layout: post
title:  "Meeting with the quantity surveyor and visit at the agglomeration community"
date:   2014-02-05 19:31:04
categories: paperwork
---

Surveyor Act 1
==============

After a succesful meeting with the advising architect yesterday, I decided to kill two bird in one stone while in town today.  
I had a meeting planned with the quantity surveyor in the afternoon.  
The goal was to have a chat with him and discuss the case.  
On my side I wanted to know what are the possibilities to split the condominium.  
He wanted to have a look around at the site to have a better understanding of my project.  
The surveyor understood my points straight away, leaving two ways to deal with the matter:  
  - A "right to build"  
  - A condominium split  
The first option would not be exactlty what I'm looking for, as it allows more rights while remaining inside the curent condominium.  
The second option is exactly what i was looking for, as this would be the split of the current condominium into two separate condominia.  
The technical solution is as simple as two survey marks.  
I was worried about the need of survey the entirety of the building.  
That would mean 3 flats, a garage, a hall, and a storage room to survey.  
With implication that would go beyond my need and could imply some changes regarding taxes for the other owner in the condominium.  
As a side note, metering the enclosing walls could be done as a side mission.  
I'm now waiting for a cost estimation from the surveyor.  
I also have a relative that knows a good surveyor if this one is overpriced somehow.  

Agglomeration Community Act 3
=============================

I used my time in town to visit the agglo once again.  
I had in mind to follow the advising architect recommandation from the day before.  
My goal was to talk someone into taking few prints for the pre-examination, for the commission that would take place the day after.  
That didn't go as planned, yet the outcome was rather positive.  
I showed up unanounced at the agglo and ask for the person that stamped the C.U.  
She wasn't there, the lady seen in the act 1 was busy, so i ended up with a third person from the agglo.  

He started off by printing 1/2000 view of my house,one of the pieces that is required in the "Permi de construire" (one thing less to print!).  
We then looked at the listed buildings and buildings of the architechtual interest of the area,and it turned out that my neighborhood used to be regulated by the [ABF](http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecte_des_b%C3%A2timents_de_France).  

First good news,is that at the 1st of Jan 2014, this area has been reduced to 500m surrounding the St. Christoph church, and I'm far away from it.  
Second good news is that my both neighboring buildings are somehow important historicly. It's really lucky, that I am not, nor is the building in front of me.  
Any of those would have required another copy of the files to send to the ABF.  
That would have add another month to the "permi de construire" to be ready.  

That settled, we looked at the other area of restrictions, the ones made by the city.  
The area is white listed for car parking, no issue there.  
Then the area is classed as "UAB", that comes with other set of restriction, none of which applied to me.  
Yet it would be wise for me to have a second look at this ruleset.  

We finally looked at what I was really interested in, the structure of the renovation.  
While I proudly waved the sketchup prints, we restated the rules that one can use with the current settings.  
The rule is that the roof under 2.5 meters high has to be layed at a 45 degrees angle.  
The other side wall, being above 2.5 metters can use a different rule.  
We could use it to go with a flat roof, in a straight horisontal fasion.  
He added that one could go from the horisontal line until it meets the other line (from 2.5m at 45 degrees)  
I settle the matter as the 2.5m from both sides as more design merrits to my eyes.  

A missing point from the 3D view, was the gutter.  
It seems that "Nantaises" and "Chesneau" are the way to go.  
Not a really intersting topic, but something important to avoid spending too much time going back and forth at the agglo.  

We then went on about openings, windows and line of sight.  
The final 3D view will require the windows to be explicit  
The "code civil" state in its 875 to 880 articles what are the rules in that area.  
Basically, under 2.6m on the neighborring side, I can have a transparent/see-though, openable, window.  
It goes down to 1.9m at the 1rst level (wich didn't strike me as odd, but is odd).  
The possibilities are:  
- reinforce, opaque glass as per the legislative text itself.  
- glass brick, because it is not considered as openings but more like stone, bricks and other building materials.  
The last choice seems like a fit to bring some light in the house from the right hand side.  

Another missing feature was the exhaust, ventilation and other pipe that might get out of my house.  
They too need to be done in such a way that one will not be able to see through it.  
Seems weird at first, but fitting a hat on each pipework should do the trick.  
Any pipe where incandecent residu (smoke) get out, need to be  at least 8 metersaway from any opennings in any directions of any neighbours.  
That might compromise the dream of the pizza oven, more mesurement to come.  
The existing chimney can (and will) be used without issues.  

Another missing feature of the 3D prints was the lack of materials.  
I will need to explicitly name the materials and their colors.  
That will go under the agglo's architech scrutiny.  
Hopefully, as i won't go for orange or green, I should be fine.  

The expert also told me to join other pieces of information in the file.  
He ask for a signed proof for the network servitude from the other condo owner.  
He added that it would be wise to add it to the house paperwork by the Notarial office.  
Same goes for any paper signed by the neighboors if we where to use the shared wall.  
This will mitigate any possible legal issues with neighboors in the future.  

Another news worth noting is that I will not need a "Permi de construire" as previously though, but a "Déclaration Préalable".  
That is a somehow easier licence to obtain.  
It also doesn't carry as much legal requirement, notably regaring certification of the finished product.  
Less expert to pay to, less time to spend on certification etc...  
This is true especially for the "RT 2012" and the thermal certification.  


-- Lutin
