onto it tomorrow. I know this guy and he's not the teeth-sucking "oh dear
that'll cost yer" type: if he says it needs fixing it needs fixing.

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.


First rule of owning a listed building is realising that you need the
conservation officer on your side, so if they say you need a structural
engineer that's what you do.
Its far easier arguing with this bloke because you are paying him.
With the nicely typed report now reading as you want it, present to CA, all
happy.
Second is the realisation that you are not the owner of this special
architectural or historic interest building merely the present occupier,
keeper.
Third is the realisation that rules one and two can cost LOM.



-

YAPH wrote:
[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down! Builder went up to look and apparently went white and said he'd get
onto it tomorrow. I know this guy and he's not the teeth-sucking "oh dear
that'll cost yer" type: if he says it needs fixing it needs fixing.

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.

Now Bobski the builder will probably rebuild the damn thing for less money
than a S.E. would charge for a report, so Mr & Mrs N.O. are inclined to
just get Bobski onto it asap.

Q is: what bureaucratic misfortune could council jobsworths wreak on them
if they're not happy with this? Assuming chimney is rebuilt as it was
before?


They can make you knock it down and reuse the original materials.

The key to Grade II is that you MUST repair, not renew, unless there is
no possible alternative. Cost benefit and 'it will look the same
afterwards' cuts no ice.

Take some advice here. STOP until you have a firm clear agreement
between the preservation people and the builder, and some firm quotes.

For some firms, listed work is a license to print money.

In your case, they will probably want all the original bricks cleaned up
and replaced with the same crappy lime mortar that was originally used,
preferably in the same locations too..yeah.. right!

I attended a meeting between a house owner, teh listing people and a
building inspector once.

Hilarious. The staircase was rotten and had been removed.

Building control: "That staircase is currently inadequate and you cant
revulid it, it wont meet current safete regulations"

Listing people:"that staircase is reparable: It must be restored and put
back".

Building control: "But it still wont meet regulations"

Listing people: "But a repair is not a 'material alteration' and
therefore doesn't come under building control"

The poor bloody house owner just stood their looking more and more
miserable...

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:38:58 +0000, chris French
wrote:

In message , YAPH
writes
[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down!

I'm guessing that they had not spoken to the Listed Building dept before
starting any of this work?

Or more sensibly before buying the place.



You mention roofing work, whilst it could easily be necessary
maintenance and like for like repairs, if doing stuff like this it's
really worth talking to them first, even if not strictly necessary. That
way they know that you will use a suitable material for repairs etc.
--
http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk
http://www.holidayunder100.co.uk

Mark wrote:
YAPH wrote in message
...

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down! Builder went up to look and apparently went white and said he'd get
onto it tomorrow. I know this guy and he's not the teeth-sucking "oh dear
that'll cost yer" type: if he says it needs fixing it needs fixing.

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.


First rule of owning a listed building is realising that you need the
conservation officer on your side, so if they say you need a structural
engineer that's what you do.
Its far easier arguing with this bloke because you are paying him.
With the nicely typed report now reading as you want it, present to CA, all
happy.
Second is the realisation that you are not the owner of this special
architectural or historic interest building merely the present occupier,
keeper.
Third is the realisation that rules one and two can cost LOM.



Its like teh arguments we had with council employyes ovvver why they had
invested our money in known dodgy Icelandic banks.

"We didnt know they were dodgy"
"well why don't you read the financial press: you are the treasurer"
"I'm to busy to do that, someone else does that for me"
"Oh, and why didnt they tell you?"
"What they tell me is irrelevant: If Moodies give it a triple A rating
it goes on our list of permitted investment vehicles, and we are simply
supposed to pick the best rate of return"

So what you are saying is that if the system tells you to do something,
even if you are given clear indications that its wrong, you will do it
anyway?"
"Yes"

I..e. No one gets fired foir losing £100M, they get fired if they don't
*follow the rules*.

