Building regs necessary for chimney stock removal.?

[jamesc_1729]

....stack removal

I am about to have a chimney stack removed and was wondering whether building regs should be involved.

To be clear, this is the removal of the stack only, to just below the roofline, so nothing structural is occurring.

I am having this done because it solves a number of problems:

It reduces noise (wind and pigeon) into my main bedroom
The flashing is leaking which is damaging the upper rooms plaster
The pointing needs attention
I have no plans whatsoever to use the fireplaces below (but will keep them as it is a period house)
I use another room on the ground floor as my lounge with an open fire (served by a different chimney)
I do not think it will devalue my house.

Also I am not in a conservation area.

So I think my logic is sound and I had assumed no regs necessary (what would they check). I have however just read on a surveyors website that I am wrong.

Any opinions or people having done similar?

Edited by jamesc_1729 on Monday 10th June 20:59

[barryrs]

I don't believe you do.

Here's a handy reference http://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docu...

[Spudler]

jamesc_1729 said:

So I think my logic is sound and I had assumed no regs necessary (what would they check

Apart from it being safe?.....dunno.

You'll need to inform them.

[jamesc_1729]

Re-reading the surveyors website I am 50/50 - I think it is badly worded.

I will ring the bco tomorrow and ask the question.

[F1SERB]

The removal of a stack does not need permission
Carry on

[Spudler]

F1SERB said:

The removal of a stack does not need permission
Carry on

Ignore ^^^^^^

The removal of part or all of the stack WILL require BR approval.

OP, you must make an application to Building Control.

[TA14]

jamesc_1729 said:

To be clear, this is the removal of the stack only, to just below the roofline, so nothing structural is occurring.

When things go wrong with chimney stack removal it's usually damp related because vetilation has not been installed. I think that strictly you should make a BR application but I don't know whether they will be bothered. A bit like planning permission for tv ariels.

[Neil - YVM]

Spudler said:

F1SERB said:

The removal of a stack does not need permission
Carry on

Ignore ^^^^^^

The removal of part or all of the stack WILL require BR approval.

OP, you must make an application to Building Control.

You definitely need BR approval when removing a lower section, but if removing the stack and into the loft, there will prob not be any structural issues, so not 100% sure.

OP, a simple call to your local Building Control will confirm the need or not. Always best to do these thing correctly, including the appropriate approvals.

[megaphone]

I've taken one down and about to take another one down, for the same reasons as the OP. Never bothered with BR on the first one and won't for the next, in fact it didn't even enter my mind. The BR police have not come knocking. OP just get on with it and make sure it's done correctly.

[The Don of Croy]

My neighbour and I removed a redundant stack on our dwelling (shared stack) circa 1993.

Turns out it was a lot bigger when you're up there removing bricks than it looks from ground level...

My concern was planning - altering the look of the property ('character' victorian semi) but we carried on regardless. Sold it in 1999 - no issues that I know of.

100% worthwhile job. Still have the pot as a memento/planter.

[jamesc_1729]

I rang the bco this morning and was told that yes a notice would definitely have to be supplied. I queried this and asked what would need to be specified or inspected and was told the new roof covering would need to be approved. When I pointed out that this was at odds with the guidance that if <25% of a roof was being replaced then it wasn't noticeable I was put on hold whilst the officer got a second opinion.

After a chat with his colleagues he said that it definitely wouldn't be notifiable to bc.

I think this highlights the problems with this kind of thing - that it is very subjective. Why should some members of the public have to spend 00s more on building control fees dependant upon who they speak to.

[Spudler]

jamesc_1729 said:

dependant upon who they speak to.

Very much a case of who you speak to.
I've never even heard of the roof coming in to the equation before. It's purely a case of the remainder of the stack is left in a sound/stable condition.
It's even worse when they come on site and try and enforce their own variation of a rule.
Try arguing with 'em
If it was a major undertaking I'd suggest getting the decision in writing but not in your case.

[Neil - YVM]

James, glad you did the sensible thing and spoke to them to get clarification. Even if they did give muddled advice, it's better to know than just do it and hope.