Restoring A 1700S Listed Yorkshire Weavers Cottage.
Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:57 PM
The property is 3 floors the top 2 floors is non structural just some stud walls to come down a redesign and new stud walls going up an ensuite shower install new electrics and a replaster possibly only patch plaster a fair bit of joinery work as new doors and frames and skirtings will be required in all areas, the 2nd floor bathroom we planned to do last in the project.
coming down to the 1st floor dependant on listed buildings approval, we intend to knock out a wall to make one big room (weve had this okayed from a structural engineer) raise a stone plinth above a fireplace to house a range cooker knock through another wall to the attached woodstore to make internal access, sandblast all the exposed beams also this applies to the 2nd floor and the stone steps from the ground floor but not the top floor the beams up there are fine. Full replaster at the ground floor in preperation for the kitchen install at a later date.
My question is this, neither my Wife or myself dont know whether to employ a local building contractor who i become connected with through a mutual friend who has measured up and given us a total price for the job on a written quotation, naturally he wont and cant do all the work,however we did have confidence in him that the job would be done right and on time. Any advice would be much appreciated.
Posted 24 February 2014 - 10:25 PM
You express confidence in the builder, and yet.....?
What are your uncertainties, because they're not clearly expressed, only hinted at in your last paragraph.
Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:28 PM
Posted 25 February 2014 - 07:04 AM
Posted 25 February 2014 - 09:10 AM
You really do need to talk with your local Heritage (sometimes still referred to as Conservation in some areas) Officer (HO) before doing ANYTHING.
You've already intimated that you're aware of the need to get Listed Buildings Consent (LBC) for one job, but are you are aware that you will need that consent for EVERYTHING you do in the building - depending on your HO's take on how wide his or her remit is, some of them are as pedantic as hell, some simply couldn't care less, although the latter are getting fewer!
In my experience, removing internal walls was a definite no-no unless you could prove without any margin of doubt that they'd been built in the last couple of decades, and definitely not if they looked as if they were there when the building was Listed.
I think at this stage I'd advise that unless the builder (ANY builder) can demonstrate a record of having worked on such buildings stay well clear.
I'm in a bit of a rush at the moment so can't say all I want to say, but I'll get back on here later. Meanwhile, hang fire.
Posted 25 February 2014 - 04:40 PM
Posted 26 February 2014 - 06:45 AM
Posted 26 February 2014 - 08:35 AM
Just enough time to say that if your CO is already involved and prepared to allow such major structural changes, or changes to the internal layout then you're either lucky (!) or there isn't anything of particular "historic character" in those aspects of the building. I've had battles like you wouldn't believe over something that was done in the seventies, the particular building having featured in previous thread of mine. But later.
Posted 08 March 2014 - 07:04 PM
We have also applied to raise the stone head in the kitchen fireplace, reason for this is so we can install a range cooker, really need this one to pass as we want the 'raised fireplace' and Aga or Rayburn style range cooker to be the main feature of the kitchen, the planning officer on site visit advised we could not remove this fireplace under any circumstances, however we are not asking to move it,only raise the head.
We will see !!
Posted 09 March 2014 - 09:23 AM
"...reason for this is so we can install a range cooker, really need this one to pass as we want the 'raised fireplace' and Aga or Rayburn style range cooker to be the main feature of the kitchen,"
...is also the reason (most) COs don't like them being messed about with.
But as we've discussed on here so many times, it all depends on your particular CO. There is no such thing as consistency.
I'd been having month's-long discussions and arguments over the double-glazing (using 14mm gas-filled units) of replacement windows in the rear of a Listed building, a one-time warehouse converted into three flats in the 1970s. The new windows were of a pattern in keeping with the period of the original building (had it been a dwelling back then - mid 19th century), including the replacement of a large 'picture window' with a brick pier to allow the fitting of two sash windows and visible only from a distant back street and then across a bowling green, but the CO blindly argued her case for close on nine months, eventually reluctantly conceding (after I'd shown her another window I'd made for another job) that I had a point and agreed to "the principle" of d/g. When the LBC arrived (and thereby hangs another tale) she'd specified single-gazing throughout!
This was that job. The 1970s dormers were removed and two conservation rooflights fitted...
Just before that job started I'd surveyed another job in the north of the county. A lovely Queen Ann property fully exposed to a main thoroughfare. They wanted all the windows replaced front and back (and there were two superb 'garden windows' on the back - sash windows that went down to the ground) and a mass of work on the inside, including a new staircase that swept up to the first floor).
As I went round with the customer she started referring to double-glazing and I warned her that the CO's knee-jerk reaction would be to refuse it. She said it had been the CO who had suggested it. Same council, same conservation department, same bloody office!!
WRITE EVERYTHING DOWN. KEEP DETAILED CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES and back them up with an email containing the details of what was said during any visit, either to site or at their office.
But then, they may walk in and say: "Fine."
Edited by joiner, 09 March 2014 - 09:24 AM.