Site next door being developed, access to our wall?

[Equus]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

We believe (and we'll be pulling out the deeds when we get a mo, thanks again to Equus for apt advice) that the owners of the site are responsible for maintaining 'their' side of the wall until the houses are sold, so why would we not push them to meet this obligation (if it is the case)

You've misunderstood my advice, if you believe that.

If the wall is shared responsibility (not T-marked) then the whole of the responsibility is shared. Certainly, if trees/shrubs damage the wall, it is the responsibility of whichever landowner's side they are growing on (and that's the case regardless of who 'owns' the fence or wall). Beyond that, maintenance costs and responsibilities (rebuilding, pointing etc.) are directly shared 50/50. It's not a matter of each landowner rebuilding his side of the wall independently... obviously, that would be a nonsensical impossibility.

I'm assuming there was no building beyond your house when your terrace was originally built? ISTR that the building previously occupying the site next door was a social club of much later construction? In which case, it may also be fair to assume that your boundary wall was built as part of your terrace, and belongs entirely to you. Back then, it was still commonplace to T-mark the boundaries, though, so it may be clear on the deeds (these days we tend to use shared boundaries unless there's a specific reason not to).

Edited by Equus on Saturday 12th June 12:47

[Equus]

bennno said:

Is Yeti a euphemism?

[greygoose]

Equus said:

They will also take Health and Safety very seriously, and if you enter the site without full PPE and a valid CSCS card, you'll be politely but very firmly asked to leave right now.

But put the bacon sandwiches down first....

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Equus said:

I tend to agree with ipy that it's a bit... odd.

Depending on how hard the developer hits the project, you may also be in for a bit of a shock over how things work on this sort of development.

It's not going to be one old boy leaning on his shovel while his lad does all the work. It's not a domestic extension.

More likely a groundworks contractor comes in and blitzes the site, then a site manager takes over coordinating various direct trades and subcontractors working from a site cabin in a secure compound. The site itself will be fully secured with Heras fencing (so you might have to lob the bacon butties over the top; or maybe fly them in by drone).

There will be several trades on site, most of the time, and they will all be working. The building site is their place of work. The idea is to get it built and sold as fast as possible, so that the money tied up in it can be moved on to the next project.

You will be viewed as .. eccentric... at best, if you start wandering about the site offering bacon butties to all and sundry.

They will also take Health and Safety very seriously, and if you enter the site without full PPE and a valid CSCS card, you'll be politely but very firmly asked to leave right now.

OK, I'll skip offering any. I have always offered tradesmen working on any of my or our homes, feeling that a fed worker is a happy and therefore productive worker. I guess offering neighbouring workers the same is a step too far.

It is the first time that either of us have had a neighbouring development built, so yes, what to expect may come as a surprise. Credit us with some intelligence though that we understand it won't be 'one old boy leaning on his shovel while his lad does all the work'
Also remember, this is your day job, I'd hope you do know such processes inside out.

[Equus]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

I have always offered tradesmen working on any of my or our homes, feeling that a fed worker is a happy and therefore productive worker. I guess offering neighbouring workers the same is a step too far.

They will (as a legal requirement) have their own welfare facilities on site. We even provide them with toilets, these days, so that they don't have to crap over the neighbour's walls.

Hell, we even have to provide them with free sun-screen.

Health and Safety gone mad, obviously...

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

Also remember, this is your day job...

Actually, it's not. I design them - I don't build or site manage them (though obviously I've worked with those who do).

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Equus said:

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

We believe (and we'll be pulling out the deeds when we get a mo, thanks again to Equus for apt advice) that the owners of the site are responsible for maintaining 'their' side of the wall until the houses are sold, so why would we not push them to meet this obligation (if it is the case)

You've misunderstood my advice, if you believe that.

