Building Regs Rejected - What Next

[NewToAllOfThis]

We have just had our Building regs rejected as we were unable to resolve all the actions raised within 2 months.

 

So what happens next, have I lost my £720 that I have paid and do I need to start again.

 

As they have been rejected, can I start again with a private company rather than the local district council

[PeterW]

That’s unusual, must be something seriously wrong with the application. You normally get the chance to resubmit the application with a new set of plans. 
 

What were the outstanding issues ..?

[NewToAllOfThis]

The main outstanding is the use of PIR near a boundary, timber supplier has been trying to resolve but building control have been less than helpful

 

[Russell griffiths]

So stick a block work skin around it. 

Simple. 

[PeterW]

  On 09/11/2020 at 21:41, NewToAllOfThis said:

The main outstanding is the use of PIR near a boundary, timber supplier has been trying to resolve but building control have been less than helpful

 

Expand  

They are not going to be helpful. You’re not paying them to come up with solutions to meet problems, they are there to ensure that your design meets building regulations. 
 

What has your architect or designer said ..? PIR externally is an unusual detail - is this a timber frame building ..?

[NewToAllOfThis]

The PIR is in the timber frame and on the inside, external is wood cladding planning restriction.

 

Looking at alternatives now as the PIR is just not going to be acceptable.

 

Was interested as to if I have to pay again and start the whole process again.

 

 

[PeterW]

So use an Calcium/Cement board behind the wood cladding, and then treat the cladding with ZeroFlame or similar. This is a pretty standard detail that is used on commercial buildings 

 

https://www.sts-uk.com/building-board-solutions/cladding-receiver

 

PIR isn’t the issue here - sounds like the BCO is looking at the external build up and not seeing a 60 minute fire resistance prior to the insulation. 
 

Not sure about fees but my local area don’t charge for a second application. You will have paid both plan fees and inspection fees, so even if they charge you again it will only be the plan fees. 

 

 

 

[Temp]

Google found..

http://www.benfieldattgroup.co.uk/knowledge-centre/advisory/building-regulations/building-regulations-application-refused/

 

"What if Building Regs Application Refused

If your plans do not comply, you will be given a Refusal Notice. The reasons for rejection will be stated. This gives you a choice to put things right and resubmit. The refusal will not go on record (unlike a planning rejection) and resubmission is at no extra charge."

 

 But would be nice to find the same on a .gov website.

 

[Temp]

Council near me says same..

https://www.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk/info/200162/existing_applications/1526/outcomes_of_a_building_control_application

 

"Rejection notice

If you do not provide enough information for your plans to show compliance with the Building Regulations we may issue a Rejection Notice.

You may still start work if your plans have been rejected but should seek assistance from us before you commence.

You may also re submit (resubmission) your plans with no further plan charge payable."

[DevilDamo]

Although BR rejections do happen, they are very rare. Tbh, I don’t think I’ve ever had one. I’ve issued one before but that was only because of the lack of BR information in order to carry out a plan check, i.e rejection under Regulation 14.

 

Assuming the rejection is therefore based on a combustible material being located within 1m of a boundary? If so, then either the combustible wall needs to be made non-combustible or you pull the way away to at least 1m from the boundary. It’s common design/detail practice and concerning if it’s something your architect/designer has missed or unable to satisfy.

 

As mentioned above, the resubmission of a BR application would not normally attract an additional fee. You would however have to pay additional fees should you choose to use private Building Control/Approved Inspector. They too wouldn’t be relaxed on the BR’s so you’d still need to comply in one way or another.

[Jilly]

There were one or two things queried during consideration of my Full Plans BC application and they liaised with my architect to come up with a 'pass with conditions'. 

 

 

[NewToAllOfThis]

  On 10/11/2020 at 07:47, DevilDamo said:

Although BR rejections do happen, they are very rare. Tbh, I don’t think I’ve ever had one. I’ve issued one before but that was only because of the lack of BR information in order to carry out a plan check, i.e rejection under Regulation 14.

