Russdl

That was what I was thinking. It seems that for me it's going to be really straight forward but just the fact that I'm thinking that makes me nervous that I've missed something really obvious that will bite me in the backside on 'D' day. I'm planning to just have the hole dug and nothing else so that MBC can put the slab in it and then, after the slab is in, and MBC have left for a couple of weeks start connecting drains and services to the "pipes and ducts" they've left behind.

I remember reading about that in your blog Jeremy, my survey is referenced to a spot heigh at the nearby church. The IC cover I have on the plot is permanent fixture for the time being and so I was considering that my 'nail'. I have space to do that, great idea. I presume that means you had all the drains etc in position prior to MBC arriving and starting the slab? For me MBC will: "install all pipes and ducts to a distance of 1 metre from the edge of the foundation slab – leaving you and your groundwork contractor to connect onwards." Am I right in thinking that's different to what happened in your build?

? It clearly is complicated then if I can't even do some basic maths! I'll edit that, thanks.

Is this simple or complicated, can someone put me straight? We have a relatively level site, dropping 1.2m over 51m from north to south. Our southern boundary is a neighbours fence and our eastern boundary is an easily defined straight line. I know the elevation of the inspection chamber cover in the south west corner of the plot, 61.31m, and the top of slab, 61.74m As we are having an MBC foundation (which we expect to be of fairly standard depth) I'm going to need a hole 600mm below the top of the slab, and covering the footprint of the building (T shaped) plus 1m all around. To my mind, and in my particular circumstances, it looks like it's going to be fairly straight forward to do that. (15m and a bit from the souther boundary, 1m and a bit from the eastern boundary and dug out to 170mm below the level of the inspection chamber cover. Is there more to it than that?

@Ferdinand I'm going to build a little thunder box down by the drain in the bottom south west corner of the plot and plumb straight into that manhole cover (on the excellent advise of @Russell griffiths in a previous thread). The welfare unit will be at the north of the plot and I don't plan on connecting it to the drains. My thought is if I did the drains first then they would likely get damaged. I don't want to be up to the finished drive level during the construction phase and so I would end up with at least 1 IC protruding from the drive sub base.

Just reviving this thread as it's sort of relevant for us. We are going to have a turning circle for the fire brigade on our plot (wether we like it or not) and the hatched area on the drawing below is what has been accepted by BCO. It will of course be very useful in permitting lorries to turn around during our build as the the narrow access track will preclude lorries turning anywhere else or reversing out. My plan at the moment is: 1. Put down a sub base that will take the construction traffic. 2. Once major construction is finished, dig up what is required in order to lay the drains. 3. Top up with 150mm Type 1. 4. Finish off the drive with 40mm of gravel in a stabilisation grid. What have I missed? Also: a) Any problems with my plan/order of doing things? b) How deep should I make the sub base for the construction traffic (were are on chalk after digging down a wee bit)? c) On the drawing it says that the driveway should have a minimum carrying capacity of 12.5 tonnes, how do I know if I've achieved that?

@AliG Thanks for the comprehensive reply, I may well steal a few of your ideas there.

@AliG I presume that gable end cladding was custom made? Looks very smart and similar to the look we are after. Can I ask who supplied it and how it attaches? Apologies for drifting the thread a bit...

@Bitpipe That’s really useful, thanks for digging that out for me ?

Hopefully relatively close to the house and eastern boundary and big enough to put cars in and still use as a workshop.

Exactly, that's plan A, actually, it's more like X than A! As I understand, it's also dependant on distance to boundaries as well and we plan to have it quite close to the eastern boundary

Well, our architect has proposed a solution that BCO are happy with and it all looks good on paper, but the paper doesn't show the future garage... We will have a turning 'Y' for the fire engine to turn around on. For the sprinkler option we were looking at around £3K, apart from the fact that we wouldn't be able to provide 98 litres/minute!! flow rate so that would be around another £500 for a 1200 litre storage tank and £1K for a pump system, so the best part of £5K for the sprinkler system. I don't have a quote for a misting system yet.

@Temp We’re investigating the sprinkler option that should ease the fire departments worries. But I’m still at a loss as to how that would help them reverse over 20m unless of course they won’t attend a fire if I have a sprinkler system! @TheMitchells I REALLY hope we find a solution as well. I’ll update when I have news.

Infuriating isn't it!

@newhome We have to reverse our wheelie bin 60m down the lane to the road.

Sadly not, we are right at the end of a single track lane that becomes a footpath after our driveway. The nearest thing to a hammerhead would be a neighbours driveway a 36m reverse from our driveway. Actually, thinking about it whilst typing I will make mention of that just in case a neighbours drive is sufficient even though it's 36m away. Thanks ?

@JSHarris Yes, a good point Jeremy. The regulation is incredibly vague unless there is more to it that I can't find: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/schedule/1/made

@Temp How should I go about arguing that point? Is there some document I can refer to? I hope you're right but I suspect you saw @Ed Davies comment earlier in the thread and one of you will definitely be correct: It is in Approved Document B, Section B5. I read it ages ago and if memory serves (which it frequently doesn't) questioned the architect about the issue and was assured it would not be a problem. I clearly should have read it more carefully because there is no way we can fit their required turning circle on the plot. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/485420/BR_PDF_AD_B1_2013.pdf

@Ed Davies Thanks for that, I'll endeavour to keep my powder dry in that case. It does seem a bloody nonsense though.

Thanks again all. It's definitely a truism that a problem shared is a problem halved. The BCO know nothing of an intended garage, that was left off the planning application on advice from a planning consultant. Actually, why didn't she make mention of this potential fire brigade issue?? I do feel like pushing back against this - I've been to the pub you see! Whilst there I bumped into a friend who is also a developer and he said that as this issue wasn't raised at the planning stage then it's too late for them to be demanding a turning circle on the plot now - is he right? I'd planned to do this in any case to make the future garage build less of a hassle, however there would still be insufficient space for a proper turning circle but the firemen may be able to turn around in it. But will it satisfy the main man? The decision as it stands has been made by a gentleman at 'buildingregs@dwfire' so I suspect appealing to the local fire chiefs better nature may be a lost cause. I think that's the first question I'll ask coupled with the PP point my pub mate mentioned.

I don't know the answer to that. There was nothing in my permission that removed PD, but there is a listed building fairly close and I don't know if that changes the rules at all? I'll have to investigate that - it sounds like that may help.

I suspect one that could turn a fire engine around would require a lottery win ? I'm not 'in it' so I can't 'win it' ?

As ever, thanks all for your replies. I'd already considered that, (and I'd be happy to reverse the fire truck if they were struggling). The problem I see with playing the game is that when I apply for planning permission for the garage that will effectively eat up most of the turning area so I presume I'll end up jumping through all the same hoops again regarding the reversing fire truck?

@ProDave I suspect you could be right, but I've no idea. I've just been looking at 'sprinkler' v 'misting' systems. I'd never heard of misting systems until about an hour ago. Every day's a school day.

@JSHarris Ah, I'm with you. I guess I could look into that. As you say If we'd had a fire in the original bungalow there would have been no turning circle and a 60m reverse, but now that bungalow has gone...