Volume 3 Issue 2

Publishers:Ghyll House Publishing LtdATSS HouseStation Road EastStowmarketSuffolkIP14 1RQ

Tel: 01449 677500Fax: 01449 770028E-mail: [email protected]

Subscriptions - free to members of theRDBANon-members UK: £20.00Non-members Overseas: £25.00

Advertising SalesChris HutchinsonTel: 01449 677500Fax: 01449 770028

Editor: Tony HutchinsonNational SecretaryRural Design and Building AssociationATSS HouseStation Road EastStowmarketSuffolkIP14 1RQ

Tel: 01449 676049Fax: 01449 770028Email: [email protected]

Cover: Building and Equipment by R.E.building Ltd, at High Ash farm, Norfolk

Countryside Building has been carefullyprepared but articles are published withoutresponsibility on the part of the publishersor authors for loss occasioned to anyperson acting or refraining from action asa result of any view, information or adviceincluded therein. The articles published donot necessarily reflect the opinions of theRural Design and Building Association.The publishers do not accept anyresponsibility for claims made byadvertisers

VOLUME 3 ISSUE 21 SECRETARY S COLUMN 2 AMENDMENTS TO MEMBER S DIRECTORY 2 DIARY DATES 6 SOME HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECTS IN DESIGN PROCUREMENT 11 RABDF DAIRY EVENT 18/19TH SEPTEMBER 2002 12 CONTRACT ALTERNATIVES AND THE ELEMENT OF TRUST 13 PROTECTED SPECIES PLANNING CHANGES AND CASE

STUDIES 15 RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTIES IN PLANNING ISSUES. 17 PRACTICAL WAYS OF ACHIEVING GOOD VENTILATION 19 TECHNICAL UPDATE END NOVEMBER 2002 21 CHANGES TO THE REGULATIONS CONCERNING ASBESTOS CONTAINING PRODUCTS 30 ZERO% TO 17.5%. TAKE YOUR PICK OF VAT CHARGES 31 THE ILLUMINATION OF AN INDOOR OR OUTDOOR

RIDING ARENA 34 LETTERS 36 WHEN DOES DEVELOPMENT NEED PLANNING

PERMISSION? 37 CSCS/BCSA SKILLS CARDS FOR STEEL ERECTORS 42 AGRICULTURAL BUILDING SHOW44 THE USE OF HOT ROLLED ASPHALT (HRA) IN

AGRICULTURAL FORAGE SILOS 47 RDBA / SAC SPRING CONFERENCE 2003

Main Features in our next issue� The Agricultural Building Show� Planning issues� Updated advice on working with asbestos cement products� Revised Technical Update� RDBA News, Branch News, Diary Dates, Membership changes,

Secretary’s Column� The Bleasdale Column� That was the year that was� VAT issues.

In Association with the

RDBARURAL DESIGN AND BUILDING ASSOCIATION

Countryside Building 1

Countryside Building Contents Secretaries column

Secretary’s ColumnThis last year has been both productive and interesting, the increase in membership hascontinued, the Construction Group has gone from strength to strength and both nationallyand in the branches there have been a large number of very successful visits, events andmeetings. One of my regrets is that pressure of work did not allow me to attend as many ofthem as I would have liked. It can be seen from the diary dates page there are plenty ofexciting events already planned for next year. I am sure that next year’s Spring Conference being held in conjunction with the ScottishAgricultural Conference will be a great success as will the Agricultural Building Show. Thisimportant show is a very good way of ‘showcasing’ the RDBA and so we must ensure thatwe make the most of it by taking space to promote our products and services and byattending on the day.The RDBA and its Construction Group is more and more being recognised as anAssociation that can talk for the agricultural building industry, with representation on BSIcommittees, the Advisory Committee for Roofwork, the Working Well Together Campaign,ad hock groups that have looked at such things as working farm buildings coming underBuilding Control, etc. This is a very important part of the Association’s workload, which wemust find the resources to continue. The number of regulation changes that will affect ourworking lives is growing all the time, with a list of some of them on page 19 this is anindication of the problem that small companies face in trying to keep up to date with this raftof regulation changes.On a happier note, Jeannie and I wish you all a happy Christmas, a prosperous 2003 andlook forward to meeting many of you next year at the ABS and the Spring Conference.


Diary Dates, AmmendmentsDiary Dates Early Spring 2003: The Yorkshire Branch are organising a seminar on the recent changes to the asbestos regulations,

which includes the new duty to manage asbestos. Contact David Marston the Yorkshire branch secretary for more information on 01943 874564

April 2003 Probable Yorkshire Branch visit to farm buildings in upper Wharfdale, which will possibly include sheephandling facilities and initiatives by the Environment Agency in Upper Wharfdale. Contact David Marston the Yorkshire branch secretary for more information on 01943 874564

8th April 2003 Construction Group Meeting and dinner based at Harper Adams College, Newport, Shropshire. More details from the Secretary Tony Hutchinson 01449 676049

9th April 2003 The Agricultural Building Show based at Harper Adams College, Newport Shropshire, see page 42 For more details.

23, 24 & 25th April 2003: The RDBA and SAC Spring Conference 2003 based in Dumfries and the RDBA National AGM, see page … for more details. More details from the National Secretary 01449 676049

19th to 22nd June 2003: The Royal Highland Show where we will be taking a stand. Anyone wanting to promote their products or services should contact the Secretary Tony Hutchinson on 01449 676049

24th June 2003 Provisional date for visit to Alnwick Castle water garden by the Yorkshire Branch. Contact David Marston the Yorkshire branch secretary for more information on 01943 874564

29th June to 2nd July: The Royal Show where we will be taking a stand. Anyone wanting to promote their products or services should contact the Secretary Tony Hutchinson on 01449 676049

1st July 2003 17.00 Construction Group Meeting at the Royal Show. More details from the Secretary Tony Hutchinson 01449 676049

21st to 24th July 2003: The Royal Welsh Show where we will be taking a stand. Anyone wanting to promote their products or services should contact the Secretary Tony Hutchinson on 01449 676049

10th Sept 2003: 10.00am Construction Group Meeting, Corus Products, Ammanford to include a tour of their new composite panel production facility.

17 & 18th Sept 2003: The European Dairy Event where we will be taking a stand. Anyone wanting to promote their products or services should contact the Secretary Tony Hutchinson on 01449 676049

October 2003: Planned Yorkshire Branch visit to dairy farms on the Savile Estate. Contact David Marston the Yorkshire branch secretary for more information on 01943 874564

Spring 2004: Possible Yorkshire Branch visit to a Rotary goat milking parlour and a dairy unit. Contact David Marston the Yorkshire branch secretary for more information on 01943 874564

June 2004: Possible Yorkshire Branch visit to the Chatsworth Estate. Contact David Marston the Yorkshire branch secretary for more information on 01943 874564

Amendments to Member sDirectory

AmendmentsMr P Blackwell, Change address to Bredy, Louds Mill, StGeorges Road, Dorchester, Dorset, DT1 1PH, Phone 01305267151, Fax 01305 251780Mr D Coates, He will be out of the country until October 2004with no UK address, so any post for him should be sent to theNational Secretary for safe keeping.Mr A J Griffiths, change company name to A J GriffithsEngineering Ltd, address and phone as before.Mr C D Hiscox, Change company name to Hereford AbrasivesLtdMr J Kerr, Change address to Letherinham, Woodbridge,Suffolk, IP13 7RAMr N J Kirkman-Wood, Change address to Holly House, 10Rowan Walk, Bromley, Kent BR2 8QN, Phone: 01689 858 213Mr J Lovegrove-Fielden, change company name to BalfoursMr J W Wright, change address to17/19 Winnington StreetNorthwich Cheshire CW8 1AQ

AdditionsMr Mark Hopkins, Corporate, Construction Group, ChilternsDaimler Chrysler UK Ltd, Tongwell, Milton Keynes, Bucks,MK15 8BAPhone: 01908 245761, Fax: 01908 245107, E-mail:[email protected] of Mercedes-Benz UnimogMr A Peggie, Individual, ScotlandCulmore Design, 33 Burghlee Terrace, Loanhead, Midlothian,EH20 9BPPhone: 0131 4404576, Fax: 0131 4404576, E-mail: [email protected] Design, land and buildings surveys, computeriseddesign, farming, domestic, industrial, farm waste managementadvice, rural buildings specialist.

DeletionsMr I Parsons LVO FRICS, Duchy of Lancaster Estate, Forton,Lancashire, PR3 0ADMR J D Tremlett, North Kent Farms, Ballington Manor Wylye,Wiltshire BA12 0QFMr R Ewbank, 10 Woodfield Road, Ealing, London, W5 1SLMr D Tomkins, Yorkshire Sheeting Supplies Ltd, GeorgeCayley Drive, Clifton Common, Yorkshire, YO30 4XE


Construction Groupmeeting 3rd September2002

Works visit to Robinsons Construction,Derbyand Unimog Demonstration

There was an excel lent at tendance at theConstruct ion Group meet ing held, by generousinvitation, at Robinson Construction’s works in Derby.After the meeting, where the subjects of training andtraining board levies, composite panels and buildinginsurance, market research and the Agr icul tura lBui ld ing Show, were d iscussed, the membersattending were divided up into four groups for a tour ofthe steel fabrication works.

The product ion l ine is being modernised and upgraded; at present they produce on average 280tonnes of steel per week, once the work is completedthis wil l increase to approximately 450 tonnes perweek, which wil l ensure that Robinson Constructionremain as one of the larges st ructura l s teelmanufacturers in the Country.Whilst this massive modernisation programme wasgoing ahead, they of course have to keep theirproduction l ines running eff iciently and on time, toensure that they do not loose orders or customers.This diff icult and complicated task, that requires indepth organisation and planning is being handled well

with l i t t le disruption to their production.

We were shown the complete production process fromthe computer design of the buildings, through to thefinished steel being taken to the loading bays anddirectly on to trai lers for delivery to site.

All the steel comes in through one opening, where it iscut to length before passing on to the di fferentproduct ion l ines dependant on the processingrequired. This wil l st i l l be the case even when theproduction has been increased. This means that stockcontrol has to be of the highest order, they use ‘ just intime’ stock and ordering techniques that rely on aclose and reliable relationship with the roll ing mil ls, toensure that the daily deliveries of steel contain thecorrect mix.

As you can imagine with this very large production ofsteel i t is crit ical that the l iaison with sites is closeand that delivery dates are well planned and kept to,as once manufactured the steel is loaded directly onto trai lers and despatched to site.

Robinson’s staff were very open and answered thelarge number of detailed technical questions, rangingfrom information required on the 3D design softwareand the l inkage to production, to detailed informationon the working of particular machines used in certainproduction processes.Al l members who attended found the tour to beextremely useful and interesting and are hopeful thatwe wil l be invited back once the extension has beencompleted to see the new facil i t ies, which wil l nodoubt be the most up to date and eff icient in the UK.

Unimog Demonstration

Construction Group

Part of the group discussing the production.

Where the steel enters the factory and is cut to length.

Part of the group being shown Robinsons’s production.

A Unimog onsite with a trailer.


Construction Group

Following the tour we all enjoyed a lovely buffet lunchsupplied by Daimler Chrysler.

Daimler Chrysler are new members of the RDBA andthe Construct ion Group, who fol lowing the lunchprovided the group with information on their Unimogall terrain vehicle. They advised that the Unimog is avery powerful, f lexible and fully all terrain vehicle withthe abil i ty to have different implements mounted on it.They gave examples of mowers, branch cut ters,chippers, sweepers etc. As l i ft ing machines wererequired dur ing the erect ion of most agr icul turalbuildings, for erecting steel work, l i ft ing materials tothe roof, as well as l i ft ing man baskets for men to worksafely at height, the Unimog, with the correct machinemounted on it, is a cost effective way of providing thiscapabil i ty.

Most cranes or other power equipment used forworking at height need to be taken to sites on a low-loader, but the Unimog as well as being at homeworking on a muddy agricultural building site is just athome on a motorway. It can even have a trai lerattached to carry extra equipment.

The par ty then moved outs ide to watch ademonstration of a Unimog with an elevating platformmounted on the rear, from which it was obvious thatthe Unimog made a very stable and versati le platformfor any machinery attached to it.

All the members who attended the visit to RobinsonConstruction and the demonstration of the Unimogfound it to be an interesting and informative day andso following a vote of thanks to both Robinsons andDaimler Chrysler. The meeting split up.

Some of the group discussing the Unimog, (jib on left).

The Unimog with crane mounted on rear.

Reader Enquiry 45

Reader Enquiry 30


Reader Enquiry 7 Reader Enquiry 8



Some Healthand Safetyaspects inDesignProcurement

By David McPhersonBuilding Design Consultant and Planning SupervisorSAC, AYR

We all know there are too many fatalities and major injuries inthe Construction Industry and some radical reform is needed ifwe are to make it a safer industry to work in.

In the results of a Labour Force Survey commissioned by theHSE to show fatal and non-fatal accidents within variousindustries, Construction, predictably, came fourth in theleague. Surprisingly, Agriculture came second. As a Designerworking predominantly in agriculture and the rural buildingssector, I found these results to be of great concern.

In August of this year the HSE published a consultationdocument ‘Revitalising Health and Safety in Construction’. Itexamines ways in which the Construction Industry can beimproved, and it poses some very searching questions.Clients, Contractors, Designers and Planning Supervisors allcome under scrutiny.Clients are, by far, in the strongest position to influence healthand safety. They can lead by example and set the tone for aproject from day one. Too few Clients, however, realise theimportance of health and safety. They perceive this to be anissue where the Contractor has overall liability andresponsibility. Some, allegedly, are unwilling to pay directly orindirectly for health and safety as they see this as anunnecessary overhead. Coupled to this are accusations thattoo many Clients are willing to pay cash in hand for buildingwork by employing casual labour. Statistics show that 30% offatal injuries to workers is to the self-employed.

Some Clients, particularly those in the agriculture and ruralbusiness sector, are reluctant to employ Designers and otherprofessionals from the inception to the completion of projects.Designers are often called upon to provide partial services. Isthis because Clients feel they have the time and experience toadminister contracts and supervise works on site? Or is itbecause they are unwilling to pay for design services, as theydo not see this as value for money?

Clients should be encouraged to employ Designers and otherprofessionals for the duration of a contract. From a health and

safety aspect, Designers should understand the complexitiesof their designs better than anyone else. Experience showsthat a well planned and managed project, whether large orsmall, is a safe and efficient project. Clients must allowsufficient time for proper planning and execution of contractsas tight schedules, timetables and programmes can result instressful situations leading ultimately to costly mistakes andaccidents.Designers are in a unique position to reduce the risks thatarise during construction work and they also have a key role toplay in CDM. As designs develop from the initial conceptthrough to detail design and specifications, Designers from alldisciplines can make a significant contribution by identifyingand eliminating hazards, and reducing the remaining risks.Designers’ earliest decisions can fundamentally affectconstruction health and safety, so it is vital to address thisissue right from the very start.

Designers should not produce designs that cannot beconstructed safely. Where risks remain, Designers mustprovide adequate information to ensure that other Designers,the Planning Supervisor and Contractors are made aware ofthem and can take account of them. Notes on drawings are agood way to convey health and safety information as these areimmediately available to those carrying out the work and theycan refer to other documents if more information is needed.They can also be annotated to keep them up to date.

Designers do not need to mention every hazard as this onlyobscures significant issues, but they do need to point outsignificant hazards. In order to identify significant hazards,Designers must understand how their designs can be built. Sowhat are significant hazards? Examples of some significanthazards are shown below:

� Hazards that could cause multiple fatalities to the public (the use of a crane close to a busy roadway).� Temporary works required to ensure stability

during construction (bracing during erection of a steel portal framed building).

� Hazardous or flammable substances specified in the design (fibreglass wall finishes or epoxy floor finishes in a parlour).

� Specific problems and possible solutions (positioning the bulk tank in the dairy before constructing perimeter walling).

� Structures that create particular access problems (access to a protected open ridge for maintenance purposes).� Heavy or awkward prefabricated elements likely to create risks in handling (pre-cast concrete slats,

channels or wall panels).

CDM requires Clients to appoint a Planning Supervisor assoon as they are in a position to judge the competence andresources needed for a proposed project. The Regulationsinfer that this needs to be at or before the start of design work.It is suggested in the HSE document ‘Revitalising Health andSafety in Construction’ that Planning Supervisors have anunfortunate title. They do not have a direct ‘planning’ input andthey do not ‘supervise’ health and safety on site. Their primaryfunction is to co-ordinate health and safety aspects during thedesign process. However, all those with duties under CDMmust satisfy themselves that those they engage or appoint arecompetent and have sufficient resources. This applies toClients, Designers, the Planning Supervisor and Contractorsas it is equally important that everyone has the necessarytraining, knowledge, experience and skills needed for work.

