What will the outcome be of my assessment?

[johnduffell]

Meaning of material change of use

I think thats describing alteration or extension?

No. change of use specifically means it had one use ie retail or commercial and then became residential. It wouldn't be change of use if you changed the use of a garden into a room!

not making it less compliant than it previously was or reduction, which I can't decipher!

That just means if the sockets are at 300mm you can't lower them but you can keep them at 300mm or higher.

 

[grumpyjohn01]

I was recently on a job where an agricultural building which had been in use as a brewery and is now being converted to a dwelling was being wired for its new use as a dwelling. There was a freelance building inspector on site and I specifically asked him if Part M applied and he said no, put the accessories at whatever height the customer wants. I'm with Stroma too but probably won't be taking them to this one on assessment...!

 

[Midwest]

No. change of use specifically means it had one use ie retail or commercial and then became residential. It wouldn't be change of use if you changed the use of a garden into a room!

That just means if the sockets are at 300mm you can't lower them but you can keep them at 300mm or higher.

Your first point, if you read item I) in below, and explain for me?



Your second point, its item 0.4 thats a bit gobbledygook.

 

[johnduffell]

Midwest I'll check later, remind me of i forget

 

[Wilko]

I haven't the reference to back it up, but I would have thought that brewery to a dwelling job would definitely have triggered the new build clauses for outlet and switch heights. If it didn't (as that inspector says) then is he also saying he doesn't need to see the latest domestic insulation or smoke alarm standards? Just to make a point .

 

[Octopus]

All this debate and as usual it’s all about poorly worded documents .....

Submit them for review by the plain English society ...

 

[Midwest]

Midwest I'll check later, remind me of i forget

Bump.

 

[PEG]

You lot don't half enjoy making things hard for yourselves...

By simply fitting pull-cords,you can comply with whatever switch height is demanded,using a pair of scissors

This is why,Peter Dinklage put me on Trustatrader.

 

[Octopus]

Just want to throw in a curved ball ... What about above counter sockets in kitchens .... They would struggle to comply with part m

 

[Wilko]

Just want to throw in a curved ball ... What about above counter sockets in kitchens .... They would struggle to comply with part m

Got that nailed - bench top 90cm and I usually leave another 20cm to the outlet so still within the 45cm to 120cm, just.

 

[PEG]

Got that nailed - bench top 90cm and I usually leave another 20cm to the outlet so still within the 45cm to 120cm, just.

....Not if i floor-sand 4" off the deck...just to reveal that lovely grain...

 

[HappyHippyDad]

I don't understand what has gone wrong?
I put some impromptu pictures of the install up and no one has said anything bad or picky???
This is not normal behaviour and I feel quite left out.... almost abandoned! For heavens sake chaps I'm a Electrical Trainee (well, 6mw)... where's all the bashing!!!
However, I can understand it if you all feel that I'm perfect

(PS.. no response from Stroma yet to my email.

 

[Midwest]

I don't understand what has gone wrong?
I put some impromptu pictures of the install up and no one has said anything bad or picky???
This is not normal behaviour and I feel quite left out.... almost abandoned! For heavens sake chaps I'm a Electrical Trainee (well, 6mw)... where's all the bashing!!!
However, I can understand it if you all feel that I'm perfect

(PS.. no response from Stroma yet to my email.

They're all too busy bumping their gums about how to earth a back box.

 

[JOURNEYMAN]

Where are the piccies?

 

[JOURNEYMAN]

Cancel that...just found them!

 

[Midwest]

Here we go.

 

[JOURNEYMAN]

BG split load board eh? Somebody's been to Screwfix lol?

 

[Midwest]

BG split load board eh? Somebody's been to Screwfix lol?

He has a point hhd, what were you thinking.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

BG split load board eh? Somebody's been to Screwfix lol?

He has a point hhd, what were you thinking.

Better... starting to relax now

 

[Dave OCD]

Nothing wrong with BG boards ! That should liven things up a bit....

 

[JOURNEYMAN]

....Here we go....tin hat time lol!

 

[johnduffell]

Your first point, if you read item I) in below, and explain for me?

View attachment 43872

Your second point, its item 0.4 thats a bit gobbledygook.

Midwest very sorry about the delay I was away and didn't have time before leaving to open up the laptop and gather all the references. Normally I access the forum on my mobile phone. I hope it will be worth the delay!