Understanding this principle is the key to dealing with jobsworths.
Produce a bit of paper that says XYZ, and their arses are covered.

If THEIR rules say that an engineers report is (no matter how bent to
suit YOUR interests) what they need to be able to say 'I did my job'
then give it to them.

There is a GHASTLY extension that lookes like a cedar portakabin stuck
on a listed house here.

How di they get a 15 square meter pictire window in a cedar clad pill
box past the planners?

simple. They got a bunch of architects and builders and loveys to all
agree that it was of such extreme architectural merit, that it could be
allowed.

All it takes is money, and enough paper to cover everyone's arse.

mogga wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:38:58 +0000, chris French
wrote:

In message , YAPH
writes
[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down!
I'm guessing that they had not spoken to the Listed Building dept before
starting any of this work?

Or more sensibly before buying the place.


Indeed. I was looking at a rtather run down listed house..I got a fried
ofa friend who was a museum consrevator to advise.

"£10,000 a room to fix that" he said.

I calculated the resale value of a reconditioned property, subtracted
that sum and made an offer.

"But that is £40,000 less than the mortgage"

"I pity you"

YAPH wrote:
[Multi-posting to uk.legal.moderated as I believe cross-posts to u.l.m get
dropped automatically.]

I'm doing a job for some folks who've just bought a grade II listed
building. (Not loadsamoney: they could only afford it because it's got
walls, floors, sort of a roof and that's about it.) Got scaffolding
going up for roofing and today apparently part of the chimney stack fell
down! Builder went up to look and apparently went white and said he'd get
onto it tomorrow. I know this guy and he's not the teeth-sucking "oh dear
that'll cost yer" type: if he says it needs fixing it needs fixing.

Meanwhile helpful folks at council got wind of it and came round with
binoculars and digicam, looked at it from the ground and said it didn't
need rebuilding. Mrs New Owner not too happy, council bods say get a
structural engineer to assess it.

Now Bobski the builder will probably rebuild the damn thing for less money
than a S.E. would charge for a report, so Mr & Mrs N.O. are inclined to
just get Bobski onto it asap.

Q is: what bureaucratic misfortune could council jobsworths wreak on them
if they're not happy with this? Assuming chimney is rebuilt as it was
before?


As has been said, no permission is needed for like for like repairs.
But this means what it says - the same bricks to be reused if at all
possible (if genuinely impossible then identical ones), the same
mortar composition, etc, no changes permitted. If the mortar isnt
plain white lime then you might need to do a mortar analysis to ensure
you get the same mix.

However, as also said, it may be a good idea to run your detailed
plans under the CO's nose to help get them on side for the future.
Also it may be wise so they can pick up on any detail you may have
overlooked - and its easily done.

Meanwhile I'm guessing you could do something to hold the stack in
place temporarily while you're sorting the details out. Dont expect to
do anything in a hurry on a listed building.


NT

Repeat this mantra:

"It's a repair"

and to Building Control this mantra:

"It's pre-existing"

- and never offer *any* more information than you're legally obliged
to give.

I think a structural engineer would be utter overkill for a chimney
repair - unless it's exceptionally large or unusual.

The council bloke almost certainly isn't qualified (or experienced) to
give an opinion on the safety of the chimney.

I doubt anyone that was, would give any sort of opinion without a
close inspection. And Mrs Owner has no obligation to let them in to do
an inspection - which rather means they would have no case against her
if the builder says "it was an immediate danger".

Saying all that - I think planning for the most part do an excellent
job of preventing the worst excesses from getting built (or our assets
destroyed) and building control for the most part do an excellent job
of making buildings safe.

The busybody round her house sounds like one where they could save us
all a bit of council tax, by reducing his salary costs to zero.

