Party Wall - loading of foundations.

['enry]

Hello.

A neighbour is suspending the rear extension (removing ground floor walls) of a Victorian house on beams, onto a lintel in our party wall. This is obviously a heavy load.

The engineer calcs show a foundation 570mm wide is needed. It is assumed the foundation is 600mm, so is structurally okay.

My question is:

the neighbour is 'maxing out' the viable load on the foundation, meaning in future I could not put additional load on the wall--but do neighbours have an equal right to loading. I.e., should the structural engineer really double the considered additional load, to be fair?

A second related question is:

must the lintels used as pad stones and/or the beams not cross the party wall centre line? It is the corner of a building, so where i would logically want to put a pad stone too (to my side of the centre). Being a Victorian House the party wall is solid.

 

[motorbiking]

what notices were you served and what have you agreed to?

 

[jeds]

All sounds a bit vague. For a start you can't assume a Victorian foundation is 600mm. People like to think the Vic's were all brilliant builders and engineers but they weren't. They put up some very dodgy stuff back then. Personally I always avoid loading the party wall in your circumstances. Either a pier your side or a column onto a pad would be preferable. Also, it sounds like they intend taking out the whole of the rear wall right up to the party wall, which is usually a no-no in adjoined houses. For exactly the reason you say - if the adjoined neighbour did the same thing it could destabilise the whole deal. I think you need more detail and a party wall notice to allow you to get the details properly checked out.

 

[^woody^]

The engineer is designing for the neighbour not you, and not for some hypothetical work you may or may not do in the future.

If you want him to, then instruct him to and pay your share.

The neighbour's beam should bear on his half of the wall only.

 

['enry]

Thanks for replies.

I have been served a Party Wall Notice. Neighbour and I have separate surveyors. My surveyor is not answering these questions, and I am concerned he will agree to the work and make a decision without answering.

Yes, engineer is being paid by neighbour--but a Party Wall is shared property. My point is, each neighbour surely has an 'equal right' to loading. So, not one loading it so much the other cannot later add load.

Yes, it is the entire rear wall being removed, but this has been approved by building regs, i assume. Certainly, it has planning permission.

 

[jeds]

Yes, it is the entire rear wall being removed, but this has been approved by building regs, i assume. Certainly, it has planning permission.

The system is crap so it can't be ruled out completely but I reckon this situation is not approved in 95% of cases. If I were you I would check and also make sure you aren't confusing planning and building regs - which are different animals.

 

[motorbiking]

planning and building control will not safeguard your rights.

it's possible to get planning and building control approval on land you don't own.

if you don't agree to modify the party wall. you retain your right to a future remedy. The idea of an independent support column seems sensible.

 

[^woody^]

My point is, each neighbour surely has an 'equal right' to loading. So, not one loading it so much the other cannot later add load.

No, each neighbour has an equal right to use the party wall or upgrade it as necessary.

When you come to do whatever you want to do, you might find that the wall and foundation is suitable. If its not you have the right to upgrade the wall.

 

['enry]

To Woody:
That is what I am saying. Not suggesting the neighbour may not build on the party wall, I am asking surely, as it is shared property, we both have an equal right to load it similarly. If 'first in' fully loads it, that is not equally sharing.

To Jeds:
To reiterate, building regs I assume has been obtained; I know planning has, because i have the approval notice with the drawings.
The issue does not really touch on regs or planning--it is about shared property. Similarly, the engineer calcs are sufficient for regs in that the beams are the right size, etc.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Jeez what an awkward sod, are you actually expecting to be applying any additional loads onto the wall from your side?

 

[^woody^]

we both have an equal right to load it similarly

Wtf? You expect the neighbour to ask you what you might want to do at some point in the future, and then work out what half the load might be and then come up with a scheme that suits you?

 

[tony1851]

If the neighbour is removing the entire rear wall, hasn't their SE detailed a goal-post frame, rather than just sticking a beam into the walls each side? What about lateral stability?

 

['enry]

To Woody
Look, let's say as an example the wall can carry a maximum 5 tonnes the lintel length. Say it presently carries two. Three is "available/in reserve". The neighbour then proposes to load it with three. What I expect is as a shared wall their scheme would load it with 1.5 tonnes, not three. I do not expect them to second guess what I might do, or produce sort of scheme for me. Say it was a shared driveway with space for four cars. If they parked caravans in three of the spaces that would not be "their fair share".

So, yes, I do expect them to limit the loading to half the spare capacity. If we shared a bag a chips and I ate them all would you be pleased?

Further, the load is almost to the maximum of a nice new concrete foundation that definitely would be 600mm. Not a crumbly 100 year old of unknown width--the surveyor says would be "too intrusive" to look.

To Tony 1851
No, no lateral bracing. The back of the house carried on a beam onto two lintels in 100mm walls. No piers. No return left on wall. Probably, the only thing keeping the thing going sideways is my back wall. No goal frame, no box frame. Engineer surely not been on site, because he thinks wall is 225mm solid (drawing developer gave him). But, as I said, they doubtless have regs approved.

 

['enry]

To freddy...

Not sure if you write in jest. Of course I would like the option of also being able to put load on the wall.

 

[^woody^]

Look, let's say as an example the wall can carry a maximum 5 tonnes the lintel length. Say it presently carries two. Three is "available/in reserve". The neighbour then proposes to load it with three. What I expect is as a shared wall their scheme would load it with 1.5 tonnes, not three

Are you saying that they can't have a treble wardrobe and a large dresser in case it puts more than their "fair share" of load on to the party wall compared with your double wardrobe and couple of bedside cabinets?