As previously mentioned, 30% of the fatal injuries to workers in

Technical

Reader Enquiry 5


the Construction Industry is to the self-employed. It is allegedthat Contractors often use the self-employed rather thanemployees to avoid the costs of training, welfare and safety.Too many Contractors make their employees and othersunder their control take unnecessary risks and ultimatelyendanger lives.

The HSE are keen to involve the Contractor as early aspossible in the design process. They have a valuablecontribution to make and have the practical knowledge andexperience needed to construct buildings safely. But how dowe achieve this and how do we involve the Contractor at thedesign stage? How many Contractors (especially those in theagricultural and rural buildings sector) would be willing tocontribute to the design stage if they have not been awardedthe contract? Do we appoint Contractors, not based oncompetitiveness or monetary values, but on competence andtrack records regarding health and safety?

The Strategic Forum for Construction recently published adocument entitled ‘Accelerating Change’. In it, the HSE arerequested to include in their Approved Code of Practicereference to a system of ‘gateways’. At each gateway, thereshould be a checklist for assessing the relevant health andsafety risks associated with critical stages in the planning anddesign process. At each stage, an integrated team should berequired to certify that they have, as a team, considered healthand safety risks in order to ensure that the building will be safeto build and safe to maintain and operate. It is inferred that oneof the aims behind this ‘gateway process’ is to ensure thatDesigners take Contractors practical knowledge of the buildingprocess into account at the earliest possible stage.

Planning Supervisors are normally responsible for preparingthe Pre-Construction Stage or Pre-Tender Stage Health andSafety Plan. They are also responsible for ensuring that theHealth and Safety File is prepared and delivered to the Clientat the end of the contract. Both are important documents. ThePre-Construction or Pre-Tender Plan should address onlysignificant hazards that a competent Contractor cannot beexpected to reasonably identify. The Health and Safety File,however, can provide vital information needed for furtherconstruction work which can include cleaning, maintenance,alterations and even the eventual demolition of a building orstructure. Information contained in the file is essential to thosedoing the work, as it alerts them to the risks and helps themdecide how to work safely. The Health and Safety File can alsoprovide significant benefits to Clients by minimising the cost offuture work.

Should basic or fundamental health and safety matters beconsidered by Building Control? Personally, I feel that healthand safety legislation should remain a separate issue. IfBuilding Control were to consider health and safety as part ofa Building Warrant application, this would slow up what isalready a sometimes lengthy and complicated process.Building Control are also inadequately resourced to performsuch a task. However, basic questions such as ‘Do the CDMRegulations apply?’, ‘Who is acting as Planning Supervisor?’and ‘Has the HSE been notified?’ as part of the applicationprocess would help to ensure that fundamental health andsafety issues were being addressed by Clients, Designers andContractors at an early date!

David McPhersonBuilding Design Consultant and Planning SupervisorSACFRBDBuilding Design ServicesAuchincruiveAYR

Technical

Reader Enquiry 34

Reader Enquiry 23


Reader Enquiry 1

Reader Enquiry 27


Reader Enquiry 11

Reader Enquiry 13

Reader Enquiry 14Reader Enquiry 15

Reader Enquiry 22

To promote your products or services to our 20,000 readers, contact Chris on 01449 677500


PROTECTING THECOASTLINE

Yorkshire Branch Event - 29 October 2002

The coastline is under pressure from many sources. This eventwas planned to show how three organisations are playing theirpart in improving, or at least alleviating, the situation. The daywas planned when one Committee Member with a long memorydescribed how the Branch had seen a large-scale model in Hullthat demonstrated coastal erosion. The opportunity arose tovisit a new water treatment works, so it was decided to have afull day on the coast.The day started with a visit to the Scarborough Water TreatmentWorks recently completed by Yorkshire Water and officiallyopened in January 2002 by Baroness Barbara Young, ChiefExecutive of the Environment Agency.Set in open country just north of Scarborough, the plant wasbuilt to resemble a farmstead. There was much debate beforework could start. Many sites were considered and the one atScalby Lodge was inevitably a compromise. This is one of foursuch works along the East Coast as part of Yorkshire Water’s£120 million “Coastcare” campaign, but it has special

significance because of Scarborough’s bathing beeches. A localpressure group, The Sons of Neptune, had campaigned formany years against the pumping of raw, screened sewage intothe sea off a tourist resort, but they publicly praised the watercompany when the works opened.Andrew Jackson of Yorkshire Water, on a tour in driving rain, toldmembers that the works had cost about £30m and wasdesigned to deal with 5.67 million litres a day, which equates tosewage from 68,000 people. The design had to take intoaccount the fact that the resort’s population significantlyincreases during the summer months.The buildings were apparently designed before it was knownwhat equipment had to be housed. The result was that someequipment had to be squeezed in to small areas. Despite thismembers were told that this conventional sewage works,together with the state of the art ultra-violet technology, resultsin almost pure water being discharged into the sea. Onemember suggested that visitors should be offered a drink of thefinished product.After almost two hours sheltering in buildings or underumbrellas, the move to the Hayburn Wyke Inn for a carverylunch and the afternoon session was welcomed by all.Mel Cunningham, Property Manager, National Trust, gave apaper on the National Trust Neptune Coastline Campaign. Froma small start in 1965 in Northern Ireland, as Enterprise Neptune,the Trust now owns nearly 600 miles of coastline in England,

Wales and Northern Ireland, with a target of 900 miles, includingthe Farne Islands, Blakeney Point and the Giant’s Causeway.This large area of land inevitably includes many buildings,several of which have been restored and brought back into avariety of uses. Of the many lighthouses the one at Souter inTyne and Wear was worthy of special mention. Built in 1871, itwas the first in the world to use alternating electric current. It stillshines today. The shifting nature of the coastline was illustratedwith a slide from Blakeney Point in Norfolk, owned by the Trustsince 1929, which showed beech huts almost covered by driftingsand.Local examples discussed included Ravenscar (the town thatnever was), where Mel Cunningham lives and works. The estatenow includes restored houses and barns, some used as holidaylets, but the outstanding feature is the consolidated remains ofthe Alum Works. The product, once used in tanning and dyeing,utilised urine from local population centres.At nearby Robin Hoods Bay the Old Coastguard Station, more

RDBA News

The Yorkshire Branch at the Scarborough Water treatment Works.

The Lighthouse!

Sand drifting over holiday homes on Blakeney point.


recently the Leeds University Marine Laboratory, has now beenrebuilt to its original design and is used as an exhibition andeducation centre in partnership with the North York MoorsNational Park. Members were finally told that the coast atHayburn Wyke, outside the meeting room, is an important sitewhich includes many fossils and dinosaur tracks.Neil Corrie, Group Engineer, Scarborough Borough Council thendescribed the Scarborough Coast Protection work. Most of thedefences for the town were built between 1897 and 1908 andthose on the Marine Drive are coming to the end of their life. Assessment of all Scarborough’s coastline had highlightedmajor problems with the East Pier (built in 1720), CastleHeadland and The Holms. Detailed model studies had shownthat even 18 tonne boulders were moved in storm conditions.These studies were used to test various proposals and a finaldesign was arrived at which included the use of Accropode Units(large interlocking concrete structures) as well rock. The criteriaincluded a design life of 50 years and minimum ongoing costs.The work is being carried out by contractor Edmund Nuttall Ltdand Point Rendel. DEFRA are providing 75% of the funds. Theoriginal cost was £26m, but this has already increased to over£30m. Work started in spring 2002 and was due to finish inOctober 2003. There have been the inevitable delays becauseof geological problems and the need for extra noise reduction toreduce the impact on residents and tourists. The completiondate is now estimated to be late summer 2004.This is a massive undertaking. It involves bringing up to280,000 tonnes of granite rocks, weighing up to 20 tonnes each,

from Larvic in Norway and theAccropode Units from themanufacturing site in Sunderland.Barges are being used for both, soreducing the need for road transportand the inevitable disruption whichwould have occurred. This was a detailed and cleardescription of the scheme, but it wasstill hard for members to fullyappreciate the full extent of the workinvolved. Many members thereforetook advantage of the chance to travelto the site on their way home.David MarstonYorkshire Branch Secretary

RABDF DairyEvent 18/19thSeptember 2002

The enthusiasm for this show was evident by the number ofexhibitors taking stand space. The cattle sheds not being usedfor livestock were full as were the exhibition halls and outdoorareas adjacent to the sheds and halls. The visitor numbers onthe first day were equal to that of last year’s one day show andwith the good weather, people kept circulating and seemedreluctant at the end to go home. Those with an opinion toexpress had ample opportunity at the Farmers Weekly RoadShow, where both invited speakers and the general publicexchanged views with great emotion and support from thecrowd. It is always good to see overseas visitors attending theshow and to think that we are still looked to for advice and know-how.

The RDBA stand, in the comfort of a cattle shed, was kept busywith those seeking advice on both the replacement andrefurbishment of buildings. With thanks to Phil Lewis ofBriarwood Products Ltd and Neil Lloyd of Ellard Ltd, who tookthe opportunity to meet customers while helping to man thestand.

Visitors on the second day were browsers rather than those whohad come with a purpose and at the end of day 2, there seemedto be a lot of support from those who had taken stands, that aone day event, if it could be organised, would suit everyone. Wewill wait and see what the RABDF have in mind for next year. JH

RDBA News

Pile driving in summer 2002.

Plant at work in the Summer of 2002

Reader Enquiry 2


ContractAlternativesand theelement oftrust

By Simon Hay Riba,FCIArb.

At one pre-contract meeting I attended many years ago inHighgate London the client on putting his signature to the contractbetween him and the contractor stated no contract is worthsigning unless the parties trusted each other and he certainly didtrust the contractor. This was ironic as the client was a villain wholater in the project did not pay the contractor what he owed whichresulted in a long drawn out legal battle.

It is true that every contract is based on trust and relies on allparties behaving reasonably but new ways of working withalternative practices do not guarantee the basic trust which isrequired between parties. The first question any party enteringinto a contract should ask is can I do business with this person.Much reliance is often based on the letter of the law containedwithin a contract. By their nature contracts imply a lack of trust. I can hear my quantity surveyors friends chortling over my naivetyrelying on a properly drawn specification to achieve the threerequirements of any building

· To complete the building for the agreed cost.· To build the project within the given

timescale.· Complete the building to the required

standard.

This does not allow however for the unknown and unpredictableelements which can occur. A recent example of this is a smallrural building currently under construction which we havedesigned and are supervising on site. In the ground using atracer as specified we discovered, a 3 phase electricity supplyindependent of my clients property passing to a neighbourbeyond. At two metres below ground level a cast iron flow andreturn again passing to the adjoining hall: An old disusedsoakaway in the middle of a building and, an active soakawaydrain passing under our building which has to be bridged over inthe foundation level. Prior to the construction a trial pit had beendug and enquiries of existing services had been made so for abuilding of this size reasonable precautions had been taken. Onthe adjoining main works to an existing building in contraventionto the relevant Codes of practice a water main had been laid inthe existing oversite concrete.

It could be argued that these events could have been foreseenbut they were not, as is often the case in the real world. The clientand ourselves can not rely on the contract to rectify theseproblems found in the ground but rely in the trust and ourpersonal relationship with the contractor to overcome the oldservices swiftly and most importantly for my client withoutcranking up cost, we are rather over a barrel.

In this case because the contractor is conscientious andprofessional he is swiftly overcoming the difficulties andabsorbing a large part of the cost himself. Needless to say histender was not the cheapest but we have worked with himbefore. The final cost of the building will probably be cheaperthan the lower price offered by an inferior contractor at tenderstage and we will certainly gain a better building. This isessentially the partnering option favoured by the Latham and

Egan. It is my belief that the hard nosed confrontation belong withthe dinosaurs; the only way to run a contract successfully is withcommon sense and give and take on both sides. This does notof course include tolerating incompetence or allowing either partytaking advantage of the other. In this case the contract termscome into play.

We use the JCT (Joint contracts tribunal) family of contractswhich cover most of the possible alternatives. These range frommanaging contracting: design and build: through to the traditionalform of contract, generally the larger the contract the greaterreliance on the contract terms in running the project. There areother contracts sets also with strengths and weaknesses.

There is a continual drive for new forms of contract to try to avoidpreviously encountered problems. These innovative contractsoften fail to recognize the problem which is to build a goodbuilding for a given price. The essential of any project is that noprevious construction has taken place in that place in that form.To add to these difficulties an untested form of contract with anunusual procurement route may not assist. The essential to asuccessful building is full and complete information before thetenders are obtained and a helpful and collaborative partnershipto resolving the unknown problems which will be encountered.

Being rather contentious it could be suggested that innovativecontract procedures are proposed by bodies which understandcontract law very well but do not understand building. It may notbe possible to anticipate all eventualities; the contract may notcater for all eventualities. A strong partnership will enable thebuilding to be built with the best possible result.

While we generally undertake smaller rural contracts a recentconsultancy for a cladding package for a very large PFI hospitalshows the deficiency in sophisticated contract forms. Thecladding sub-contractor was to supply and install a very largepackage. The contract details had stitched him up like a kipper.This availed the main contractor and funding bodies very little asthe contract terms assisted in sending the sub-contractor intobankruptcy. The resulting fallout in terms of labour, design andmanufacturers (there were 30 different suppliers) led to anincrease in time and a massive increase in cost with the contractbeing split between a number of installers hired staff and newprocurement routes being established. The management timewas huge in sorting out the mess. Another failure for a new formof procurement.

One large sub-contract some years ago was late leading to delayin the project. We informed the domestic sub-contractor of hisobligations and stated liquidated damages for non-completionwould be laid at his door. He responded by informing us that ifthat was the case he would put his company into liquidation thatafternoon and we could whistle for our contract; after enquiry wediscovered that he was likely to be true to his word. In this casewe immediately looked into alternative supplies and discoveredas above there would be additional delay and a massive increasein cost. We were forced to moderate our justifiable stance andwork with him to install his element of the building for the agreedprice but late.

However subtle and intelligent the contract terms, there is nosurety in even large sophisticated firms that the nuances havebeen understood and the obligations taken on board. In manycases a traditional building contract with the design team workingfor and in the clients interest and a good main contractor willalways be the best route for building procurement with a strongpartnering ethos to work together to achieve the best possibleresult.

Simon Hay Riba,FCIArb.Architect specializing in rural buildings

Technical


ProtectedSpeciesPlanningChanges andCase Studies

By Jackie Webley, EcologistLandmark Environmental Ltd

At Landmark Environmental Ltd we deal with many casesranging from ecological problems through to landcontamination issues. In this article we shall inform you ofrecent CHANGES to the protected species licensing system,discuss the consultation paper on protected species and theland-use planning regime and will provide you with examplesof projects we have completed INCLUDING the costs!

Planning stages of building projects are the most crucial asmany of you know. Budgets have to be established andtimescales set. Incorporating protected species into planningstages is often not considered simply because they are notthought of as an issue and/or they are difficult to quantify as acost. Setting a timescale can be difficult if the correct adviceis not provided at the outset. A fully licensed practitioner mustexecute all protected species work. From November 1st 2002there will be changes to the current licensing system withchanges to affect not only the ecological worker but also theecologist’s client.

For each protected species project a method statement andapplication for licence has to be provided to DepartmentEnvironment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and EnglishNature (EN). The ecologist deals with this work, however, theclient should be aware that the processing time of licences hasincreased from 25 days to 30 days. Scheduling start dates forconstruction work must therefore realise this additionalworking week.

Changes have also been made to the license application form.The ecologist prepares the method statement and completesthe application form however, there is a new requirement thatthe ecologist’s client must also sign the declaration to abide bythe conditions of the licence and adhere to the methodstatement. The licence will then be issued in the name of theecologist with a statement that they are working for the clientwhose details will be shown on the licence.

Should there be any amendments to the application thenEnglish Nature and DEFRA will require a further 30 days toprocess the new information.

The above changes to the licensing application system couldseriously influence construction progress. The costimplications of dealing with this scenario in the middle of aproject is far greater than if a survey had been implemented inthe planning stages to check for presence or absence of aprotected species.

In order to effectively plan for protected species we haveproduced a diagram of processes that a developer should beaware of (diagram 1). Please note that planning for theseprocesses is often far more cost effective than reacting mid-way through a development.

DEFRA have released a consultation document entitled,

“Consultation paper on legislative proposals for integration ofthe Habitats Directive provisions on conservation of Europeanprotected species into the land-use planning regime.” Thisconsultation paper has the potential to affect the planningsystem with regard to protected species. The aim is to removethe current double – regulation whereby developers need toobtain planning permission then a separate licence fromDEFRA to carry out the development. The changes wouldfocus on streamlining the system by considering protectedspecies at the time when the principle of whether to permitdevelopment is being decided. This means that all of theissues relevant to a proposal would be considered as part of asingle process rather than in two separate regimes, negatingthe need for a separate licence application from DEFRA. Forthose of you who have dealt with protected species mitigationin the past this should come as welcome news as theproposed changes will simplify the system.