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:51:48 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

Like for like repairs should be completely acceptable, but
Conservation Officers all seem to have a mind of their own so you cant
assume that what one CO will OK the next CO will too

I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

And much as it may be galling they should get the Conservation Officer
on side. COs tend to be much more picky when they see new owners with
no track record of listed building repairs. If they do this one right
they will have less hassle with the CO when the next problem arises

Thanks Anna, and everyone. I phoned Mr & Mrs Owner[1] this morning with
gist of your contributions and Mrs O phoned CO uttering Magic Words[2] who
agreed to stack being rebuilt pronto with that and original-type bricks.
Bobski went off to source reclaimed bricks (originals falling apart,
hence problem with stack) whilst Mrs O phoned round & found a supplier for
for HLM & sent builder off to fetch that, plus supplier offered to give
builder a quick crib on how to use the stuff. Talking of which any gotchas
to using lime mortar? ISTR Anna writing at length about it some time back
but it doesn't seem to have found its way onto our wiki.


[1] currently off-interweb until formerly wirus-ridden Windoze PC, now
newly linuxified[3], gets back to them

[2] "Hydraulic Lime Mortar"

[3] The machine was practically old enought to be listed itself: you can
just see it, can't you? "That PC originally had Microsoft Windows on it,
so you've got to remove Linux and restore it to its original state" :-)



--
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

Thesaurus: extinct reptile noted for its wide vocabulary.

Talking of which any gotchas
to using lime mortar?

isnt it too cold for lime mortar,
it doesnt set properly in freezing conditions?

http://www.blackdog.ukf.net/

A5 32 page illustrated paperback offering sensible, easy-to-follow
advice based on 25 thrifty years

of practical experience, for anyone wishing to repair, redecorate or
maintain an old building in the traditional manner. Suppliers list
updated annually. Over 13,000 copies sold.

£4.00 per copy in UK (including post & packing), £30 for 10 copies.

£5.00 (sterling only) per copy overseas.



[g]

In message , YAPH
writes
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:51:48 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

Like for like repairs should be completely acceptable, but
Conservation Officers all seem to have a mind of their own so you cant
assume that what one CO will OK the next CO will too

I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

And much as it may be galling they should get the Conservation Officer
on side. COs tend to be much more picky when they see new owners with
no track record of listed building repairs. If they do this one right
they will have less hassle with the CO when the next problem arises

Thanks Anna, and everyone. I phoned Mr & Mrs Owner[1] this morning with
gist of your contributions and Mrs O phoned CO uttering Magic Words[2] who
agreed to stack being rebuilt pronto with that and original-type bricks.

See, they can be quite reasonable :-)

Bobski went off to source reclaimed bricks (originals falling apart,
hence problem with stack) whilst Mrs O phoned round & found a supplier for
for HLM & sent builder off to fetch that, plus supplier offered to give
builder a quick crib on how to use the stuff.

Worth checking that the mortar will match the existing mortar colour (it
can be quite variable)
Talking of which any gotchas
to using lime mortar?

It may want protecting at this time of year from frost/cold winds or
heavy rain. esp in an exposed location such as a chimney stack

--
Chris French

george (dicegeorge) wrote:
Talking of which any gotchas
to using lime mortar?

isnt it too cold for lime mortar,
it doesnt set properly in freezing conditions?

Non-hydraulic lime needs to be treated differently to cement, or bad
things can happen. But hydraulic lime sets like cement - albeit softer
- and can be used much the same way as cement. I guess its still wise
to cover it in this weather though for a few days until its dried (dry
does not equal set).


NT

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:37:07 GMT, YAPH wrote:

Talking of which any gotchas
to using lime mortar?

Make a hydaulic lime mortar mix with the same aggregate and
proportions that he would do using cement

Technique is much the same as with cement but it will take longer to
set and should be protected with hessian (which has just the right
amount of permeability) for as long as possible. At least a week,
preferably three at this time of year

The colour wont match, it will be far too white but do a sand colour
match as well as can be managed and over the next couple of years
lichen will get a hold and the new work will mellow to match the old

ISTR Anna writing at length about it some time back
but it doesn't seem to have found its way onto our wiki.