I've looked at the online version so I could get the context of the previous page, and I think it's changed from your version.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...BR_PDF_AD_M1_2015_with_2016_amendments_V3.pdf
Using the new document, it's quite specific in the guidance now:

Looking at the actual regulation 5 in the legislation it does match your quote, but the context is essential here (see underline): The Building Regulations 2010 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/regulation/5
"there is a material change of use where there is a change in the purposes for which or the circumstances in which a building is used, so that after that change... ...the building, which contains at least one room for residential purposes, contains a greater or lesser number of such rooms than it did previously"
So it specifically only includes changes in what you're using the existing building, rather than changes resulting from building work.
Also the regulation itself excludes extensions specifically

Regarding 0.4, again it's changed in the latest version to 0.11

Looking at regulation 3 The Building Regulations 2010 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/regulation/3
"
(2) An alteration is material for the purposes of these Regulations if the work, or any part of it, would at any stage result—

(a)in a building or controlled service or fitting not complying with a relevant requirement where previously it did; or

(b)in a building or controlled service or fitting which before the work commenced did not comply with a relevant requirement, being more unsatisfactory in relation to such a requirement.
"
So a socket at 300mm doesn't comply, but it would be a material alteration if you moved it down to 200mm. Adding further sockets at an existing non compliant height, to me (non professional) would be a material alteration. However part M above specifically says that the building overall shouldn't be less compliant, so that clarifies matters somewhat.

Let me know if that is unclear - it's certainly clarified my understanding somewhat!

 

[johnduffell]

Just want to throw in a curved ball ... What about above counter sockets in kitchens .... They would struggle to comply with part m

Most kitchen sockets are within the appropriate range for habitable rooms (inc kitchens) in visitable dwellings for people with reduced mobility.
I suppose you don't consider that sockets at 1200 with a 600 depth unit in front meet the performance suggestion:

Thinking of older people I know, I think bending tends to be the tricky part rather than reaching forward, so perhaps the requirement isn't as far off as we'd expect?

Interestingly, for houses for people in wheelchairs, the requirements are far more strict and the whole kitchen is built around suitable requirements. The relevant part would be

I would expect the layout would be designed and provided by a designer for all the trades in that situation though.

 

[Octopus]

Let me know if that is unclear - it's certainly clarified my understanding somewhat!

I really don’t understand what you are doing on here John, but what I do know is that the building regs are far too open to interpretation so my advice stands to the op

If Stroma think it’s wrong, ask them to clarify in writing what Is wrong and why

But go ahead with the assessment as I would wager a large bet it won’t be raised.

 

[Midwest]

Midwest very sorry about the delay I was away and didn't have time before leaving to open up the laptop and gather all the references. Normally I access the forum on my mobile phone. I hope it will be worth the delay!

I've looked at the online version so I could get the context of the previous page, and I think it's changed from your version.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...BR_PDF_AD_M1_2015_with_2016_amendments_V3.pdf
Using the new document, it's quite specific in the guidance now:
View attachment 43910
Looking at the actual regulation 5 in the legislation it does match your quote, but the context is essential here (see underline): The Building Regulations 2010 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/regulation/5
"there is a material change of use where there is a change in the purposes for which or the circumstances in which a building is used, so that after that change... ...the building, which contains at least one room for residential purposes, contains a greater or lesser number of such rooms than it did previously"
So it specifically only includes changes in what you're using the existing building, rather than changes resulting from building work.
Also the regulation itself excludes extensions specifically
View attachment 43916


Regarding 0.4, again it's changed in the latest version to 0.11
View attachment 43911
Looking at regulation 3 The Building Regulations 2010 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/regulation/3
"
(2) An alteration is material for the purposes of these Regulations if the work, or any part of it, would at any stage result—

(a)in a building or controlled service or fitting not complying with a relevant requirement where previously it did; or

(b)in a building or controlled service or fitting which before the work commenced did not comply with a relevant requirement, being more unsatisfactory in relation to such a requirement.
"
So a socket at 300mm doesn't comply, but it would be a material alteration if you moved it down to 200mm. Adding further sockets at an existing non compliant height, to me (non professional) would be a material alteration. However part M above specifically says that the building overall shouldn't be less compliant, so that clarifies matters somewhat.

Let me know if that is unclear - it's certainly clarified my understanding somewhat!

Thanks for the reply & time.

I can't find that the definition of material change of use, has been altered (or removed) in the latest legislation (Reg 5; (i) the building, which contains at least one room for residential purposes, contains a greater or lesser number of such rooms than it did previously. Clearly relates to an extension or alteration of a building. However, Reg 6 Requirements relating to material change of use, does not list Reg 5 (i), to include M1.

So in the broad sense, an alteration or extension to an existing property, is a material alteration, but not all the Documents apply, including M1. Not commenting on Reg 3, so as not to confuse things!

However, the Guidance given in 0.4, is what appears to meander around IMO, although it does give one example of removing a downstairs toilet in an extension or alteration, of making things worse in terms of (M1) than before.

Enough said now?

 

[Midwest]

If Stroma think it’s wrong, ask them to clarify in writing what Is wrong and why

But go ahead with the assessment as I would wager a large bet it won’t be raised.

Agree, I would wager the written guidance coming back to hhd, will make no mention of the said faceplates heights.

 

[rolyberkin]

I would suggest a nice packet of Boaster biscuits and a freshly brewed Lavazza coffee, that way you are unlikely to get out of your front door!