If the wall is shared responsibility (not T-marked) then the [/i]whole[/i] of the responsibility is shared. Certainly, if trees/shrubs damage the wall, it is the responsibility of whichever landowner's side they are growing on (and that's the case regardless of who 'owns' the fence or wall). Beyond that, maintenance costs and responsibilities (rebuilding, pointing etc.) are directly shared 50/50. It's not a matter of each landowner rebuilding his side of the wall independently... obviously, that would be a nonsensical impossibility.

I'm assuming there was no building beyond your house when your terrace was originally built? ISTR that the building previously occupying the site next door was a social club of much later construction? In which case, it may also be fair to assume that your boundary wall was built as part of your terrace, and belongs entirely to you. Back then, it was still commonplace to T-mark the boundaries, though, so it may be clear on the deeds (these days we tend to use shared boundaries unless there's a specific reason not to).

Your memory serves you correctly, the social club was built at a much later date. Ours is the first house in to the settlement.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Equus said:

Actually, it's not. I design them - I don't build or site manage them (though obviously I've worked with those who do).

OK, your sector was what I was trying to get at. I wasn't implying that you're the old boy leaning on his shovel or the lad doing all the work.

[Equus]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

OK, your sector was what I was trying to get at. I wasn't implying that you're the old boy leaning on his shovel or the lad doing all the work.

And obviously what I'm getting at is the fact that the modern building industry isn't something out of Trumpton or Bob The Builder (at least once you get away from jobbing builders working on domestic extensions).

Wandering onto site on any decent-sized building project and offering bacon butties all round is very nearly as weird as doing the same thing at a haulage yard or something, if you happen to live next door to one of those.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Equus said:

Wandering onto site on any decent-sized building project and offering bacon butties all round is very nearly as weird as doing the same thing at a haulage yard or something, if you happen to live next door to one of those.

Cut me a bit of slack here, I've acknowledged this point. From now on I'll only offer them tradesmen working on our property.

[RichFN2]

I'm not somebody in the trade but having lived in a new build with various small developments being build around it over the years and now a supermarket, I think you may be in for a shock when the development takes place compared to what you were expecting.

I didn't find your bacon butty comment as odd as some but it simply won't be able to happen, some years ago when this would have been done by a few local family builders and some labourers yes but now it seems to be throw as much manpower and heavy machinery at it to get it done as quickly as possible.

Also without wanting to alarm you too much but be prepared for a fair amount of noise. Not just from the construction work but also from the lorries delivering and collecting all the equipment, cabins and materials. Also all the tipper lorries to collect soil and drop off literally tons of rubble/rock/sand.

The current site by me is generally noisy from 7am until 6pm, doesn't bother me as I'm up for work and can block it out but earplugs are needed on a day off. Also be prepared for your house to physically shake at times

[Rob.]

Equus said:

They will also take Health and Safety very seriously, and if you enter the site without full PPE and a valid CSCS card, you'll be politely but very firmly asked to leave right now.

I was with you right up until this bit. I work in heavy civils but have done my fair share of house building groundworks. Health and safety is not something many house builders take very seriously! It's more likely to be shorts, boots, hi-viz vest and not much else.

[kingBadger]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

Cut me a bit of slack here, I've acknowledged this point. From now on I'll only offer them tradesmen working on our property.

I hope it goes well for you though, difficult to not get stressed by these jobs. Also, just saying, but if you'd like to pop round with a bacon sarnie for me it would be much appreciated. Crispy-ish bacon but not overdone, buttered white bread and no crusts, ketchup. Oh and a cup of tea as well please. (-:

[anonymous-user]

I’d also take comments such as those from the auction guy, “knowing how they do things, says it's unlikely they'll fence the wall in”, with a very large pinch of salt.

IMHO, he’s not going to tell you anything you don’t want to hear.

Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

at some of the comments on this thread, Fermit always brings them out!

Speaking on the other side-I am both a jobbing builder, project manager and property developer depending on which project I’m on at which time.

Without fail, the first thing I do is go and introduce myself to the neighbours and try and put any concerns to bed good and early.