In order for this new system to work effectively soundecological survey information on which to base decisions willbe needed in the first instance in any case where protectedspecies may be present. Providing a basic presence orabsence report when the decision to grant planning permissionis being made adds to the effective streamlining of thisproposed new system. This allows the developer to accuratelytimetable work and budget accordingly as any protectedspecies work has to be decided at the outset before planningpermission will even be granted.

We shall keep you informed of changes in the system so youcan plan effectively in the future, however, if you would like toread the consultation document then copies can be obtainedfrom DEFRA publications on 08459 556000.

So we have discussed changes to the licence applicationsystem and summarised the proposed changes to the whole

Technical


planning process but, how do protected species projectsoperate and how much do they cost?The following case studies are examples of projects LandmarkEnvironmental has undertaken.

Case Study 1

This case study concerns a housing developer who achievedplanning permission for the erection of 22 dwellings, conversionof existing barns to form 4 dwellings and erection of a two-storeyoffice building. A planning condition relating to the buildingconversions required that, “ a competent person establishedwhether the buildings are used as hibernation sites, roosts orbreeding sites by barn owls or bats.” Landmark EnvironmentalLtd was asked to establish if the buildings affected bydevelopment were a habitat for the named protected species.

In order to establish presence or absence a fully licensed expertcarried out a site visit. During the site visit standard surveymethods were employed.

Barn Owls� Search inside the buildings for birds� Examination of the floor, ledges and beams for white

staining (found beneath a regular roost) and search for regurgitated pellets

� Ledges and beams examined for signs of nesting activity

Bats� Examine interior and exterior of all buildings� Check for presence of droppings and insect fragments� Search all floors walls, ledges and beams� Examine crevices and wall cavities for staining and

presence of bats

When we implement a survey of this type it is essential that thetime of year is suitable for example this survey was implementedin September 2002, when weather conditions were optimal foranimal activity (dry, mild). Barn owl or bats would not havedependant young and bats would still be active before the onsetof cooler weather and hibernation. It is unacceptable practice tosurvey protected species at the inappropriate time of year foreach species.

In this particular example no evidence of barn owl activity wasdiscovered. However, there was evidence of bat activity seediagram 2

TechnicalThroughout the survey area a total of three old bat droppingswere discovered and a number of butterfly wings were found onthe floors of all the buildings. The distribution and low numberof droppings is not consistent with regular use by bats and thebutterfly wings were not accompanied by droppings so it is likelythat the non edible wings have been left by other animals andnot necessarily bats.

In this example we recommend to the developer that bat bricksbe incorporated into the conversion of the buildings.

Figure 1 Bat Brick

Figure 1 illustrates a bat brick. Theslits are ideal for bats to use asroosting sites. These bricks can beincorporated into new buildings andconversions. They costapproximately £9.60 each and adeveloper can use these to replacenormal bricks in some sections ofthe building.This case study is a simple

operation involving a site visit and a report submission to theappropriate planning authority. In terms of costing this job wehave to consider the different elements. It is very difficult to seta standard price for implementing a survey as each site presentsdifferent scenarios. For example a large site will take longer tosurvey than a smaller one therefore, the larger site will costmore to complete. The cost for implementing the above casestudy was between £150 - £250 including 3 copies of the surveyreport. This expenditure allowed the developer to carry on withconstruction work to a timescale that did not need to includemitigation work for a protected species whilst at the same timethe developer has incorporated bat bricks into the conversionsincreasing suitable bat habitat.

Case Study 2

In this example we were called in by two companies who sharedan interest in a development on a site already designated as aConservation Area. The development involved the extension ofan existing building and the creation of a car park. Planningpermission was given for this development as it was decidedthere was no reasonable alternative. A condition on theplanning application stated that a survey for great crested newtsshould be implemented before the development could proceedas the building work was to occur within 250m of a pond.

This project has two phases. Initially a suitably licensedspecialist carried out a presence or absence survey in April2002. The survey involved bottle trapping, torching and eggsearching. The methods were employed over 5 consecutiveweeks. The presence of great crested newts was confirmedwhen eggs were found on water forget-me-not and an adultmale was caught in a bottle trap. The survey report was writtenup and the next stage before development could proceed wouldbe to produce a mitigation package and apply for a licence.

The mitigation package aimed to clear the area destined fordevelopment of newts, to prevent newts from escaping from thepond area and to ensure their safety during the developmentwork. We received the licence from DEFRA and proceeded withthe mitigation work.

Amphibian fencing was erected around the pond and around theperimeter of the land to be developed. In the latter we installedbuckets at 5m intervals. The buckets were flush with ground


level and adjacent to the fencing to channel newts towardsthem. We carried out a 30 consecutive day trapping exercise.In order for this to be effective the area of land to be developedwas strimmed as this encourages the newts to move. Any newtsthat were trapped were placed into the fenced off area aroundthe pond. After the trapping exercise the fencing is removed sodevelopment work can proceed.

In the pond area we placed 4 large shelters on the banks andcreated 6, 1m x 1m hibernacula. These are large pits dug outand filled with odd bricks and hard core then topped with soiland turf. They make ideal hibernation sites for all amphibians.The pond area is equivalent to 5 star accommodation where thenewts shall reside until the development work is complete. Onlywhen all work is complete will the fencing around the pond beremoved. Landmark is responsible for all maintenance duringthis period.

This mitigation package involved a high labour input to preparethe habitat for great crested newts during the development.Landmark carried out all the work and provided all thenecessary materials. This project was implemented over a 5-month period from survey through to the completion of themitigation package. Pricing a project like this occurs in twostages the survey and the mitigation. No two mitigationpackages are the same as each pond or wet habitat will providedifferent mitigation options. Some may involve the creation ofnew ponds, digging hibernacula or translocating newts, theoptions are many. The cost for the case study summarisedabove was between £6000 - £7000.

The changes discussed at the beginning of this article arebringing evermore-tighter controls on the developer and theirobligations towards protected species. The changes afoot in theplanning system aim to make the whole process a lot simpler,saving time and money. However, sound ecological informationwill be required in the first instance before planning permissionis acquired.

The two case studies provide you with examples of workLandmark is qualified to carry out. They also illustrate that thecost of such work does not need to be excessive and thebenefits of an initial survey far out weigh the potential fordisruption during a construction project.

Article by:Jackie WebleyEcologistLandmark Environmental Ltd101 Ashleigh HouseHarris Knowledge ParkFulwood, PrestonPR2 9AB

OpinionThe Bleasdale Column

Rights ofthird partiesin Planningissues.

Writing from ‘abroad’ as I do, one gets an unusualperspective on some every day happenings.To a professional Planner, like myself, planningapplications are a part of everyday life but I supposethere are many people who are complete strangers to thewhole business and it must come as a considerable shockto them when, sooner or later, they become implicated inone. Nowhere more so than if one lives in the countrysidewith a feeling that “nothing will ever change round here”and then find oneself either having to submit anapplication for something which one wants to do to yourown property or, even more shocking, when someone elseapplies to carry out a development which will, on the faceof it and in your opinion, seriously affect your premises.

How much say does one expect to be able to have, eitherin support of your own proposal, or in defiance of yourneighbour’s scheme?

If someone else interferes in your application and eithercauses delay or, even worse, a Refusal: you will be sore.Will you be more or less sore than if you find you have noway to influence the decision on your neighbour ’sscheme?

All Planning Applications have to go before a decisionmaking body, be it the Local Council or the Governmentrepresented by an Inspector. You can lobby appropriatelyeither by personal contact and/or correspondence in thecase of a local representative (Councillor) and similarly bywriting to or appearing before an Inspector if there is aPublic Inquiry.

You can usually attend the meeting of the PlanningCommittee and some Local Councils are moving towardsallowing the public to speak at such meetings. All publisha list every week in the local newspaper and someactually notify neighbours – either way you should knowwhat is going on.

Here though, in the Isle of Man, they go further than that.

Here every ‘neighbour’ (that is anyone owning landabutting on the application site) has the right to ask forthe application to be “called-in”. This is after it hasostensibly been approved. The Planning Committee thenhas to re-consider the application in the light of what theneighbour may say. Sometimes this results in a Refusal,always it means delay. Would you like that if it was yourapplication?

Furthermore, if the neighbour is still not satisfied becausethe proposal has still been approved, he can seek anAppeal. More delay!

All this is fine for the neighbour but very unsatisfactory for


Opinionothers. What of the neighbour who lives across the roadbut doesn’t own land abutting? What of a smallbusinessman who has bought a vacant shop and seeksplanning permission to open it as some other kind of shopor business premises? What is he going to live on with noincome whilst the neighbours take him through Reviewand Appeal, which might easily take 12 months?

As against this liberality in giving power to the unfriendlyneighbour, there is no public access to the PlanningCommittee here, which meets in secret.

Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, someneighbours are said to be from hell, and perhaps theymight object, not on proper Planning grounds or issues,but just because they don’t like the people next door.

Why I am writing all this is because there are moves afootto introduce something like the Manx system in England.

..................................................

A Planning issue continually debated is what to do abouttownspeople migrating to the countryside and buying-uplocal properties. The short answer within the practicallimits of planning control is “Nothing”. Planning is notthere to involve itself in personalities – it’s remit is landand buildings. Who sells the country properties totownspeople? The country people who own them, ofcourse! Perhaps they should be asked (politely) to stopdoing it? I don’t think that would go down too well.

In a Dictatorship one might reasonably expect legislationto forbid such practises but in a Democracy there must belimits to how much one can control by the force of law. Weare supposed to be a FREE society, for goodness sake!

On this same subject I was interested to read extractsfrom a speech recently made by Pam Warhurst, deputychair of the Countryside Agency to Members ofParliament:-

“Contrary to popular opinion, rural economics arenot just about agriculture and tourism. Importantthough these industries are, the reality is muchmore complex, with more than 80% of the ruralworkforce employed in other jobs. The lion’sshare is employed in manufacturing, wholesaleand retail, public administration and financialservices, compared with 4% of the ruralworkforce who are employed in farming.

“The real rural economy holds some surprises.For example, whilst only 14% of urban jobs arenow in manufacturing, more than 17% of totalrural employment is in the manufacturingindustry. Another overlooked fact is the positivecontribution that in-migrants make to rural areas.All too often, they are characterised ascommuters who buy up local rural property,forcing prices up, but who work in town and do allof their shopping in the out-of-town superstore. Inshort, people who put nothing back into the localrural economy. But the reality is more complex.As the Countryside Agency’s own researchreveals, two thirds of all new business start-upsin rural areas are led by people who have movedin to rural England, each creating an additional1.7 jobs for local people.

I find this last sentence quite heartening.

A facet of the invasion of the countryside by town-dwellers, is what I have long called the draw bridgesyndrome. “I’ve got my new/re-vamped/extended housenow so I don’t want anyone else to come near or invademy patch, so pull up the drawbridge and don’t allow anymore planning permissions.” This brings me full-circleback to my opening piece about neighbour consultationsand how much weight should be given to them.

..................................................

I was reading an Appeal Decision last week whichillustrates another planning issue.

The application was to erect an agricultural building some12m x 8m in floor area on a holding involving only onefield of some 0.48 ha. (which, to old fashioned folk likeme, represents just over 1 acre).

The Planning Authority, quite reasonably, questioned theviability of such a small enterprise and doubted thegenuineness of any agricultural need for such a largestructure. The application was Refused because a) thebuilding was larger than could be justified; b) it would beunsightly in the countryside and c) increased use of thevehicular access (which was opposite a road junction)would have traffic safety risks.

At the Appeal the Inspector noted that the applicant hadinformed him that: a) he didn’t really need a building thatbig and would be happy with a smaller one; b) he wouldbe happy to move it to another part of the site where itwould be less conspicuous; c) he would undertake to useanother access (already existing) which connected withthe highway further from the road junction and d) wouldbe prepared to build the shed in timber rather thanconcrete blocks.

Appeals are strictly related to the original Application,therefore the Inspector had no choice but to recommendRefusal.If only people would get their ideas properly formulatedbefore submitting planning applications!

Incidentally the Inspector wisely noted that the viability ofthe holding was claimed to be based on a flock of sheepbut the flock was only 7 strong and they were ManxLoughtans “and it is my understanding that these are aremarkably hardy breed and that indoor housing is notnecessary even in very severe weather”.

It occurred to me after reading his Report, that had theapplicant kept a pony on the land and submitted anapplication for a hobby building in the form of a smallwooden stable, it would probably have been approvedwithout murmur in the first place. There must be a moralin this somewhere!

..................................................

What my calendar to-day says is: What the world needs isfewer rules and more good examples.

Ian. K. Bleasdale MRICS.,DipTP.,Dip.LI.November 2002


Practical ways ofachieving goodventilation

By Mike Kelly MSc PhD FIAgrE FRAgS

Dr Mike Kelly works as a livestock housing designerspecialising in dairy and beef buildings UK wide. He has aparticular interest in the design of ventilation for all types ofcattle and sheep buildings.

We are all aware of the need for good ventilation oflivestock buildings. There are many ways of achieving this,such as open ridges, raised capped ridges, spacedsheeting, slotted sheeting, outlet shafts, and breathingroofs using spacers. The range of options is shown insketches 1-10. Even so, there are many variationsincluding raised ridges made of translucent sheeting,giving additional light into the building. The importantmessage is to create the required outlet area for stock.

Many of the designs shown are based on informationoriginally supplied by SAC in the SAC Farm BuildingsHandbook and on trade information supplied bycommercial suppliers such as Eternit UK Ltd. Furtherdetails are available from these organisations, or bycontacting the author direct. The most important factor isto get sufficient outlet in livestock buildings, and tocalculate out the opening requirements based on maximumstocking on still days. The SAC computer design programcan do this, or alternatively the author can provide thenecessary design calculations. These take into account:

� The inlet and outlet areas� The height difference between inlet and outlet� Internal and external temperatures� The amount of heat generated by the stock

Multi-span buildings are becoming more common aslivestock buildings increase in size. The provision of goodventilation throughout such buildings is often difficult,because of the lack of opportunity for inlets, creating “deadspots” within the centre of the complex. There is a need toprovide good ventilation at these points, and one way toachieve this is by creating a “breathing roof”, which allowsfresh air to penetrate throughout the building (see sketch8). Farmers in doubt are well advised to visit a unit with abreathing roof in order to allay any fears associated withintentionally creating gaps in a roof.

This method is best suited to new constructions, butexisting roofs can be stripped and re-laid in this fashion,especially metal. The essential design feature is to have aroof channel with an upstand either side of the gap. Thisusually means laying the sheets upside down, althoughspecially cut fibre cement sheets are now available. Thechannel prevents water entry into the building, and musthave secure fixings either side of it, to minimise the riskof roof uplift during storms.

A gap size of up to 12mm is recommended. A 6mm gapworks, but snow or ice bridging is a risk. A wider gap than12mm risks rain penetration. However, rain entry isusually insignificant, especially when livestock are in thebuilding, because they create an updraught at the slots.This technique is not recommended for buildings storing

hay, straw or other feeds, since some rain will enterdirectly through the gaps, when livestock are not present.

One bonus of this technique, in addition to a breathing roof,is extra natural light. From the underside, the slot alsolooks wider than it is because of the high degree of naturallight penetration. Another bonus is a lack of condensationon the underside of the roof, and this helps to protect thebuilding from decay, from sheet rusting, fixing rusting orpurlin rot. The ‘fresh air feeling’ creates a lighter, healthierworkplace, as well as a healthier environment for stock.

Slotting an existing roof is best suited to upgrading existingcorrugated roofs (see sketch 9). As for the otherconstructions, this is a professional job for a roofingcontractor, involving the need for underslung safetynetting. Great care must be taken when accessing roofs,especially fragile ones made of fibre cement. Crawlingboards and platforms must be used at all times. Never walkalong a line of purlin bolts. In addition, if the roof contains

Technical

Dramatic ventilation improvement by cutting out the ridge and slotting the roof.


asbestos, breathing masks must be worn, dust levelsminimised, and cut material disposed of safely. Henceasbestos roofs are best left alone, because of safety risks.

The procedure for fibre cement roofs involves cutting slotsup to 12mm wide with a disc cutter, at regular intervals, sayevery fourth corrugation, or one per sheet. The slots arecut in the crown of the profile, leaving uncut sheeting toprotect the purlins. If necessary, put in additional fixingseither side of the slots to maintain the structural strength ofthe roof.

The procedure for metal roofs is normally a disc cutter, butbeware of sparks causing a fire risk. A nibbler, which workson compressed air or electricity, can be hired and this cutsmetal without creating sparks. Whatever the type of roofbeing cut, then every safety precaution must be taken,including being aware of any electrical cables, or waterpipes, which may be running directly underneath theexisting roof sheeting. If the original roof was non-fragile(see Countryside Building Vol 1 Issue 4 Page 11 ‘Fragility’) Then the cutting of the slots will probably mean that itbecomes fragile and so signage should be added to thebuilding to worn people not to walk on the roof without thecorrect precautions.