Someone else wrote a good summary ages ago which was on the FAQ. I
tend to write regularly but not at length

Anna

YAPH wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:51:48 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

Like for like repairs should be completely acceptable, but
Conservation Officers all seem to have a mind of their own so you cant
assume that what one CO will OK the next CO will too

I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

And much as it may be galling they should get the Conservation Officer
on side. COs tend to be much more picky when they see new owners with
no track record of listed building repairs. If they do this one right
they will have less hassle with the CO when the next problem arises

Thanks Anna, and everyone. I phoned Mr & Mrs Owner[1] this morning with
gist of your contributions and Mrs O phoned CO uttering Magic Words[2] who
agreed to stack being rebuilt pronto with that and original-type bricks.
Bobski went off to source reclaimed bricks (originals falling apart,
hence problem with stack) whilst Mrs O phoned round & found a supplier for
for HLM & sent builder off to fetch that, plus supplier offered to give
builder a quick crib on how to use the stuff. Talking of which any gotchas
to using lime mortar? ISTR Anna writing at length about it some time back
but it doesn't seem to have found its way onto our wiki.


[1] currently off-interweb until formerly wirus-ridden Windoze PC, now
newly linuxified[3], gets back to them

[2] "Hydraulic Lime Mortar"

[3] The machine was practically old enought to be listed itself: you can
just see it, can't you? "That PC originally had Microsoft Windows on it,
so you've got to remove Linux and restore it to its original state" :-)



If the listing people had been around in the Dark Ages we would still be
living in saxon wattle huts...

On 28 Jan, 08:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

If the listing people had been around in the Dark Ages we would still be
living in saxon wattle huts...

Err - no. If the *planning* people had been around in the Dark Ages we
would still be living in saxon wattle huts. If the listing people had
been around in the Dark Ages we would still have lots of examples of
saxon wattle huts, all completely original in the same way that the
philosopher's axe remained the same axe, as well lots of new build in
exciting new styles.

Sid

(Anna Kettle) wrote:

The colour wont match, it will be far too white but do a sand colour
match as well as can be managed and over the next couple of years
lichen will get a hold and the new work will mellow to match the old


Painting the mortar with a thin coat of live yoghurt will help speed
this process. Wait for the mortar to cure before doing it - probably
four to six weeks at this time of the year.

It must be *live* yoghurt.

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:25:03 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


I attended a meeting between a house owner, teh listing people and a
building inspector once.

Hilarious. The staircase was rotten and had been removed.

Building control: "That staircase is currently inadequate and you cant
revulid it, it wont meet current safete regulations"

Listing people:"that staircase is reparable: It must be restored and put
back".

Building control: "But it still wont meet regulations"

Listing people: "But a repair is not a 'material alteration' and
therefore doesn't come under building control"

The poor bloody house owner just stood their looking more and more
miserable...

Having worked for a local authority architect's department at a low
point in my life I recognise the scenario. I was converting a garage
in a council estate into a bedroom for a disabled person (high point
of my architectural career!) I seem to recall lots of conflicting
requirements between various council bodies but no system in place to
give an indication of whose requirements had priority. At this point I
gave up my architectural career and went into computers!
Maris

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:25:03 +0000, a certain chimpanzee, The Natural
Philosopher randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

I attended a meeting between a house owner, teh listing people and a
building inspector once.

Hilarious. The staircase was rotten and had been removed.

Building control: "That staircase is currently inadequate and you cant
revulid it, it wont meet current safete regulations"

Listing people:"that staircase is reparable: It must be restored and put
back".

Building control: "But it still wont meet regulations"

Listing people: "But a repair is not a 'material alteration' and
therefore doesn't come under building control"

The poor bloody house owner just stood their looking more and more
miserable...

Hate to say it, but the one wearing the safety sandals was correct.
The building regulations would have only applied to a *replacement*
stair, and then only if there was other work to the building that was
'relevant'.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed"?