If nothing else, I can mark someone’s card as a st stirrer and with preempt their strike to get them onside.

Above all else, I want an easy job and happy neighbours.

Not that easy when your bricklayer has taken off with one of the neighbours wives mind you but these things are sent to try us (yes that really happened, a couple of weeks before a job was due to start!).

I’m pleased to say on the latest development, a couple of the neighbours have asked if I wouldn’t like to move in myself instead of selling as the village has taken a shine to me (give it time, I’ve only got the slab in just yet)!

On the flip side, I’ve got one (un-metred) neighbour giving me a fresh water supply to site until the water board pull their finger out and another took all the spare spoil and soil from the site for nowt. Look after your neighbours and they’ll look after you-works both ways

Edited by LaurasOtherHalf on Saturday 12th June 17:55

[Gargamel]

Equus said:

bennno said:

Is Yeti a euphemism?

Wouldn’t mind giving her Yeti a quick hose down.

[Equus]

Rob. said:

I was with you right up until this bit. I work in heavy civils but have done my fair share of house building groundworks. Health and safety is not something many house builders take very seriously! It's more likely to be shorts, boots, hi-viz vest and not much else.

They you're working with (or for) the wrong housebuilders.

I once got a bking from the Big Boss because he'd seen me doing an initial site appraisal on a site in the Forest of Dean - basically walking across an open field in the countryside - without wearing full PPE.

We took it very seriously indeed - they wouldn't even let me (their Design and Technical Director, carrying a 'Professional' level CSCS card) onto a an active site without an induction by the Site Manager. Admittedly that usually amounted to: 'That's the compound layout and site traffic management plan; you'll know 'cos you drew it. Nothing else you need to know. Sign here.'

You're right - smaller housebuilders will be more lax, but their Site Manager would still deserve the sack if he allowed a member of the public to walk onto the site waving bacon butties around. If there was an accident, the HSE would tear him a new ahole.

[fourstardan]

Who would honestly want to live on a plot of houses stacked in like that let alone next to it?

Good luck with the wall..sounds like the developer wants to make as much profit as possible.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

kingBadger said:

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

Cut me a bit of slack here, I've acknowledged this point. From now on I'll only offer them tradesmen working on our property.

I hope it goes well for you though, difficult to not get stressed by these jobs. Also, just saying, but if you'd like to pop round with a bacon sarnie for me it would be much appreciated. Crispy-ish bacon but not overdone, buttered white bread and no crusts, ketchup. Oh and a cup of tea as well please. (-:

Well if you're ever passing give us a knock and I'll get the frying pan out. Just don't expect any of that red sugar sauce, bacon requires HP, you heathen

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

fourstardan said:

Who would honestly want to live on a plot of houses stacked in like that let alone next to it?

Have you seen the view from our house? 22 miles of open countryside, with a copse in the foreground having tawny and barn owls living within making lovely noises. It's not all bad.

[Equus]

fourstardan said:

Who would honestly want to live on a plot of houses stacked in like that let alone next to it?

It does have all the hallmarks of affordable housing (not least because splitting the terraces up by a metre usually adds a comfortable 5 figure sum to the value of what would currently be the mid-terrace properties, if you're selling them as open market... though perhaps not in Nottinghamshire). The lack of garages is another indicator.

...But having checked the Planning Approval, surprisingly, it's not. They must just be aiming to sell them at bargain-basement prices. Someone will buy anything, if it's cheap enough, and terraces with no garages will make ideal BTL's.

Interestingly, the Officer Report records that County Highways requested Conditions to deal with construction impacts (details of site compound, wheel wash facilities etc.), but for some reason these were not implemented on the approval.

The Case Officer also noted that the surface water drainage proposals were inadequate and stated that a Condition would be necessary to require submission of a scheme of surface water disposal, but then failed to impose any such condition, so it just looks like sloppy Planning work.

The proposed elevations make my teeth itch.