Ventilation improvements using this technique are usuallydramatic, creating a breathing roof with increased airmovement, and higher natural light levels.

A breathing roof created using spacers can be used toupgrade existing roofs, or on a new roof construction (seesketch 7). It is most appropriate for a new roof overlivestock accommodation, which could at times be used forfeed or bedding storage. Do check with the sheetsmanufacturer whether the use of the spacers will changethe fragility status of the roof.

A minimum end lap of 150mm is advised, increasing this to300mm in exposed conditions, to minimise the penetrationof rain or snow into the building. The hardwood timberspacer must be fully anchored between the sheets, usingdrive screws of a suitable length to secure the top sheet tothe purlin. An option to timber is a nylon strip called ‘Enkaroof spacer’, placed between the two layers of sheetingwith a 150mm overlap.

It is not necessary to place a roof spacer at every sheetlap, and two or three spacers per side for a wide portalbuilding will significantly improve air distribution, creating aventilation opening equivalent to a 50mm gap at each

spacer. Condensation will be reduced throughout thebuilding, especially in the locality of the spacer. Anycondensation created at that point runs directly out of thebuilding on the topside of the lapped sheet.

The improvement of building ventilation is an importanttask, which involves all those associated with agriculturalbuildings, such as designers, contractors, farmers, andproduct suppliers.

There are instances where additional mechanicalventilation using fans is appropriate to suit designdeficiencies, or site circumstances, such as:

� A traditional stone and slated building which is difficult to open up.

� A building sited in the centre of a complex withoutadequate inlets.

� A low building with insufficient cubic capacity and/or height difference between inlet and outlet.

� A wide building with internal ‘dead spots’.� A troublesome building on a sheltered, misty site

needing an extra ventilation boost when cattle health risks are high, as often experienced in October and November.

Fan ventilation is not about trying to create a controlledenvironment within the whole building. Its primary purposeis to create fresh air at cattle level during times of specificneed. Hence systems which deliver air directly onto thestock are the most effective at achieving this objective.The principles behind a cheap and effective system are asfollows:

� Do not use a thermostat to regulate ventilation rate.

� A pressurised ventilation system is the best system.

� This air is best distributed through a perforated duct.

� Guideline design figures are at least 35 cubic metres per hour per calf in the winter, and at least 105 cubic metres per hour per calf in the summer.For larger animals aim for at least 50 cubic metres per hour per head in the winter.

Every building has its own set of circumstances and thedesign solution must be tailor-made to meet these. Fanventilation is never an excuse to overcrowd buildings.Maximum stocking densities must not exceed those statedin the Welfare of Livestock Regulations. It is also not anexcuse to attempt to use totally unsuitable buildings, in thevain hope that everything will be alright.

Working on roofs can be dangerous. Guidance is availablefree from the Health and Safety Executive, InformationSheet No. 32, Preventing Falls from Fragile Roofs inAgriculture. [Tel. 01787 881165 or fax. 01787 313995 ].The information sheet sets out key safeguards to assistfarmers and their staff in working safely, and complyingwith the law.

For a detailed ventilation check or construction advice on aspecific livestock building, contact the authortel. 01563 830147, or SAC Building Design Services tel.01292 525168.Building Design, Knockendale Cottages, Symington,Ayrshire, KA1 5PNE-mail mkelly.builddesign@ btinternet.com www.mkbuilddesign.co.uk.

Technical


TechnicalTechnical Update End November 2002

By Tony Hutchinson, National Secretary, RDBA

There are more and more actual and planned changes to standards, laws, regulations and advice, which makes it almost impossiblefor small and medium sized businesses to be able to keep up to date with the changes that could drastically affect their business.I have recently compiled a list of the changes that may have some effect on companies in agricultural construction; I plan to add toand update this list on a regular basis and will continue to publish it in Countryside Building. The list is not definitive, and so shouldnot be taken as the only changes that will affect our industry.

1. BSI – CEN1.1. CE Marks

1.1.1. It is looking more likely that the UK will lose the argument that CE marking is voluntary and so CE marking will become mandatory.

1.1.2. This will mean that if there is a CE mark for a product, then only products with a CE mark will be allowed on the market.

1.1.3. There is more information on this on the RICS web site http://www.rics. org /building _control/ce _marking.html

1.2. A final draft of prEN 12951 ‘Prefabricated Accessories for Roofing – Permanently Fixed Roof Ladders – Product Specification and Test Methods’ is out for UAP.

1.2.1. Consultation ends 17th January 20031.3. A new BS EN 1263-2:2002 Safety Nets ‘Part 2: Safety Requirements for the Positioning Limits’ has been

published. 1.4. BS 5250 – Code of Practice for the Control of Condensation in Buildings was published in November 2002

and can be obtained from the BSI1.5. PrEN 490 – Concrete Tiles & Fittings – Product Specification. Out for CEN inquiry, comments required end

Jan 2003 for agreement that it should go out for formal enquiry.1.6. PrEN 491 – Concrete Tiles & Fittings – Test Methods. Out for CEN inquiry, comments required by end Jan

2003. for agreement that it should go out for formal enquiry.1.7. PrEN 1236 –1 Slate and stone products for discontinuous roofing and cladding — Part 1: Product

Specification Out for CEN inquiry, reply required by Jan 2003 for agreement that it should go out for 6 month UAP

1.8. PrEN 1236 –2 Slate and stone products for discontinuous roofing and cladding — Part 2: Methods of test (Amendment 1) Out for CEN inquiry, reply required by Jan 2003 for agreement that it should go out for 6 month UAP

1.9. PrEN 492 – Fibre Cement Slates and their fittings for roofing – Product specification and test methods. Out for CEN inquiry, reply required by Jan 2003 for agreement that it should go out for 6 month UAP

1.10. PrEN 494 – Fibre Cement profiled sheets and fittings for roofing – Product specification and test methods.Out for CEN inquiry, reply required by Jan 2003 for agreement that it should go out for 6 month UAP

1.11. PrEN 12467 – Fibre-cement flat sheets – Product specifications and test methods. Out for CEN inquiry, replyrequired by Jan 2003 for agreement that it should go out for 6 month UAP

1.12. PrEN 14437 – Determination of the uplift resistance of installed clay or concrete tiles for roofing – Roof system test method – comments now in.

1.13. It is probable that that the Construction Product Directive will be revised in 2003, effective in 2004, we are advised that it should not affect industry’s work at the moment. The aim is to make it easier to understand.

2. Building Regulations2.1. Part B & E now expected in November2002.2.2. Part A Expected September 2003 – Euro Code problems2.3. Part M Proposals for Amending Part M Access to and use of buildings – out for consultation - response required

by end November.3. Health and safety

3.1. General Product Safety Directive 3.1.1. Out for comment at end of year.3.1.2. If a consumer can buy a product, that product will be covered 3.1.3. Probably duty of merchant to pass info on to the consumer.3.1.4. There is a recall clause but may be difficult to enforce on a product that has been incorporated in a

building.3.2. Proposed EU proposal on Safety of Services

3.2.1. Advice from Merchants may be covered.3.2.2. Advice from Manufacturers about their products probably will not be covered.3.2.3. Advise from consultants, designers etc, will certainly be covered.

3.3. It looks as if the HSE is going to have a blitz on occupational health next year, with the main areas of concern listed below:

3.3.1. All Sites to have welfare facilities that comply with Reg. 22 CHSW regs.3.3.2. Management arrangements to control exposure to wet cement include health surveillance where workers

are exposed to cement.3.3.3. Eliminate unnecessary use of hand held vibrating tools. Where not practicable risk reduction measures

in place incl. Health surveillance3.3.4. Introduce practical measures to avoid manual handling e.g. use mechanical handling aids in HSG 149

–‘Backs For The Future’


Technical3.3.5. Eliminate noise risk by design3.3.6. Management controls where noise not eliminated3.3.7. Asbestos Survey before starting all demolition and refurb jobs.3.3.8. HSG61 lists all the occupational health advice

3.4. The CDM regulations are going to be amended next year.3.4.1. Expect consultation papers in the middle of the year.

3.5. Revitalising Health and Safety in Construction3.5.1. Incidence of fatal injury in construction 6X the ‘all industry average’3.5.2. Construction 1/3 of GB’s workplace fatalities.3.5.3. 900 workers and 50 members of the public killed in 10 years.3.5.4. 10000 reported ‘over 3-day’ injuries per year.3.5.5. In the Building industry 56% maintenance/ refurbishment, 14% new build.3.5.6. The Ten point strategy

3.5.6.1. Promote better working environments3.5.6.2. Complement a competitive knowledge driven economy3.5.6.3. Have occupational health as a priority3.5.6.4. Engage and help small firms3.5.6.5. Motivate employers3.5.6.6. Engrain a culture of self regulation3.5.6.7. Build effective partnerships3.5.6.8. Include the government leading by example3.5.6.9. Recognise the importance of education3.5.6.10. Ensure that health and safety is ‘designed in’3.5.6.11. A Discussion Document is out for comment, with replies required by 31st December 2002.

3.6. A new HSE document has been printed ‘Inspecting fall Arrest Equipment’3.7. A new HSE document ‘Use of Contractors a joint responsibility’3.8. There will be new ‘Working at Heights Regulations SI 2003 Draft’ out for comment in the near future.

3.8.1. It will cover all industries not just construction3.9. ‘ACR[CP]001:2001 – Code of Practice for working on Roofs’ This will be the recommended practice for

working on large element profiled sheeted roofs and should be published in the next few months.3.10. ‘Managing Asbestos in Premises – INDG223(rev2)’ is available on the HSE web site.3.11. The Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002 was debated in parliament on 24/10/2002.

3.11.1. The part of the legislation that covers the changes to how asbestos containing products should be handled comes into force from the 21st November 2002.

3.11.2. The responsibility to survey buildings comes in to force from 21st May 20043.11.3. There will be three new/revised Approved Codes of Practice, one to cover products that normally require

a licensed contractor to work on them one to cover products where a licensed contractor is not normally required and one to provide the detail on surveying buildings. They went out for consultation late last year. It is now expected that they will be published in December 2002.

3.12. Proposals for amending the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002. HSE, 2002. (CD184) Sets out HSC’s proposals for regulations to amend the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (COSHH). Available from the HSE web site.

3.13. Review of existing supporting scientific knowledge to underpin standards of good practice for key work – related stressors: phase 1. ISBN 0717625680 Undertaken to identify the best available evidence on the ways in which stress affect individuals at work. Is available from the HSE web site.

3.14. Noise at work – advice for employers - HSE, 2002. (INDG362) Replaces four existing noise leaflets, bringing all the generic information on noise together Available from the HSE web site.

3.15. Why fall for it – Preventing falls in agriculture – This advice note was published by the HSE in November, they can be obtained fromHSE Books.

4. Environment4.1. DEFRA have provided an update on the subjects listed below:

4.1.1. Spending review 2002 and what it means for DEFRA4.1.2. DEFRA’s aim and objectives (revised)4.1.3. Ministerial responsibilities (revised)4.1.4. DEFRA’s new corporate identity4.1.5. Secretary of State’s statement to WSSD in Johannesburg.

4.2. DEFRA has put out a consultation on Legislative Proposals: Habitats Directive and Land-use Planning Regime.

4.2.1. Response required by 24th January 20034.3. ODPM has put out a consultation paper ‘The Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (2001/42/EC):

Draft Guidance.4.3.1. Response required by 24th January 2003

4.4. European Directive on Energy Performance in Buildings is expected to be signed by the year-end. It’s four main requirements are:

4.4.1. Member states shall apply a common methodology for calculating the energy performance of buildings.4.4.2. Minimum standards on the energy performance of new buildings and certain renovated buildings.4.4.3. Most buildings, when sold or rented out would have to have an energy certificate based in the integrated

energy methodology.4.4.4. Regular inspection scheme for boilers over 20kW and air conditioning units over 12kW.4.4.5. Implementation 3 years after signing.


Technical

Changes to the regulations concerning asbestos contaproducts

There are a number of recent changes to regulations that govern working with and managing asbestos containing products.

These new regulations CAW 2002, will replace the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 1987 CAW 1987.The purpose of these regulations is to introduce a new requirement to manage asbestos in non-domestic premises. They require those that havemaintenance and repair responsibilities for the premises to take a range of actions to ensure that any asbestos- containing materials (ACM)within them are properly managed and that information about the location and condition of the materials is passed on to those who are liable todisturb them. They also tighten the requirement on contractors and others to protect their employees from asbestos fibres.With regard to domestic premises, at present these regulations only cover the common parts, it is planned that in the future similar regulationswill apply to domestic rented premises.

The CAW 2002 Regulations came into effect on 21 November 2002, except for:

� Regulation 4, ‘The duty to manage asbestos in non-domestic premises’ which comes into force on 21 May 2004; and � Regulation 20, ‘Standards for analysis’ which comes into force on 21 November 2004. This relates to the use of accredited laboratories

for the analysis of bulk samples.In this article I will only cover the risks associated with working with asbestos cement (AC) products mainly because the majority of working farmbuildings contain them and the regulations came into force on the 21st November 2002. Very few working farm buildings contain low-densityasbestos containing products and working with them is specialist work that should only be carried out by contractors licensed by the HSE to doso and so I will not be providing details of the changes that effect work with them.

I will not be covering the other risks that might be associated with working with AC such as working at heights, the use of power tools, etc. Theserisks should be set out in a job specific risk assessment and method statement written before the work starts.

At the end of the article I will provide the main details of the duty to manage ACMs in buildings, but as they do not come into force until 21st May2004 I will leave the more in depth advice until a later article.

The following is only a brief guide; it is not a complete guide to Health and Safety responsibilities when working with asbestos containing productsnor is it a complete guide to health and safety responsibilities when on a construction site. Any one working with ACMs should read andunderstand the relevant Approved Code of Practice (when it is available).

This guidance is given with the best intentions and in good faith but nothing in this advice shall create or be deemed to create any obligations,whether expressed or implied, on the RDBA, the writer or the publishers under the CDM or other regulations.

Working with asbestos cement products under the new legislation, In force from 21st November 2002

I will discuss the precautions and requirements for one off work with asbestos cement products that does not exceed an action level or a controllimit. Where there is a risk of them being exceeded, in my view it becomes specialist work and so should be carried out by a contractor licensedby the HSE to work with low density ACMs.

From the 21st November 2002 the regulations set new action levels and control limits for exposure to asbestos fibres.

� Action Levels:

� One of the following cumulative exposures to asbestos over a continuous 12-week period:� Chrysotile alone, 72 fibre-hours per millilitre of air� Any other asbestos fibre, 48 fibre-hours per millilitre of air� Where both types of exposure occur separately over a 12-week period, a proportionate number of fibre-

hours per millilitre of air.

� Control limits� Chrysotile (White)

� 0.3 fibres per millilitre of air averaged over a continuous period of 4 hours

4.5. CEN Guide 4 (ISO Guide 64) on Environmental aspects in product standards4.5.1. Examples of Environmental Checklists were submitted to CEN/SABE(Strategic Advisory Body on

Environment) and have been issued by CEN/BT as BTC 073/2002 for voting by 2 October.4.6. Environmental Product Declarations (EPD): The Task Group of ISO/TC 59/SC3/WG12 is now very active. 4.7. Environmental impact of buildings: This Task Group of ISO/TC 59/SC3/WG12 is also now very active. 4.8. Other aspects of Sustainable building: Three other standards are also being developed by

ISO/TC59/SC3/WG124.8.1. Buildings and constructed assets - Sustainable building - General principles of sustainability4.8.2. Buildings and constructed assets - Sustainable building - Terminology related to sustainability4.8.3. Buildings and constructed assets - Sustainable buildings – sustainability indicators.

5. General 5.1. The NFRC has issued a draft ‘Check List to Establish Non-fragile Roof Assembly Facts for HSE’

5.1.1. They require comments as soon as possible5.2. The NFRC has issued advice on ‘Performance standard for butyl strip sealants in metal clad buildings.


Technical� 0.9 fibres per millilitre of air averaged over a continuous period of 10 minutes

� Other types of asbestos� 0.2 fibres per millilitre of air averaged over a continuous period of 4 hours� 0.6 fibres per millilitre of air averaged over a continuous period of 10 minutes

From 21st November 2002 all employers must ensure that they do not carry out any work which exposes or is liable to expose their employeesto asbestos, without first identifying if the product does contain asbestos and if so what type, unless he treats the product as if it contains crocidolite(blue) or Amosite (brown) asbestos. Before work starts an employer must:

� Carry out a written risk assessment of the work to be done that will

� Identify the type of asbestos involved or treat it as if it is asbestos other than chrysotile.� Decide on the degree of exposure that may occur

� Ensure that exposure is reduced to the lowest level reasonably practicable, other than by the use of respiratory equipment.

� Ensure that the number of employees who are exposed is as low as reasonable practical.� Where it is not reasonably practicable to reduce the exposure to below the control limits, then the

employees should be provided with suitable respiratory protective equipment, that will reduce the asbestos in the air inhaled by the employee to a level that is as low as reasonably practicable and in any event below the control limit.