 

Assuming the rejection is therefore based on a combustible material being located within 1m of a boundary? If so, then either the combustible wall needs to be made non-combustible or you pull the way away to at least 1m from the boundary. It’s common design/detail practice and concerning if it’s something your architect/designer has missed or unable to satisfy.

 

As mentioned above, the resubmission of a BR application would not normally attract an additional fee. You would however have to pay additional fees should you choose to use private Building Control/Approved Inspector. They too wouldn’t be relaxed on the BR’s so you’d still need to comply in one way or another.

Expand  

 

Thanks for the reply, we have found it impossible to get a straight answer from BC, they hide behind 'we can not design the solution', all we get is a constant this is not acceptable, no pointers as to the exact problem besides no test certificate exists for overall solution.

 

Is this 1 metre boundary an exact measurement rule, we are 1.06 metres away from the boundary,?

 

It is being assumed that it is the PIR in the timber frame and possibly on the inside of the frame that is the problem. MultiPro XS is being used in place of OSB on the outside. The BC wants a certificate showing a test being completed on the overall wall make-up from the outside and no one can find a test being done. There is one from the inside using plasterboard and this passes the fire test, common logic would therefore say the outside fireboard would perform better, but where is common sense these days.

 

It is not clear why this test is needed, if the outer skin, MultiPro XS has 120 minute protection so I assume it meets the requirement then why does it matter about the PIR enclosed in this board?

 

We can not replace the outer skin with brick, it has to be at present wood cladding, cement board cladding is not acceptable, we might be able to replace the wood cladding with render board, it would mean another planning application but even then no clue as to if this would solve the problem, but I assume not as the wood cladding if treated doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

Is the building inspector correct or is he making a mistake as to what information and tests are required.

 

[Dave Jones]

  On 09/11/2020 at 21:28, NewToAllOfThis said:

We have just had our Building regs rejected as we were unable to resolve all the actions raised within 2 months.

 

So what happens next, have I lost my £720 that I have paid and do I need to start again.

 

As they have been rejected, can I start again with a private company rather than the local district council

Expand  

 

 

why weren't you able to resolve in 2 months ?

 

 

[Ian]

  On 10/11/2020 at 10:29, NewToAllOfThis said:

Is this 1 metre boundary an exact measurement rule, we are 1.06 metres away from the boundary,?

Expand  

You need to have a good read of Part B of the Building Regulations, particularly Section 11 (page 83 onwards). It's quite a complex set of regs so not easy to simply summarise here but briefly the closer your building is to the property boundary then more of its wall will need to be fire resisting construction.

 

  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/832631/Approved_Document_B__fire_safety__volume_1_-_2019_edition.pdf

[Dave Jones]

clad it it fireproof board, cheaperst you csn get.

 

Have BC come and sign it off.

 

Rip it off and put the cladding back on.

[NewToAllOfThis]

  On 10/11/2020 at 11:53, Dave Jones said:

clad it it fireproof board, cheaperst you csn get.

 

Have BC come and sign it off.

 

Rip it off and put the cladding back on.

Expand  

This is the problem, BC are not accepting fireproof board, currently looking at Multipro-XS.

 

As from the replies here, there does seem to be various understanding of what the building regulations actually require and is the interpretation of the building regs by the BCO being applied correctly?

 

One dominant question is: Can PIR board be used close to a boundary? Is there any make-up of a timber frame with PIR that would meet building regs without using a brick outer skin. 

[PeterW]

@NewToAllOfThis why is it down to you to do this ..? Has the architect designed something that cannot be built ..??

 

Speak to the technical department at STS and ask them for the technical detail for the cladding receiver board in use with a timber frame building and PIR. They should have a standard detail or be able to tell you if it meets Part B. 

[Dave Jones]

  On 10/11/2020 at 12:01, NewToAllOfThis said:

This is the problem, BC are not accepting fireproof board, currently looking at Multipro-XS.

 

As from the replies here, there does seem to be various understanding of what the building regulations actually require and is the interpretation of the building regs by the BCO being applied correctly?

 

One dominant question is: Can PIR board be used close to a boundary? Is there any make-up of a timber frame with PIR that would meet building regs without using a brick outer skin. 

Expand  

ask them what they will accept ?