Hugo Nebula wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:25:03 +0000, a certain chimpanzee, The Natural
Philosopher randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

I attended a meeting between a house owner, teh listing people and a
building inspector once.

Hilarious. The staircase was rotten and had been removed.

Building control: "That staircase is currently inadequate and you cant
revulid it, it wont meet current safete regulations"

Listing people:"that staircase is reparable: It must be restored and put
back".

Building control: "But it still wont meet regulations"

Listing people: "But a repair is not a 'material alteration' and
therefore doesn't come under building control"

The poor bloody house owner just stood their looking more and more
miserable...

Hate to say it, but the one wearing the safety sandals was correct.
The building regulations would have only applied to a *replacement*
stair, and then only if there was other work to the building that was
'relevant'.

Oh I know that the listing people were in fact correct. The house could
not have passed building regs as a new build at all.


I just wanted to point out the tussles you can get into if you start
'replacing' rather than 'repairing'

The message
from (Anna Kettle) contains these words:



I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

Current thinking is that hydraulic lime mortar isn't the complete
answer. Mixture of lime putty and hydraulic lime mortar to ensure that
there's a both good initial set and long term stregth.

The message

from contains these words:


As has been said, no permission is needed for like for like repairs.
But this means what it says - the same bricks to be reused if at all
possible (if genuinely impossible then identical ones), the same
mortar composition, etc, no changes permitted. If the mortar isnt
plain white lime then you might need to do a mortar analysis to ensure
you get the same mix.

One point being missed here is that the chances are that a chimney stack
will have received some less than sympathetic attention in the past half
century and so have a fair bit of cement pointing. That will mean it's
not "like for like" which may be required, but the use of materials
identical to the original.

Appin wrote:
The message
from (Anna Kettle) contains these words:



I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

Current thinking is that hydraulic lime mortar isn't the complete
answer. Mixture of lime putty and hydraulic lime mortar to ensure that
there's a both good initial set and long term stregth.

My builders aid that if you used white cement and a bit of lime as well,
chances are the conservation people wouldn't notice anyway..

But beware of strong repairs on weak bricks held togeher with existing
weak mortars.

You may just create a new problem further down..

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Appin wrote:
The message
from (Anna Kettle) contains these words:



I would def take 'before' photos as evidence that the repair is like
for like. Use hydraulic lime mortar. The word 'cement' is a red rag to
a bull

Current thinking is that hydraulic lime mortar isn't the complete
answer. Mixture of lime putty and hydraulic lime mortar to ensure that
there's a both good initial set and long term stregth.

My builders aid that if you used white cement and a bit of lime as well,
chances are the conservation people wouldn't notice anyway..

But beware of strong repairs on weak bricks held togeher with existing
weak mortars.

You may just create a new problem further down..
The booklet which I have bought via amazon
Lime in Building
by Jane Schofield


says not to mix portland cement and lime,
that removing any portland cement which may have been used
to patch your chimney decades ago is a hard job,
and that lime takes many weeks to dry,
during which time it must be protected from frost,
so if it's protected by sacking would you have to have the scaffold up
for a month?

the best time is late spring.

why not get the booklet?

www.blackdogpress.co.uk

http://www.buildingconservation.com/...ent/cement.htm

Lime Mortars and Renders: The Relative Merits of Adding Cement

Graham O'Hare

For many years those specialising in historic building repairs have
known the dangers of using hard, cementbased mortars. But the specialist
world has been split between those who advocated the use of small
amounts of Portland cement as an additive to a lime mortar and those who
rejected all cement additives. New evidence sheds light on the
controversy, with some radical conclusions.

http://www.jjsharpe.co.uk/faq.html
says

My house is in an exposed area, should I use hydraulic lime or
non-hydraulic lime?

We recommend that for external rendering and pointing hydraulic lime
should be used.

Are these products more expensive than conventional modern cements and
plasters?

Yes, but less expensive than using inappropriate materials that will
harm your building in the long term