� The risk assessment should be reviewed regularly and if there has been a significant change in the work or there is reason to suspect that the existing assessment is no longer valid.

� Must prepare a suitable written plan of work detailing how the work is to be carried out. A copy must be kept at the premises at which the work is being carried out for as long as the work is being carried out. The plan shall include:

� The nature and duration of the work� The location of the place of work� The methods to be applied� The equipment to be used� Measures which the employer intends to take in order to reduce the exposure to his employees and others to the

lowest level reasonable practicable.� The Employer shall ensure, so far as is practicable that the work is carried out in accordance with the plan.� Monitor the exposure of his employees to asbestos, unless he has good reason to believe that the employee is not liable to exceed

the action level.� The Employer must keep a record of the monitoring carried out or where he decides that monitoring is not required,

the reason for that decision.� If at any time it is shown that an employee’s exposure is likely to be above the action level then a number further actions are required,

which I will not go into at this time as this would indicate to me that the work should be carried out by a contractor licensed by the HSE to work with low density ACMs.

� Employers must ensure that adequate information; instruction and training are given to those employees who are liable to be exposed to asbestos. This should cover:

� The findings of the risk assessment� The risks to health from asbestos� The precautions that should be observed� The relevant control limit and action level.� The plan of work� This information and training should be provided at regular intervals.� It should be adapted to take account of changes to the work� It should be provided in a manner appropriate to the nature and degree of exposure.

� An Employer must provide adequate and suitable protective clothing for any employees who are liable to be exposed to asbestos. The protective clothing shall either be disposed of as asbestos waste or adequately cleaned after each shift.

� In the event of an unplanned release of asbestos at the work place, the employer shall ensure that immediate steps are taken to:� Mitigate the effects if the event� Restore the situation to normal� Inform any person who may be affected.

� An employer must take all practical steps to stop the spread of asbestos from any place where work under his control is carried out.� Keep all work areas clean and at the end of the job ensure that the work area is thoroughly cleaned.� An employer must ensure that any area in which work on asbestos is being carried out is designated an asbestos area and the area

shall be clearly marked as such. Only employees that are working on the asbestos material will be allowed in to the asbestos area.� Employees will not be allowed to eat or drink or smoke in the area.

� An employer who arranges for monitoring of asbestos fibre levels or arranges for a sample of any material to be sampled to determine whether it contains asbestos must ensure that the work is carried out by someone accredited by an appropriate body as complying with ISO 17025.

� An employer must ensure that his employees are provided with:� Adequate washing and changing facilities.� Where he provides protective clothing he must also provide adequate storage for the protective clothing and where

required adequate storage for the employees personal clothing not worn during working hours.� The storage of the protective clothing will be separate from the storage of personal clothing.

� Any asbestos waste created must be kept in a sealed container and clearly marked.� It must be disposed of as soon as possible by a licensed haulier who should consign it as special waste to a dump

licensed to take asbestos waste.� Unless the waste has been created on agricultural premises, in which case it can be classed as agricultural waste

and buried on the farm. It must not be taken on the public high way and a record should be kept of where it is


Technicalburied so that any one who might disturb it in the future can be advised of exactly where it is buried.

The Approved Code of Practice (ACoP) that provides details of how a contractor should interpret the above Statutory Instrument is not going tobe published until Mid December, unfortunately this is too late for this article.

I have a copy of the draft ACoP that was sent out for consultation but I am advised that there have been a number of changes agreed and so itwould be misleading for me to provide advice based on it. I will therefore provide more detail on how the above should be interpreted, in the nextissue of Countryside Building.

Duty to surveyIn force from 21st May 2004

This duty applies to any one who has responsibility to repair or maintain a non-domestic building or the common spaces of rented domesticproperties.

� The duty holder must carry out a suitable and sufficient assessment as to whether asbestos is liable to be present in the premises.

� And to ascertain what condition it is in.� This should entail an inspection of those parts of the premises that are reasonably accessible and will be repeated

if there is reason to believe that the assessment is no longer valid or there has been a change to the premises.� This assessment must be in writing and kept in a prominent position so that any one who might disturb the

asbestos can be advised that it contains asbestos.� Where the assessment shows that asbestos is liable to be present, the duty holder must

� Determine the risk from it� Write a plan that identifies where the ACMs are� Include in the plan the measures that are to be taken to manage the risk that should include

� Monitoring the condition of the ACMs� Ensuring that the ACMs are properly maintained or where necessary encapsulated or removed.

� The management plan should� Be provided to every person liable to disturb it� Be made available to the emergency services.� Be reviewed and revised as required and at regular intervals� The Duty holder must ensure that the plans are implemented� The measures taken to implement the plan are recorded.

In farm buildings the ACMs that are most likely to be found are AC corrugated sheets for roof and walling claddings, AC gutters and down pipes,pressure and sewage pipes and flat sheets as animal pens or linings to buildings or structures.Some of these products were legally supplied until November 1999.Where these products are in good condition and are unlikely to be abraded the management plan will probably be relatively simple. It will justneed to note; where they are and in what condition they are in, state that they should be inspected on an annual basis or sooner if there is anyreason to believe that their condition has changed. This plan should be kept up to date and should be provided to any one who is going to workon the building.

In my next article I will advise some of the ways that you might be able to ascertain whether a corrugated sheet contains asbestos or not andhow you might recognise when an AC product is coming to the end of its life.I will also discuss some of the actions that should be considered once it is decided that an AC product has come to the end of its economic life.

Tony HutchinsonDirector GeneralAsbestos Information Centre LtdPhone 01449 676900E-mail [email protected] site www.aic.org.uk



Geographical areaCategories

Duraframe Structures Ltd84 Mile Barn Road, Wrexham, LL13 9JYPhone 01978 356164 Fax 01978 3624991 & 3 A UK

G & T EvansDulas Mill, Ffordd MochdreNewtown, Powys, SY16 4JDPhone 01686 622100 Fax 01686 6222201 & 2 B C D E F G H I UK

Farmplus Constructions LtdShay Lane, Longridge Preston, PR3 3BTPhone 01772 785252 Fax 01772 7829442 B C G UK

Farmstead EngineeringAcorn Farm, Nether Whitacre, ColeshillBirmingham, West Midlands, B46 2DTPhone 01675 481314 Fax 01675 4813141, 2, 3, A B C D E F G H M

Glendale Engineering (Milfield) LtdBerwick Road Industrial Estate, Wooler,Northumberland, NE71 6AHPhone 01668 281464 Fax 01668 2816221 A B C F G H NW NE SL SH

RDBAConstruction Group Members

Classification

1. Steel frame2. Timber frame3. Concrete frame

A. All typesB. Cattle buildingsC. Sheep buildingsD. Vegtable storesE. Vegtable processing

WN. Wales NorthNW. North WestNE. North EastSL. Scotland LowlandsSH. Scotland Highlands

Crown Steel Buildings LtdGreen Park, Burnards House, Holsworth,Devon, EX22 7JAPhone: 01409 253315,Fax: 014092542241 W

Curtis Engineering LtdMarston Trading Estate, FromeSomerset, BA11 4BHPhone 01373 462126 Fax 01373 4519811 B C D E F G H I W

Deville & Lear LtdMill Lane Works, Rosten, Ashbourne,Derbyshire, DE6 2EEPhone 01335 324302 Fax 01335 3245681, A, UK

Devine IAC LtdThe Farthings, 1Ripplesmore, Sandhurst.Berks GU47 8PEPhone 020 86410071 Fax 01344 7776961, 2 & 3 A W SE EA M WS WN

Peter DowslandStone Bank Farm, Rosedale AbbeyPickering, North Yorkshire, YO18 8RBPhone & fax 01751 4178871 B C D E F G H I UK

The Main aims of the Construction Group are to promote good safe working practices within theindustry, to raise the profile of agricultural building manufacture and construction as a skilledindustry, to discuss and exchange views and information within the industry, to ensure thatclients realise their responsibilities under the Construction Health & Safety Regulations, topromote a Safety & Quality Scheme to the highest standards within the industry and to liaise withthe Government and other bodies, including suppliers. Membership is open to all agriculturalbuilders and their suppliers who have the same aims.

F. Grain storesG. Machinery storesH. RepairsI. RenovationsJ. Barn conversions

UK. All UKW. West CountrySE. South EastEA. East AngliaM. MidlandsWS. Wales South

M D Anthony LtdUnit 20, The Dock Business Park,Angek Drove, Ely, Cambs, CB7 4DTPhone 01353 666201 Fax 01353 6629991 B C D E F G H I EA

A C Bacon Engineering LtdNorwich Rd, Hingham, NorwichNorfolk, NR9 4LSPhone01953 850611 Fax 01953 8514451, B D E F G I, EA

Balsham Buildings Ltd7 High Street, Balsham, Cambs, CB1 6DJPhone 01223 894404, Fax 01223 8928181 A EA

Browns of Wem LtdFour Lane Ends, Wem Shropshire, SY4 5UQphone 01939 232382 Fax 01939 2340321 2, A B C D E F G H I, UK

Collins Engineering LtdUnit 5, Westwood Ind Est, Pontrilas,Hereford, HR2 0ELPhone 01981 240682 Fax 01981 2429261 A M WS WN

It is the responsibility of anyone employing a contractor to ensurethat the contractor is competent in health and safety matters,

because RDBA Construction Group Members sign up to the aboveaims you can be confident of their competence.

Continued on next page


D A Green & Sons LtdWhaplode, Spalding, Lincs, PE12 6TLPhone 01406 370585 Fax 01406 3707661 B C D E F G H I EA & M

A J GriffithsGreenacre, Suckley, Worcs, WR6 5EHPhone 01886 884294 Fax 01886 8842941 B C D E F G H I M

Knapp Farm BuildingsQuarryKnowe, InchturePerthshire, PH14 9SWPhone 01828 686265 Fax 01828 6862652 A SL & SH

Ernest Leng & SonFriars Hill Farm, Friars Hill, SinningtonYork, YO62 6SLPhone 01751 431774 Fax 01751 4317741 B C D E F G H I NE

A J Lowther & Son LtdThe Factory, Whitchurch, Ross On Wye,Herefordshire, HR6 6DFPhone 01600 890482 Fax 016008909301, A, W SE M WS

S A MoggFox Pits Farm, Blazie Lane, HuntEnd,Redditch, Worcs B96 6QAPhone 01527 892570 Fax 01527 8927121, B C F G, M

Phillips Contractors4 Westside, Tillington, PetworthSurrey, GU28 9ALPhone 01798 343392 Fax 01798 3428991 2, A, W SE EA M

Gareth Pugh Steel Framed BuildingsAgrimont Depot, Station Yard, Abermule,Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6NHPhone: 01686 630500, Fax: 01686 6304411 A B C F G H WS

R E Buildings LtdSpout House, Bay HorseLancaster, Lancs, LA2 9DEPhone 01524 792247 Fax 01524 7918901 A B C D E F G H UK

Red Alce SteelworkBarcombe, Lewis, East Sussex, BN8 5EDPhone 01273 400780 Fax 01273 4007441 B C D E F G H SE

Redwing Structures (Marlow) Ltd1 The Square, Church RoadLane End, Bucks, HP14 3JEPhone01494 8808571, A, SE EA MRedwing Structures LtdBarons Keep, The Mount, HighclereNewbury, Berks. RE20 9PSPhone01635 255299 Fax 01635 2553021 A SE

S Robinson & Sons (Engineers) LtdWincanton Cls, Ascot Drive Ind EstateDerby, Derbyshire, DE24 8NJPhone 01332 574711Fax 01332 8614011. A B C D E F G H UK

Mervyn Rose Engineering LtdParadise Farm, BagberSturminster Newton, Dorset, DT10 2HBPhone 01258 472866 FAX 01258 4710051, A, W

Shufflebottom LtdCross Hands Business Park,Cross Hands, Carmarthenshire, SA14 6RSPhone 01269 831831 Fax 01269 8310311, A, UK

Simpson & Allinson LtdHarmire Enterprise Park, Barnard Castle, Co Durham, DL12 8EHPhone 01833 690379 Fax 01833 6900401 B C D E F G H I, NW NE SL

Supercraft Structures LtdShobden Airfield, Shobden, Nr Leominster, Herefordshire, HR6 9NR Phone: 01568 708456 Fax: 01568 7082121 A UK

Sutcliffe Construction LtdGoal Farm, Hellifield, SkiptonNorth Yorkshire, BD23 4JRPhone 01729 850817 Fax 01729 8503231, B C D F G NW & NE

Tucket Farm Services15 Schorne Lane, North Marston,Buckingham, MK18 3PJPhone 01296 670646 Fax 01296 6706061, A SE

J Wareing & Son LtdWrea Green, PrestonLancashire, PR4 2NBPhone 01772 682159 Fax 01772 6710711 2, B C D E F G H, UK

Associate MembersBrett Martin Roofing Products LtdLangley Road, Burscough Ind EstateBurscough, Lancs, L40 8JBPhone01704 895345 FAX 01704 894229Supplier of rooflights

Briarwood Products LtdUnit 10, Weston Europark, Winterstoke Rd,Weston-super-Mare, BS23 3YTPhone 01934 641446 Fax 01934 641214Fibre cement sheets & fittings supplier

Celtic ProfilesLlandybie, Ammanford, Carmarthenshire,SA18 3JGPhone 01269 850677 Fax 01269 851081Manufacturers of agricultural roof and

wall profiles

Ellard LtdDallimore Road, Roundthorn Ind EstWythenshawe, Manchester, M23 9NXPhone 0161 9454561Fax 0161 9454566Manufacture sliding door gear

Eternit (UK) LtdMeldreth, Nr Royston, Herts, SG8 5RLPhone 01763 260421 Fax 01763 262531Fibre cement sheets & fittings manufacturer

Fibre Cement ManufacturersAssociation LtdATSS House, Station Road East,Stowmarket, Suffolk, IP14 1RQPhone 01449 676053 Fax 01449 770028Association of fibre cement manufacturers

Filon Products LtdAldridge Rd, Streetly, Sutton Coldfield,West Midlands, B74 2DZPhone 0121 3530814 fax 0121 352 0886Supplier of rooflights

Health and Safety ExecutiveThe Pearson Building, 55 Upper Parliamentstreet, Nottingham, NG1 6AUPhone 0115 971 2400 Fax 0115 971 2802Contact David Gould

Milbury Systems LtdThe Long Barn, Clevedon RoadTickenham, Bristol, Avon, BS21 6RYPhone 01275 857799, Fax 01275 853123Pre-stressed concrete, silos, walling, etc.

MJCLower Stones, Bar Lane, Rippondon,Sowerby Bridge, W Yorkshire, HX6 4EYPhone & Fax 01422 825992Health and Safety Consultant

Polypipe Civils LtdBishop Meadow Road, Loughborough, LE11 5REPhone 01509 615100 Fax 01509 236726Ducting, drainage and environmental systems

UnimogDaimlerchrysler UK LtdTongwell, Milton KeynesMK15 8BAPhone 01908 245000 Fax 01908 664351Manufacturers of the Unimog all terainvehicles

United Roofing Products Ltd1 Scotts Yard, Haslingfield, Cambridge, CB3 7NBPhone 01223 871135 Fax 01223 874443Suppliers of Composite and built up metalsystems, slates and tiles.

RDBA Construction Group Members Cont.

Countryside Building 26 Countryside Building 26

Membership Application Form(Includes information for the Membership Register)

Please give your details below in block letters. If you do not want your details to be published please mark a cross here ( )We/I wish to become members of the Rural Design & Building Association and agree to pay the annual subscription on 1 Octobereach year.

Name of Company or College (if applicable)

Address

Post Code Tel No Fax No

E-mail Web address

Title Mr./Mrs./Miss. Initials Surname

Position

Professional or other qualifications (abbreviations)

Home Address

Post Code Tel No Fax No

Business, please describe materials, products or services offered, including Trade Names. If a College please describe courses available.

Signed Date

The following prices are inclusive of VAT.Membership (circle) Corporate - £258.50, College - £129.25, Individual - £45.83, Retired -£20.00, Student - £15.00.

Construction Group Membership is open to Corporate Members of the RDBA plus a £117.50 annual fee. Tick the boxif you wish to join the Construction Group and you will be invoiced for the £117.50 fee once you are a Corporate Member.There is a special concessionary rate for small firms with less than 6 employees, who wish to join the Construction Group of £176.25.The cheques should be made payable to the RDBA Construction Group.

Please return to the National Secretary with your cheque made payable to RDBA. A VAT receipt will be provided.

National Secretary, Tony and Jeannie HutchinsonATSS House, Station Road East, Stowmarket, Suffolk IP14 1RQTel: 01449 676049, Fax: 01449 770028, E-mail: [email protected]

RDBARURAL DESIGN AND BUILDING ASSOCIATION


RDBA NewsThat was the Year ThatWas

(A review of the Associations’ Journals 1957 - 1991)

RURAL HOUSINGBy John Messer

To this day the supply of rural housing has nevermatched the demand and it is no surprise that at the FirstSpring Conference in Scotland in 1957 this subjectfeatured during the day long discussion period.

The siting of new cottages was first consideredand because of the differences in farming practices manyof the cottages in the north were sited near the steadingand somewhat isolated from community life, whilst thosein the south were in villages where there were schools,shops and other amenities. Because of this the delegatesfavoured building new cottages in villages or small towns.But Mr Gunn said that he had recently discussed housingproblems with an Angus farmer, who declared, “For thesake of family peace cottages should be placed wellapart.”

At that time most farm workers’ cottages hadbeen built before the first World War with inadequatelayouts and facilities. No doubt stimulated by the report ofthe Conference next year’s Journal had a description ofthe improvements made to a group of single storiedcottages commonly found in the East of Scotland at thattime (Fig 1). They were small, cramped, with flaggedfloors and a single sink in the kitchen with a single cold

water tap. A small extension made it possible to separatethe kitchen from the living room, provide a bathroom, andin one design, three bedrooms. The stone flagged floorswere replaced and a hot water system installed.

Returning to the 1957 Conference the delegatesthen discussed the cottages shown in Figs 2 and 3. DavidSoutar described the modern three bedroom cottage withits separate dining and living areas built at Bulborne,Herts. by the “Farmers Weekly” and designed by “a ladyarchitect.” The inclusion of a front door in addition to aside door leading to an area entering into a room wherethe farm worker could remove dirty clothes and boots andhave a wash before entering the kitchen was discussedand supported. One of the delegates said that he hadfound that there was a demand by the would-beoccupants of rural houses for front doors that could beused on special occasions such as when the Vicar orDoctor called. He also suggested calling the living roomthe Parlour as this name had a higher social standing.

These plans show a large variation in layoutalthough the materials and method of construction weresimilar to those used today. The exception was theOrkney cottage where doors and windows were as smallas practical because of the high rainfall and the highwinds that could reach 100 mph. It was thought that underthese severe conditions rain could penetrate into theinside walls so the outside wall cavities were not filledwith insulation which was replaced by an inch ofglasswool fixed to the inner wall and covered withplasterboard.

The Conference then considered the housing ofsingle workers. Mr Mackie - later Lord Mackie - spoke ofhis experiences in 1942 of building a hostel for six LandGirls. He assumed they would look after themselves andFig 1, Improving the Traditional Rural Cottage

fig 2.


RDBA News

added, “they did not nor did they when I gave them awoman housekeeper.” His second hostel for six singlemen was sited 300 yards from the first one – “adisposition dictated by my Presbyterian upbringing,” heexplained. Apparently this did not improve matters andthe problem was finally resolved by housing three of thegirls in the first hostel with a married woman in charge,whilst the second hostel was run by another marriedwoman whose semi-invalid husband did odd jobs on thefarm.

Mr Mackie had another farm in the Lea Valley atHarolds Park Essex, an area where there was verystrong competition for labour. Here he built a single unitcomprising two bungalows attached to, and on eitherside of, a hostel in between the two of them. There wasaccess from the hostel to the kitchens of bothbungalows and the wives in the bungalows tookfortnightly turns to feed the “boys” leading to a goodnatured rivalry between the wives “as to who did theboys best.”

In a later journal an article by Dennis Hodsdon,the Editor of “Land Worker“ emphasised the importanceof planning for future requirements. He considered threebedrooms as an essential to segregate the sexes in afamily; that two-storied houses should have a wcupstairs and one downstairs and he was in favour of aparlour “where parents could escape from their childrenand when the children got older, vice-versa”. He thoughtall the houses should have two doors and although atthat time few farm workers had refrigerators, washingmachines or cars space should be provided for them inthe kitchen and outside as they would become commonplace during the life of the house.

In 1962 two farm cottages were built near

Petersfield, Hampshire (fig 4) at a cost of £5226. Theywere somewhat revolutionary in design with flat roofs,the plinths silver-grey in colour and the walls coveredwith dark brown tiles. The author of the report let theplans speak for themselves but noted that “the largeliving room was provided on the assumption that it wouldbe used regularly to watch television rather thanoccasionally for funerals and Christmas festivities.”

Although the Association had 10 OverseasCorrespondents there was but one report from them, theSwedish cottage shown in fig 2. Then an articleappeared from Germany in 1964 with a title which if notexactly eye-catching was very comprehensive - “Acombinative system for a rationalisation of planning ofhousing units for Family Farms in Germany”. The systemwas derived from a questionnaire sent to several officialorganisations seeking their views on the siting ofhouses, the need for standardisation of the ground plan,and so on. The results can best be and perhaps only besummarised by quoting the author - “In three widths ofthe entire house of 7.50m, 8.75m and 10m, a series ofliving quarters and a series of sleeping quarters weredeveloped. Each separate living quarter in any of thethree series can be combined with a sleeping quarter ofthe same series to form a house; so that 10 livingquarters and 10 sleeping quarters will yield 10 x 10 =100 different combinations ie 100 different houses.”

This article on Rural Housing began with thereport from the 1957 Spring Conference. It is endingwith the report from the 1978 Spring Conference whichincluded a visit to two Estates where redundant farmbuildings had been converted into craft workshops.(There is nothing new under the sun - except it was saidthat “the planners were happy, the building regulation

Fig 3 Fig 4.


men seemed content and the highway men agreed forno reason at all”).

However in the 1978 Journal Canon PeterBuckler’s article, “Rural Housing - Today and Tomorrow”begins by quoting a survey of West Dorset villages. Ofvillages with populations up to 500, 75% had no school,50% had no post office, 30% had no shop, 60% had nopub and 68% had no garage. He predicted that therewould be an increasing demand for affordable ruralhouses and that it was unlikely to be met by rentedproperty in private ownership or by Local Authoritieswith limited budgets and urban demands. But he saw aray of hope - Housing Associations. Then as nowHousing Associations must be registered with theHousing Corporation. Canon Buckler sited the 67 stepsthat had to be gone through before registration wasapproved – “like a game of snakes and ladders,” hewrote.

As an example the Ockley Housing Associationcontemplated 62 developments of which 12 are activeand “we hope to complete 6. Or put another way insteadof 400 new houses, 40 to 60 is a more likely figure.”Nevertheless he was optimistic that HousingAssociations would provide the houses that wouldmaintain viable rural communities and help to bring lightindustry into villages and small towns.

This light hearted review of Rural Housingshows the involvement of the Association in ruralhousing but it also traces the development of ruralhousing from the much needed improvement to sub-standard farm cottages to the well-equipped ruralhouses of today now being built in villages or smalltowns of the countryside (Fig 5).

Construction Group

fig 5.

Construction Group AGM &Visit to Filon 20 November

The AGM, was followed by a very interesting talk given by ChrisPearce, on the uses and production method for Filon GRP.

He explained that Filon products were manufactured fromtranslucent polyester resin reinforced with glass matting in athermoset process commonly called g.r.p. The Filon process wasdeveloped in the mid 50’s under an American Patent to make g.r.p.by continuous pultrusion and called FILON. The Patent was takenup for the U.K. by B.I.P. The Resin is catalysed and then the process“wets out” the glass mat with the final shape of the product formedwhen at the “gel point” i.e. as the product hardens. See theschematic at figure 1We were then divided into groups and taken on a guided tour of theproduction line, seeing every part of the process.

We were impressed to think that GRP is used in situations wheregreat strength is required, but where metal for a variety pf reasonscan not be used, such as in the nose cones of 747 jets the hulls ofminesweepers and road signs.

It was amazing to see what fine materials were used and what adelicate process achieved a product with both strength anddurability, and all made to measure. The advantage it gave as a rooflight, giving a diffused, more even light distribution and the vastvariety of different profiles and weights. It is claimed that they cansupply almost all the profiles of metal and fibre cement that haveever been manufactured in the UK. We were also shown their,double skin and triple skin roof light manufacturing process, whichensures that there is a Filon product to help meet the new insulationrequirements.

It was explained that not only could the sheets be supplied in theirnatural colour but also in a large variety of colours as well as opaque.The opaque sheets could be used to economically replace oldasbestos cement or metal sheets with profiles that were no longermanufactured by the original manufacturer.

Following the guided tour we enjoyed a buffet lunch.

Most members then remained to hear a very interesting and usefulpresentation given by Chris Pearce on the new Part L to the buildingregulations. This then evolved into a general discussion about someof the problems and situations facing contractors.

Our last two meetings, including this one, have been very wellattended and we hope to ensure that this continues next year withmeetings that are both informative and enjoyable. To this end, we willbe holding a meeting and dinner the evening before the ABS Showat Harper Adams College on the 8th April and Corus have alreadykindly invited us to see their new composite panel productionfacilities at Llandybie, Carmarthenshire, on 10th September 2003.

Fig 1, Filon production process.


Zero% to17.5%.Take your pickof VAT chargeson theconversion ofcountryside

buildings.

By John CrawfordHave the ravages of Foot & Mouth now firmly passed usby? How many rural property owners are now looking tomake use of empty barns, outbuildings and farm propertiesfollowing the reduction of herds and flocks.

Converting rural buildings for new forms of use is notuncommon and may be seen by many as a way ofdiversifying and generating additional income. But howdoes Customs & Excise view this and what VAT penaltieslay in store.

To understand the complicities of VAT legislation and themind of Customs & Excise one fairly typical example willgive us many different scenarios. The VAT legislation onconversion of property evokes the use of different rates ofVAT subject to the use of the premises.

To best demonstrate the complexities of the manyloopholes with regards to Customs & Excise’s viewpoint onthe charging of VAT, let us use a fairly typical and plausible‘case study’ to highlight the changes.

Assume Farmer A has a disused barn, built of timber orstone, the construction details are unimportant. The ownerwishes to change the use of the property from agriculturalto residential, however the barn has never been tenanted.The property is a listed building and the owner wants tocompletely renovate the barn making it a multi occupancybuilding, for either leasehold residential units, or holidayflats.

What are the implications and how does the VAT change asthe various stages of development unfold? The followingrules will apply to all barn conversions:

Case 1If the owner was to convert the barn into short termdomestic letting accommodation, then the conversion workscarried out to the barn will only carry 5% VAT rather than17.5% VAT on the letting income. No VAT may bereclaimed on reclaim of costs. If he lets it out as holidayaccommodation then VAT is payable on lets but VAT maybe reclaimable on costs.

Case 2The owner may wish to sell the barn to a third party, aprivate individual who desires to live in that barn as theirown domestic personal property. 5% VAT is charged oncontractors service to the new owner, however the existingowner may enjoy a full VAT refund under what is known asthe House Builders DIY scheme.

Case 3

The farmer decides to convert the barn into domesticproperties and then sell on to third parties as new domesticdwellings. The sale of the barn will be zero rated, which willallow full VAT recovery on all the associated costs includingcontractor services at 5%, the standard rate of services ofarchitects, surveyors, agents and legal fees.

Case 4 Clear scope exists for the farmer to generate either lettingincome, or to dispose of the property once it has beenconverted. He may choose to dispose the barn to aprospective DIY converter who will be sure in theknowledge that they can recover lower rate VAT onconstruction services but get that VAT back under the DIYhouse builders scheme.

Case 5 For those who purchase barns for their own occupation,then providing they carry out the works and renovate thebarn, otherwise in the course of business (i.e. not sell thebuilding, but live in it) then they will get VAT recovery onthe contractor’s services under the DIY Refund Scheme.

In all circumstances one should think seriously about adesign and build contract, as the professional fees ofarchitects, surveyors etc. which carry VAT at 17.5% andare not normally reclaimable under the DIY RefundScheme, but would be better channelled through to thecontractor under a design and build contract.

The Design and Build Contract allows the Contractor torecover the VAT charged by the architect or surveyor at17.5% but he in turn only onward charges 5% VAT to theowner of the property. It is therefore possible in thesecircumstances to sweep up all the VAT incurred on theproject under the Refund Scheme.

During the recent 2002 Budget, certain changes to VATlegislation extended the scope of the reduced VAT rate thatapplies to the conversion of certain types of property. Whentaken with last years budget changes, a new rate of 5%VAT applies in certain cases. Some of the applications ofthis new ruling are:

5% VAT applies to works carried out when a building isconverted into a different number of single householddwellings.5% VAT applies when converting a single householddwelling or any building that, before conversion, was not asingle dwelling.5 % VAT applies to the conversion of any building into amultiple occupancy dwelling (such as a bed-sit), thatpreviously was not of that status.5 % VAT applies to the conversion of a building intendedfor residential use, that when last used was not for aresidential purpose.5% VAT applies to the renovation of a dwelling that has notbeen occupied in the last 3 years.

The views of HM Customs & Excise on these changes areset out in VAT Information Sheet 03/2002. While thepurpose of the Urban Regeneration Measures were toencourage the development, conversion and renovation ofunused and redundant rural dwellings, customs are takingtheir usual hard stance and narrow view. Before startingany works make sure you have the correct facts and themethodology with which to proceed. Once you start goingdown the wrong track, it may be difficult to back track.Seek expert advice and beware.

For more details on VAT and countryside conversions,

Technical


TechnicalThe Illumination of an Indoor or Outdoor RidingArenaA Techinical AppraisalBy David J Wood NDA., MIMgt.

1.0. Background

1.01 The training of both horses and riders in riding skills is constant and requires the daily use of a riding arena/manege, whether it be indoors or outdoors, to maintain fitness and ability and to hone and perfect those skills.

1.02. Dressage and show jumping in particular are very precise disciplines where the correct lighting levels are mandatory for schooling, practice and competition and to carry out the necessary manoeuvres both correctly and precisely.

1.03. For those persons in full employment the only opportunity to indulge in their chosen sport is in the evenings and at weekends. In late Autumn, the Winter and early Spring these opportunities may be limited to the available daylight hours.

1.04. It is against this background, be it a private or a commercial riding establishment, that it is necessary to illuminate a riding area/manege, whether indoors or outdoors.

2.0. Technical data as a design guide.

2.01. The British Horse Society, (BHS), and the British Show Jumping Association, (BSJA), have set down a table of minimum recommended illuminances for the various equestrian disciplines and those which are applicable as follows......

Schooling, supervised practice, training and warm-up areas.

Application. Illuminance Plane of Mounting height of light(Lux). measurement source in meters

Show jumping 150/300 Horizontal on 8/10,000 metersRiding surface

Dressage 100/200 Ditto 8/10,000 meters

Carriage driving 200/300 Ditto 8/10,000 meters

2.02. Based on these BHS recommended minimum standards, further advice and technical information should be sought from competent electricians or lighting manufacturers, who are specialists in lighting design.

2.03. In the majority of outdoor applications the scheme should be designed with minimum light spillage as one of the principal criteria, since many manege are located in sensitive rural locations.

2.04. A lighting scheme for a typical 40.000m x 20.000m out door all-weather manege will require 6 No x 8.000m high lighting columns to each of which are attached 2 No x l.OOkW lamps. (I normally specify the Phosco FL range of lamps).

2.05. The features of this type of lamp is to provide high efficiency, full cut-off and low light spillage/pollution.

2.06 The manufacturers/suppliers of these lamps will often provide, (free of charge), all the necessary photometric data which shows illuminances measured at the manege surface.

2.07 The spacing and focussing of these lamps will provide surface illuminations varying from 516 Lux beneath the lamps through to 196 Lux at the centre/end of a 40.000m x 20.000m manege.

2.08. Each lamp should be fitted with a steel shroud which, together with the lamp mounting position is designed to be manually focussed to direct the maximum amount of light in the downwards plane. Such focussing mustbe carried out individually to each lamp, when in place using a light meter to contain the maximum amount of light within the manege perimeter.


Technical2.09. The design of the ‘Phosco’ lamp body employs the use of a downwards throw deflector. The principle feature

of this type of unit is that the glazing is located in the bottom of the body of the unit. As a result it is virtually impossible to see the lit lantern from outside of the perimeter of the manege.

2.10. The illumination of a manege, whether indoors or outdoors, requires the light to be concentrated downwards on to the riding surface and any show jumps.

2.11. The normal line of sight of a mounted rider is no higher than 3.300 metres above the riding surface. Lighting, other than on a vertical plane, would dazzle the rider and possibly the horse and prove extremely dangerous were show jumping to be attempted.

2.12. Such lighting may be compared with that on aircraft taxi-ways and dispersal areas at airports where it is important that the pilot is not dazzled by any lighting when bringing an aircraft up to the terminal ‘stand’.

2.13. This type of lighting must not be confused with the wider spread of lighting in both the horizontal and the vertical planes and the use of substantially higher columns associated with most ball games......... Rugby, football, hockey, tennis, golf driving ranges, etc., where the ball, in play, may travel well above the normal line of sight and must at all times be visible to the players below.

2.14. An inspection of such sport facilities will confirm the amount of light spillage/pollution which occurs within a wide area well beyond the curtilage of such premises.

2.15. The only other possible source of light pollution outside of the lit area could be refracted light from the manege surface.

2.16. A large majority of manege riding surfaces will consist of a mixture of sand, plastic granules/particles and/or rubber, both of which have a low refractive index. Light striking such a surface will mostly be absorbed and not reflected and could not therefore be considered as a source of secondary light pollution.

2.17. Outside of the perimeter of most manege the surfaces are normally of grass with similar characteristics to those described above.

2.18. The design of any lighting scheme should incorporate double switching. This will allow for, say, 50% of the lighting to be available for ordinary ‘flatwork’ and the daily exercising of the horses. When practicing for showjumping, for example, the light level can be increased to the 100% level.

2.19. The majority of manege uses will normally be at the lower lighting level which, as a result, would also economise in the use of electricity.

2.20. For the lighting of an indoor riding arena the same BHS lighting recommendations will apply. However much depends upon the refractive or light absorption qualities of the internal structure.

2.21. For an indoor riding arena I would normally specify the use of Low Bay Luminaires, preferably of the high pressure sodium type. Whilst these may prove to be slightly more expensive they have lower running costs which would recoup the difference in a very short while. These units may be slung, on chains, from the portal frame purlins which gives very precise adjustment to the luminaire.

2.22. The spread of light from the unit controls the mounting height since it is important to contain the surface illumination within the perimeter of the riding area. Once again it is preferable to obtain advice from a manufacturer or a lighting consultant when considering the illumination of an indoor riding arena.

3.0. Light pollution and the design criteria.

3.01. This is a subject which has come substantially to the fore in recent years partially due to the efforts of planners concerned with the impact on rural areas and previous disregard, or possibly, ignorance of designers of lighting schemes to the effects of light pollution.

3.02. Whilst the term ‘light pollution’ is often used to describe a problem, it is in fact made up by a number of factors, some widely accepted, others more difficult to identify.......

a. Glare.

Refers to a source of visual discomfort caused by the persons sightline being in line with the main beam,(or strength), of the light source. (Un-dipped headlights of an approaching vehicle).

In planning terms this would be quantified by establishing a persons normal station. i.e. Someone sitting intheir living room rather than being unusually close up to a light source. A classic example is a poorly locatedand aimed security light.

b. Light intrusion.

An overspill of light in to an area where it is not wanted, e.g. A sports flood-lighting scheme which illuminates


Technicalan adjacent back gardens and adjoining properties as well as the playing area to unacceptable levels orextent

c. Upward light pollution.

Is usually caused by poor lantern or scheme design which allows light, which performs no useful function,up in to the air and can lead to a localised glow in the sky.

d. Reactive visual awareness.

Is essentially the after effects of a new lighting scheme being put where there was previouslyno lighting or a poorly lit facility. This is not essentially a fault with a scheme or equipmentused but instead a reaction to a change in the landscape as previously unlit surfaces may berevealed.

3.03. In 1994 the Institute of Lighting engineers issued a paper entitled ‘Guidance notes for the reduction of light pollution’. This gives a number of recommendations in simplified form that would reduce the instance of unnecessary and obtrusive light spillage.

3.04. This went on to suggest the adoption by Local Planning Authorities, (LPA’s), of lighting limitations to types of Environmental Area Zones, as follows......E. 1. National Park, AONB., or other dark landscapes.E.2. Areas of ‘low district brightness’, such as rural areas.E.3. Areas of ‘medium district brightness’, such as urban, largely residential locations.E.4. Areas of ‘high district brightness’, such as urban areas with high night time activity.

To these zones were applied criteria against which lighting should be tested......Sky glow.The figure for Zone E. 1. is 0%. The design of lamp bodies and the position of the light source will establish this.

Light in to windows.This is measured in Lux. Photometric data produced by light manufacturers may establish whether this islikely to occur.

Source intensity.This refers to the intensity of the light source when viewed from areas outside of the area to be lit.

4.0. Legislative considerations.Health & Safety in horse riding establishments.

4.01. The Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 applies to all persons at work, or play, be they employers, self employed, employees, members of the general public or even family members who may be affected by such activities.

4.02. In short the owner or manager of any equestrian facility has a duty of care to all persons, including themselves, who are working with or engaged in horse riding or are spectators.

4.03. The Act places a statutory obligation on the owner and/or occupier of the premises to provide alighting system which produces a level of lighting for such activities to proceed in such a manner as not to prejudice the health and safety of all such persons and meet the requirements of The Workplace (Health & Safety) Regulations 1992.

5.0. Planning considerations.

5.01. Virtually all LP A’s will have a policy or guidance relating to the floodlighting of premises used for outdoor sport generally. A few LPA’s in fact have a specific policy for horse riding establishments.

5.02. It is in my experience that the majority of LP A Planning Officers and certainly Planning Committee members have little understanding of the technicalities and the effects of floodlighting in terms of light spillage and pollution and do not, or will not, accept that such spillage and pollution can be designed out of an installation.This inexperience often extends to their Landscape Architects and Environmental Officers who may be approached to give an opinion on such an application.

5.03. For this reason, when dealing with LPA’s, I use the term ‘illumination’ of, rather than the floodlighting of an outdoor manege. (Hence the title to my article !). It would appear, the floodlighting of a football pitch with hundreds of lights perched on pylons some 30.000 metres in the air springs to their minds!

5.04. Where there are concerns about the impact on amenity of nearby residents from floodlighting and other forms of illumination, particularly in sensitive areas, the LPA may impose conditions on a consent which limitsthe hours during which the lights are switched on.


Technical5.05. Typically these may be restricted to.... .

am. 06.30 hrs through to 1 hour after sunrise, pm. 1 hour before sunset through to 22.00 hrs.

Whilst these times may be the ideal many LPA’s will nibble away at each end of the day and reduce the overall times.I suggest you ask for a little more time at the outset when you are likely to end up with the ideal!

5.05. Where such a condition is imposed and to be acceptable to the applicant it must be subject to and meet the ‘Six tests’, for planning conditions as set out in the D of E Circular 11/95. The Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions, (More of this at another time !)

5.06. In addition some LPA’s may object to the light pylons themselves from a daytime visual amenity point of viewand their impact on the landscape. I personally prefer to specify slim steel pylons, which are powder coated to a BS colour of 18.B.29.

5.07. Such columns may also be available with a counter-balanced/hinged mechanism which allows the pylon to be lowered out of sight when not in use and is also very convenient for the changing of light bulbs !

6.0. Conclusions.

6.01. For a commercial equestrian enterprise it is essential that any outdoor manege or exercise areas are illuminated up to the minimum standards. Not all such establishments may enjoy the use of an indoor riding arena!

6.02. Even in highly sensitive National Parks, AONB’s and Green Belt locations a well designed and located manege illumination scheme will minimise light spillage, pollution and intrusion or damage to amenities of the area and will prove acceptable to a LPA..

6.03. Technical guidance should be sought from the outset from a reputable manufacturer or lighting consultant. If the matter proceeds to a Planning Appeal then some of these companies will often provide expert witnesses in lighting, at a price !

David J. Wood NDA., MMgt.Agricultural & Equestrian Building Architectural & Planning Consultant.

References.

Planning & Design Data. Architectural Press. The

A. J. Handbook of the Building Environment Section 9.,

Electrical lighting. Architects Journal.

Illumination of outdoor competition, supervised

practice & training areas. The British Horse Society.

Letters

Building Insurance & Composite Panels

At the last Construction Group meeting some members, quite understandably, expressed concern at the attitude that someInsurance Companies are adopting towards Composite Panels of any type. I think we are all aware that the real concern is regardingpanels with Polystyrene infill, but that confusion (?) has lead to high premiums being demanded by some Insurers for any core type.

I have now received confirmation from NFU Mutual that they are quite willing to insure buildings with Composite Panels having acore of PUR (Polyurethane) or PIR (Polyisocianurate) without increasing premiums. This is indeed good news for the industry as awhole, particularly as so much of our work is in the Agricultural sector. Perhaps their stance will start to clear the objections of thefew other Insurers who will no doubt start to lose business!

It will still be prudent to ensure the client is aware of this insurance situation, but I would expect to see the growth in Compositepanels continue at a rapid pace!!!

John DominyUnited Roofing Products Ltd1 Scots YardHaslingfieldCambs. CB3 7NB


READER DETAILSFULL NAME JOB TITLE COMPANY ADDRESS POST CODE TEL No. FAX No. E-MAIL ADDRESS WEB ADDRESS

Make cheques payable to: Ghyll House Publishing Ltdand post to:- Ghyll House Publishing Ltd

FREEPOST ANG20369,Stowmarket, IP14 1ZY

Or you can phone or fax your credit card details on:Tel: 01449 677500 Fax:01449 770028

Special offer UK address £20.00 for 1 years �£35.00 for 2 years �£45.00 for 3 years �

Overseas address £25.00 for 1 years �£40.00 for 2 years �£60.00 for 3 years �

Credit Card Details Card Type: Name on Card: Card No: / / / Expiry Date: / Issue No:

TYPE OF BUSINESS�MANUFACTURER�FRAME MANUFACTURER�RURAL SURVEYOR�ARCHITECT�SPECIFIERS�OTHERS.........................................

�QUANTITY SURVEYOR�BUILDING CONTRACTOR�LOCAL GOVERNMENT�CENTRAL GOVERNMENT�FARMER�DEVELOPER

NO. OF EMPLOYEES� 1/5� 5/10� 10/25� 25/50� 50+

Published and printed by Ghyll House Publishing Ltd, ATSS House, Station Rd East,Stowmarket

Suffolk, IP14 1RQ Telephone: 01449 677500 Fax: 01449 770028 E-mail: [email protected]

As you would expect Countryside Building’s circulationis increasing every issue, we now have a readership ofover 17,000.Countryside Building is of course free to RDBAMembers; the normal annual subscription cost for non-members with UK address is £20.00 and for overseasaddress £25.00

Countryside Building Subscription

COUNTRYSIDE BUILDINGFREE READER ENQUIRY SERVICE

READER DETAILS

FIRST NAME SURNAME JOB TITLE COMPANY ADDRESS POST CODE TEL No. FAX No. E-MAIL ADDRESS WEB ADDRESS

FAX: 01449 770028TEL: 01449 677500

PLEASE SEND ME DETAILS OF THE ADVERTISER I HAVE INDICATEDTYPE OF BUSINESS� MANUFACTURER� FRAME MANUFACTURER� RURAL SURVEYOR� ARCHITECT� SPECIFIERS� OTHERS......................................

� QUANTITY SURVEYOR� BUILDING CONTRACTOR� LOCAL GOVERNMENT� CENTRAL GOVERNMENT� FARMER� DEVELOPER

NO. OF EMPLOYEES� 1/5� 5/10� 10/25� 25/50� 50+

� PLEASE TICK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE ADVERTISING DETAILSWANT YOUR ENQUIRIES PROCESSED NOW? THEN FAX

YOUR COMPLETED CARD TO US ON 01449 770028or post to:- Ghyll House Publishing Ltd FREEPOST ANG20369,

Stowmarket, IP14 1ZYPublished and printed by Ghyll House Publishing Ltd ,ATSS House, Station Rd East, Stowmarket

Suffolk, IP14 1RQ Telephone: 01449 677500 Fax: 01449 770028 E-mail: [email protected]

--------------------------------------------------------------�---------------------------------------------------------------

Enquiry numbers:-


When doesDevelopmentneed PlanningPermission?

By Alison Roland

The question of precisely what constitutes development requiringplanning permission is not always as straightforward as it may seem.The Town and Country Planning Act at Section 55 definesdevelopment thus:“the carrying out of building, mining, engineering or other operations,in, on, over or under land or the making of any material change in theuse of buildings or other land”.The majority of development requiring consent relates to newbuildings or changes of use and this article will therefore focus onthese two main types of development.

When is Building not a Building?The Town and Country Planning Act defines a building as:“any structure or erection but not plant and machinery comprised in abuilding”The question as to what constitutes a building as opposed to atemporary structure has stretched Planners minds for decades. Theproblem is that the definition is inevitably subject to interpretation andhence it is only reference to court cases, which have qualified themeaning of the term “building”. The key issues that have emergedfrom these court cases are as follows:

- Size (how big is the structure)- Permanence (how long has it remained insitu)- Degree of attachment (i.e. does the structure have

foundations or a purpose built concrete base?)

Typical areas of ambiguity concern structures such as steelcontainers (often used for commercial storage); stables, and the moreunusual garden features such as pergolas. In all these cases,whether a proposal amounts to a building operation is a matter of factand degree, having regard to the aforementioned 3 criteria. Forexample, in one case at planning appeal, an Inspector concluded thatsteel containers stacked on top of each other at a commercialpremises, amounted to “buildings” even though they were obviouslyoriginally portable structures designed to be lifted by a crane. Thereason she came to this conclusion was partly the permanence of thecontainers; they had been insitu for over 18 months and had not beenmoved in that time. They were also supplied with mains electricity andwere essentially being utilised as additional storage area for a wellestablished carpet factory. They had no proper foundations but weresupported at each corner on bricks. The Inspector referred to thebricks as “terrestrial foundations”. Had the containers been movedperiodically about the site, she may well have come to a differentconclusion.

Another case concerned a marquee at a rural hotel/pub. Themarquee was used for functions such as weddings and social events.The Council argued that since it was insitu for over 6 months in everyyear, the structure amounted to a building requiring planningpermission. At a planning appeal, the Inspector agreed andconcluded that given its relative permanence, and the fact that itremained present on the land for months at a time, that the marqueeamounted to a “building” requiring planning permission.

Even a plastic “Herbie Tree” children’s play structure at a PublicHouse has been held on appeal to constitute a building.

TechnicalA further common query concerns polytunnels, which are oftenperceived not to be buildings. However, appeal cases would tend tosuggest otherwise. Typically the tunnels need to be erected on siterather than being transported in one piece to the land. When erected,the framework is fixed into the ground either into concrete or intotubes which are sunk into the ground. They also tend to persist in thelandscape for a number of years i.e they tend to acquire permanence.For these reasons, polytunnels are usually held to be buildings.

Of course there are “permitted development” rights relating toagricultural buildings and even if a structure is determined to be abuilding, the next stage is to establish whether it benefits from“permitted development” rights conferred by the Town and CountryPlanning (General Permitted Development) Order, or GPDO forshort. (see Countryside Building Volume 2 Issue 1 “Do you need fullplanning permission for your agricultural building”)

A more recent development has been the emergence of moveablestables and field shelters on skids or sleds. Whilst stables usuallyrequire planning permission, these more recent innovations are anattempt to overcome the requirement for planning permission.However, I always advise clients that in order to be regarded as trulymobile, it is prudent to periodically move these structures, say 3 or 4times a year, to ensure that the Local Authority do not allege that theyhave become permanent buildings by acquiring a degree ofpermanence on the land.

The moral of the story with regards to what does or does notconstitute a building is to take professional advice and not to rely onhearsay or experiences of friends and family.

Changes of use.This is another common cause of dispute with Planning Authorities.In order for a change of use to require planning permission, it has tobe “material” in planning terms, that is to say it has to be a significantchange. This arises most usually because the appearance andcharacter of the land is fundamentally changed.

A common example is agricultural contracting. Contractors typicallyhave a compound or yard area with a range of machinery and plantwhich is contracted out to local farms and businesses. Such a userequires planning permission, although it is fair to say that a significantproportion of such businesses have either passed undetected by thePlanning Authority, or are so well established through the passage oftime as to have become immune from enforcement action by theCouncil.

The stationing of a caravan usually amounts to a material change inuse on the land it is stationed, unless it is utilised for storage and isancillary to agriculture. However, this is something of a grey areaand I have recently won an appeal for a large static caravan on thisbasis, but know of a client who lost an appeal for a much smallertouring caravan; both of which were ostensibly utilised for fodderstorage at holdings! Of course residential occupation requirespermission unless it is related to a seasonal requirement at aholding.

A further common issue is paraphernalia associated with horserelated developments including horse boxes etc. In a case I recentlydealt with, the Council issued an Enforcement Notice against thehorsebox and water baths depicted in the photographs. They arguedthat there had been a material change in the use of the land to thestorage of baths and stationing of a horsebox. At appeal, thePlanning Inspector agreed with me that both were ancillary to theprimary use of the land for agriculture and the keeping of horses. Shewent on to quash the Notice but did not award costs to the appellanton the grounds of unreasonable issue of an Enforcement Notice.

The concept of an ancillary use is potentially extremely beneficial for


landowners. For example, a farm shop selling produce grownprincipally on the holding would be ancillary to the primary use foragriculture and would not normally require planning permission.Another example is the packing of eggs, obviously an essentialexercise to enable a fragile product to be marketed. Howeverprocessing of farm produce, whether cutting and packing meat orprocessing arable products is normally held to be akin to an industrialprocess which is not ancillary to agriculture and which requiresplanning permission. Processing involving wine and cider making aresomething of a grey area in planning circles and there are appealcases which conclude both that they are and are not ancillary toagriculture.

A discussion of changes of use would not be complete withoutmentioning the various temporary uses to which land can be put.These rights are conferred by the Town and Country Planning(General Permitted Development) Order 1995. This is the samedocument which confers “permitted development” rights for buildingsunder certain circumstances. Essentially there are two types ofdeemed consent for changes of use; those up to a maximum of 28days per year and those which are limited to 14 days. There arecertain restrictions for ecologically sensitive sites. Typical uses limitedto 14 days include clay pigeon shooting and car boot sales. Whilst atfirst sight these rights do not appear particularly generous, I know ofsome businesses who exploit car boot sales to the full, and when thefinal 14th event has been held, merely move to an adjacent farm tohold a further 14 events!

This article is very much a whistle stop tour of some of the nuancesof planning law, but it serves to illustrate the complexities inherent inthe system and the fact that so many elements of the statute aresubject to interpretation. Small wonder then that the Government areproposing a radical overhaul of the panning system!

Alison Roland Chartered Town Planner, operates across Cumbria,Lancashire and Yorkshire and is a sole practitioner. She can becontacted on 01282 863409.

TechnicalCSCS/BCSASkills Cards forsteel erectors

By Phil Robinson of RobinsonConstruction

As you are aware the Major Contractors Group have agreedthat from 2004 they will only allow full qualified staff orofficial trainees to work on their sites. Because of their sizeand the number of construction sites under their control thiswill have an important effect on the industrial andcommercial construction industries. At present it will havelittle effect on most agricultural construction sites althoughin time we must expect that more and more sites willrequire a fully trained work force.Up and until now it has been very difficult to obtain trainingfor steel erectors, but this is now changing.The Chairman of the Construction Skills CertificationScheme, Tony Merricks, and the Director General of TheBritish Constructional Steelwork Association Ltd, DerekTordoff, have proposed a way forward for steel erectorcards. It is planned to introduce two new CSCS cardschemes (incorporating the BCSA logo) aimed at the steelconstruction on-site workers, with a target Date forimplementation of 6 January 2003.In a meeting between representatives of BCSA And CSCS,it was agreed that CSCS would introduce a ‘SteelworkErector’ card and a ‘Steelwork Fabricator’ card (the latter tocover plating and welding activities on site) as from the firstweek in January 2003.With the end of the year approaching, the Major ContractorsGroup [MCG] has been discussing its skills cards targetswith CSCS. The lack of a ‘Steelwork Erector’ CSCS cardwas an issue of major concern. Recent meetings andcommunications with the Engineering Construction IndustryTraining Board [ECITB] and the CSCS made it clear thatECITB’s proposed steel erectors card would be unlikely tobecome available before mid-2003. Furthermore, althoughECITB and CSCS had agreed on mutual recognition of theirrespective health and safety [H&S] tests, ECITB may beunable to meet some other CSCS affiliation criteria, and sowould be unable to issue a skills card that would beacceptable to the MCG.Before the new “CSCS/BCSA” cards can be set up,occupational standards, vocational qualifications andassessment routes have to be in place. NVQ3 for SteelworkErectors, and both NVQ2 and NVQ3 for SteelworkFabricators are already in place; BCSA will be working withMetskill to establish an NVQ2 for Steelwork Erectors.This means that the following cards should be available asfrom January 2003:

Steelwork Erector:Red - Trainee CardGreen - Construction Site Operative CardGold - Skilled [Skills to NVQ3 Standard] Card

Steelwork Fabricator:Red - Trainee CardGreen - Construction Site Operative CardBlue - Experienced Worker [Skills to NVQ2 Standard] CardGold - Skilled [Skills to NVQ3 Standard] Card

The Blue (NVQ2 level) Skill Card for the ‘Steelwork Erector’The water baths in dispute

The “horse box” in dispute


will become available once the NVQ2 qualification has beenestablished by BCSA/Metskill (during 2003). Gold, Platinumand Black cards for supervisors, managers and contractsmanagers are already available through CSCS in their ownright(i.e. not specifically connected to steelwork). As these cards are introduced, an agreed period of‘grandfather rights’/industry accreditation will begin. Thisperiod will be either 18 months or two years. In addition,when the 18 months/2 years grandfather rights applicationsclose, a further entry route will open as an ExperiencedWorker, working towards an NVQ/SVQ.

Grandfather Rights.The erector gold card and the fabricator blue and gold cardswill be open to all suitably capable steel erectors/fabricators[with skills that equate to NVQ Level 2 or 3 standard asappropriate]. They will need an endorsement from theircurrent or recent specialist employer, and must apply withinthe 18 months/2 years that the grandfather rights window isopen. Thereafter, the route to grandfather rights will close,and any subsequent Applicants will have to follow the NVQroute.At present, NVQ Level 3 for steel erectors is in existence;Level 2 is likely to take 6 - 8 months to bring in. Currentsteel erectors who do not have the necessary skills that canbe equated to Level 3 standard might be expected to reachthe lower Level 2 standard when it established. For theseerectors, as an interim measure, they would be able toobtain a Construction Site Operatives card [general siteNVQ Level 1] through grandfather rights - and subsequentlyupgrade to Steel Erectors card [Level 2] when thenecessary NVQs have been set up and confirmed.

Experienced Worker CardTwo years from the inception of the new erectors card [i.e.early in 2005], the grandfather rights/industry accreditationroute to the skills card will close. Thereafter, anyexperienced worker wishing to acquire his/her first steelerectors card will have to register for an NVQ or SVQ.Taken with employer’s confirmation of competence in steelerection, the applicant could then apply for an ExperiencedWorkers card. The card would later lapse if the NVQ/SVQwere not achieved.

CostsIt appears probable that in 2003, all cards acquired via thegrandfather rights/industry accreditation route will cost£20.00. Most updates or replacement cards should cost£9.00. The present cost of H&S ‘touch screen’ test is£35.00.

Health and Safety TestsAll first time applicants for the erectors card will have topass a H&S ‘touch screen’ test or to have an exemptionresulting from, for example, having acquired a CCNSG H&Spassport within the previous two years. Card renewal [after5 years] will demand another touch screen test, without anyexemptions. The ‘touch-screen’ test is taken at DVLC testcentres, arranged through CITB.

Engineering Construction SitesThough ECITB and CSCS have agreed on mutualrecognition of their respective H&S tests, workers onengineering construction sites will be expected to do a halfdays top-up course in addition to the ‘touch screen test’ tomeet the different demands of these sites. As a short termexpedient, workers on engineering construction sites willcontinue to require completion of the CCNSG H&S passport

course until the H&S top-up course is established next year.Obviously grandfather rights are only open to those whohave the necessary knowledge and experience, whichleaves a training rout required for those coming into theindustry to replace natural wastage and so with a localcollege I am organising all weather-training facilities inDerby, which once completed should also allow, sheeting,cladding and decking training on the same site. I will keepthe RDBA Construction Group members informed ofdevelopments

ConclusionAt last there is positive news and major progress towardsthe long-awaited erectors skills card. CSCS is hoping tolaunch the new cards on 6 January 2003, and although thedate cannot yet be graven in stone, we are optimistic thatthere should not be the sort of hold ups that have sodelayed the ECITB card.Although these cards are not at present required onagricultural sites, this could change in the future. There arethough other strong arguments for having a fully trainedwork force; buildings are likely to be erected more efficientlyand with fewer accidents. Most RDBA Construction GroupMembers are already erecting industrial buildings and so itwill not be long before a main contractor will ask for proof ofa fully trained work force before you can start work. It istherefore in your own interest to try and ensure that yoursteel erectors apply for the qualifications under grandfatherrights or you could be at a disadvantage.

Phil RobinsonRobinson ConstructionWincanton Close, Ascot Drive Industrial Estate, Derby,Derbyshire, DE24 8NJPhone 01332 574711

Technical

Reader Enquiry 22


Reader Enquiry 16

Reader Enquiry 17

Reader Enquiry 19

Reader Enquiry 20

Reader Enquiry 18

Reader Enquiry 21


Reader Enquiry 24

Reader Enquiry 32



Reader Enquiry 28


Reader Enquiry 12

AgriculturalWednesday

Harper Adams University

Investing in buildings is one the most significant and long lasting decisions thata farmer makes, with the results being a vital factor in the success or otherwise

of the business for many years.

With this in mind the Agricultural Buildings Show has been set up to act as areference point covering all facets of farm buildings. Its aim is to bring togetherfarmers and the trade under one roof to discuss the best possible solutions for

the farm business.

The event targets the practical, forward thinking farmer who is looking toimprove his existing facilities, develop a new building/green field site and/or

diversify the existing buildings for alternative use.

The Agricultural Buildings Show combines a technical trade exhibition whichshowcases the best products, hardware and services available to the farmeralongside a strongly independent seminar programme of the best practical

advice and leading research and actual case studies.

The Agricultural Buildings Show runs from 9am - 5pm at Harper AdamsUniversity College, Newport, Shropshire, for directions please see the map on

the opposite page. There is free parking on site.

Admission to the event is free with a ticket or £5 on the gate. Tickets areavailable for free download from the event website at www.farmbuilding.co.uk,by email from [email protected] , by fax from the organizers on01539 740485 by calling Fusion Events on 01539 734725 or cutting out the

ticket on the opposite page

There has already been a great deal of interest shown in exhibiting with a number of sites already sold, so if you are keen on taking part please contact

Andy Newbold on 01539 734725 or by email [email protected] .

Organised by Fusion Events in association with


Buildings Show9 April 2003College, Shropshire

Directions

Please cut out the form below and bring along on the day to obtain free entry to the Agricultiral Building Show� �

Wednesday 9th April 2003, Harper Adams UniversityCollege, Newport Shropshire, TF10 8NB

FREEUsual gate price

£5.00

Name:

Address:

Tel:

Job title:

E-mail:

Fusion Events www.farmbuildings.co.uk

the RDBA and Farmers Weekly.



The Use of Hot RolledAsphalt (HRA) inAgricultural Forage Silos

Hot Rolled Asphalt (HRA) can provide an economical andflexible alternative to concrete in the flooring of forage silos butthe correct specification and proper installation are essential. Itcan be used very successfully in new silos but it is especiallyuseful for refurbishing existing floors where the concrete is wornor porous. Recent work carried out by ADAS in conjunction withthe Quarry Products Association (QPA) has identified bestpractice. HRA is just one product in the range of asphalt and coatedmacadam mixes commonly used in road construction andmaintenance, which all come under the generic heading of‘asphalt’. For the more technically minded HRA is a combinationof high viscosity bitumen, filler and fine aggregate to whichcoarse aggregate is added as a bulking agent. The importantissue here is that although HRA is just one in the range ofasphalt road materials it is likely to be the best one in terms ofits impermeability. This is just one of the reasons why the manwho knocks on the door and says he has a lorry load of asphaltleft over from the ‘motorway job’ down the road should be turnedaway. If the floor of a forage silo is going to leak then it is a completewaste of time putting it down because it will cause waterpollution. The floor needs to be impermeable (not leak) to avoidpollution and to comply with the Control of Pollution Regulations.Another reason to turn down the cheap offer on the doorstep isthat there will be no time to prepare the existing base. Poorpreparation can result in sympathetic, reflective cracks andholes coming through the pristine new asphalt surface withinjust a few days. It is important to prepare well and to use theright HRA mix. Plenty of good advice is now available on thesesubjects. It is always a good idea to get two or three prices and of courseto check around locally to get recommendations where you can.Where possible choose a contractor who is a member of arecognised trade organisation such as the QPA (phone: 0207730 8194). You can confirm this with a quick telephone call tothe trade association. Then make sure that the contractor takescare over the specification and finer details of the installation.For a forage silo it must be HRA, which means working toBS594 (Hot Rolled Asphalt for roads and other paved areas).They should be aware of the unique problems associated withagricultural installations mentioned in the ADAS and QPAtechnical information sheets. They must be looking to achievethe appropriate mix for the particular application and intending toprepare the site well.For laying the HRA a mechanical paver will usually do the bestjob but working in confined spaces may mean that the HRA willneed to be laid by hand. If this is the case then particularattention is needed to keep a consistent thickness and to ensuregood compaction. A good firm base is essential in both new andexisting installations. More detailed information and usefuldiagrams are given in the ADAS technical information sheet.Other points to remember include the need for good jointingdetails with water bars where appropriate and, of course, forcontinuous effluent drainage channels around the perimeter.Once HRA is properly specified and installed there are still oneor two points to keep in mind. Silos with HRA floors should notbe used for permanent parking or pallet storage as some oilsand heavy point loads can cause damage. Dung can damageany asphalt material if allowed to accumulate. In self-feedsystems dung can stick on, then on drying out it shrinks, whichis when the damage is done. Regular cleaning of the floor cankeep this under control. A visit to the QPA Website at www.qpa.org is well worthwhile as

they provide free information sheets on a wide range of asphaltrelated subjects. Their Application Sheet No. 8, ‘FarmingApplications of Asphalt’ provides guidance on variousagricultural uses of asphalt including silos and farm roads.BS 5502 Part 21 is being revised to include more information onHRA. ADAS has produced a new technical note (ConstructionGuidance Note no. 012), which is reproduced here in ‘pull-out’format. The whole series of CGN technical notes, as listedbelow is available free from the RDBA or can be printed off freefrom the ADAS Website www.farmbuildings.co.uk or from ADASon 01626 892638 or by emailing - [email protected]

· CGN001Above-ground circular concrete and rectangular weeping-wall slurry stores

· CGN002Earth-banked slurry stores· CGN003In-situ concrete slurry stores· CGN004Above-ground circular steel slurry stores· CGN005Silage clamps and effluent tanks· CGN006Sheep dip handling facilities and drainage

yards· CGN007Chemical and pesticide stores· CGN008Separation of clean and dirty water. Dirty

water storage.Yard area construction· CGN009Bunds for agricultural fuel oil tanks· CGN010Sluice valves on steel and concrete circular

above-ground slurry stores· CGN011 The Use of Covers on Circular Steel and

Concrete Slurry Stores· CGN012 The Use of Hot Rolled Asphalt (HRA)

Surfacing for Agricultural Forage Silos· CGN100Organising contracts for farm waste

structures

David HughesBuilding Design Manager ADAS

Technical

Reader Enquiry 6

adas sheet


RDBA / SAC SPRING CONFERENCE

DUMFRIES : 23/24/24 APRIL 2003‘A TASTE OF SCOTLAND’ Cairndale Hotel & Leisure Club, Dumfries

We have combined forces with the SAC to organise next year’s Spring Conference. It will be anessential meeting for those interested in farm building development and diversification, and will betaking place in a very attractive area of Scotland, accessible from all areas of the UK. You will beassured of good hospitality and a Scottish welcome in a top quality hotel, situated in the heart ofDumfries.

Dumfriesshire is a good farming area with plenty of up-to-date steadings. It is also a very populartourist area where the local Tourist Board are pro-active in catering for visitors and has plenty of goodprojects to offer.

One of the main farm visits will be at Crichton Royal Farm, which is the flagship dairy research centrein Scotland. It is presently undergoing an upgrade to accommodate a high genetic new herd. TheCrichton estate is also interesting and a guided farm walk will take place with a look around theCrichton Museum.

Other visits we hope will include a Scottish salmon-smoking unit, visiting local organic farmers andmilk producers and Gretna Centre with its Blacksmiths Shop. Final details will be ready in the NewYear.

This is a meeting not to be missed!

Wednesday 23 April

Arrive late afternoon/early eveningVisit will be arranged to a local attraction, (possibly a whiskey distillery)Dinner at Cairndale Hotel

Thursday 24 April

Morning - AGM followed by conference at Crichton (transport provided by coach from hotel)Afternoon – After lunch at Crichton there will be a guided farm walk and a look round the

Crichton MuseumEvening – Conference dinner Cairndale Hotel, with a Scottish theme & prominent local speaker.

Friday 25 April

Visits in the morning and disperse by early afternoon. Visits will probably include a local organicfarm, milk producers, Gretna Centre and Blacksmiths shop and BSW Sawmills in Carlisle.

Prices per person Cost member Cost none member Double / full conference + dinner, b&b x 1 night pp £135.00 £160.00 Single / full conference + dinner, b&b x 1 night £150.00 £175.00 1st day conference + dinner (no bed) £60.00 £80.00 1st day conference only (no dinner) £40.00 £60.00 1st & 2nd day + conference dinner (no bed) £90.00 £110.00

For those wishing to stay for dinner b&b on Wednesday 23 April the cost is £66.50 pp double or£81.00 single.

For further details contact the RDBA on 01449 676049, by fax on 01449 770028 or [email protected] or Margaret Fagan at SAC on 01292 520331


Reader Enquiry 25

Reader Enquiry 26

Volume 3 Issue 2

Documents

Transcript of Volume 3 Issue 2