Addition Scope and Phasing Decision Checklist

Write a plain list of what the addition has to make possible, in the words you would use talking to a friend, before a single drawing exists.

Requirements written in ordinary language survive translation into a design; requirements written as products do not.

Mark each entry on that list as something you would not proceed without or something you could let go if it came to it, and be honest about the difference.

The list you are unwilling to grade is the list that quietly grows, because nothing on it is ever the thing that gets dropped.

Note beside each entry where it came from, whether it was your own frustration with the house, an image you saw or a suggestion from somebody else.

Ideas that arrived from elsewhere tend to be defended as if they were needs, and tracing them back makes the conversation easier.

Record which problems in the existing house the addition is actually meant to solve, since that is usually the real reason the project started.

Schemes drift away from the original complaint, and a household can end up with more space and the same daily annoyance.

Decide and record your position on a smaller structure finished properly against a larger one left partly unfinished, before anyone asks you to choose under pressure.

This decision gets made in every project, and it is far better made calmly with the household than late and reluctantly.

Ask a designer which of your stated requirements pull against each other, and record the conflicts rather than expecting all of them to survive.

Naming conflicts early turns them into decisions you make, rather than compromises that appear in a drawing without explanation.

List the work in the existing house that becomes far less disruptive while walls and floors are already open, such as pipe runs, cabling or work on an adjoining wall.

The chance to do this work under the same disruption comes once, and it is usually missed by nobody having listed it.

Note what sits behind or above the point where new meets existing, and ask what would be permanently concealed once the two are joined.

The junction hides more than anywhere else in the project, and it is the least examined part of most schemes.

Only a qualified professional can say what remains reachable at that junction and what would be sealed away for good once the two parts are joined.

Record whether the heating and hot water arrangement would have to be altered regardless, since that changes what else is worth doing at the same time.

Once the heating is being touched, several other decisions become sensible to make together rather than separately.

Note which existing floors, decorations and joinery would be disturbed by the work regardless of what you choose, and treat those as already in the conversation.

Work that will be disturbed anyway is the natural place to extend a scope, and people usually realise it after the decorator has gone.

Note work on the existing building that depends on access being available outside, such as attention to gutters, render or a roof edge, and raise it before access is removed.

Access to an elevation is temporary, and the list of things that needed it tends to be written afterwards.

What can be reached safely and by whom is a matter for the professionals involved; do not plan owner work around access provided for others.

Ask which decisions must be made before the structure is closed up, and write that list somewhere it will be looked at rather than filed.

The moment these decisions have to be made is set by the work itself, and it arrives sooner than most households expect.

Decide which parts of the scheme would be provided for but not fitted, and write each one down as a specific item rather than as a general intention.

A vague intention to allow for something later is not provision, and it is discovered to be nothing at all when the time comes.

Ask what leaving provision for a particular item would actually involve here, and who would record precisely what was left and where.

Provision means different things to different people, and the difference only shows up when somebody comes to use it.

What can be left in place safely, and how it must be terminated or protected, is entirely a matter for the qualified professionals involved.

Note the difference between leaving a route for something and leaving a connection for it, and be clear which you are asking for in each case.

Owners usually mean one and are given the other, and the misunderstanding is invisible until the wall is closed.

Photograph the surfaces of each stage as they are closed up, and file the images against the version of the scope that was current when that work was done.

Tying images to a scope version is what lets a later stage establish what was agreed and built, instead of guessing from a finished wall.

Record whether leaving provision for a future item constrains the layout now, and decide whether the constraint is worth accepting.

Provision is not free of consequences, and a layout bent around a possibility can be worse than one that ignores it.

Decide which items you would rather do fully now than half do, and record why, so the reasoning survives the next conversation about trimming the scheme.

Half finished items accumulate, and each one was a sensible compromise at the time nobody wrote down.

Ask a qualified professional whether this scheme can honestly be split at all, and where a natural stopping point would be if it can.

Owners tend to assume a project pauses wherever suits them; the structure and the sequence often say otherwise.

Whether a project may be built in stages depends on matters to confirm with the local authority and with the professionals involved.

Ask what a paused stage would need in order to be weathertight and secure, and note that as part of the stage rather than as an extra.

The work required to leave something standing safely is frequently left out of the description of the stage it belongs to.

Write down which parts of the house would be unusable between stages and confirm with everyone living here that this is acceptable.

The household member who was not part of that conversation is the one for whom the pause becomes intolerable.

Ask what would have to be undone, opened up again or repeated if the next stage happened well after the first, and record the answer plainly.

Splitting a project has consequences at the join, and they are far easier to accept when they were described in advance.

Ask what happens to responsibility for the work across a gap between stages, and whether the same people would be expected to return.

Responsibility across a pause is one of the least discussed parts of phasing and one of the most awkward afterwards.

Responsibility, insurance and agreements between parties need proper documents and appropriate advice; nothing here settles any of it.

Ask what would have to be confirmed locally if the project were carried out in stages rather than as one piece of work.

This is a question for the authority and your professionals, and asking it early avoids assuming that a split is neutral.

List which rooms and facilities would be out of use during the work, and write down what the household would use instead in each case.

Naming the substitute makes the arrangement real, and it exposes the gaps that nobody had thought about.

Record where cooking, washing up and food storage would happen if the work meets the kitchen, and whether that arrangement is realistic for everyone here.

The temporary kitchen is the single arrangement most likely to decide how a household experiences the whole project.

Note where the laundry, the bins, the boiler and the meter cupboard sit in relation to the work, and how each would be reached while it goes on.

These are the small daily routes that get blocked, and they are never on the drawing that everybody is looking at.

Write down the household constraints that matter, such as someone working from home, unusual working patterns, a young child, a pet or someone with limited mobility.

Stating constraints early lets them be planned around; raising them late turns them into complaints.

How work is organised around people in the property is a matter for the professionals responsible for the site, not an owner arrangement.

Note where materials and spoil would be stored, where vehicles would stand and whether that uses the space you rely on for parking or access.

Space on site is a real constraint that owners can assess honestly before anybody has to raise it with them.

Decide and record the point at which you would rather move out than continue living here, and say it plainly before the work begins.

A household that has already discussed this makes a calmer decision than one confronting it in the middle of the work.

Write an explicit list of what this project does not include, so that items which have been discussed but not adopted do not quietly return.

An exclusions list is the simplest defence against scope drift, and it takes only a few lines to make.

Note which known defects in the existing property are deliberately being left for now, and record that you know about each of them.

Leaving something alone knowingly is a decision; leaving it alone by omission is how it gets discovered as a surprise later.

Record whether making good the garden, paths, fences and planting is inside or outside the project, and say so before anyone starts.

Reinstatement outside is the most commonly assumed inclusion and one of the most commonly excluded items.

Note who deals with decoration where new work meets existing surfaces, since that boundary is where responsibility usually blurs.

The join is nobody's first priority and everybody's lasting impression of the finished work.

Record what should happen to items removed during the work, such as a door, a radiator, a garage door or fitted shelving, and which you want kept.

Anything not claimed in advance leaves the site, and some of it is worth keeping for a future stage.

Note anything you intend to carry out yourself, and raise where that boundary sits before the scope is described to anyone else.

Owner work inside a professional scope has to be agreed openly, and it affects far more than the item itself.

Where owner work meets professional work, the boundary needs to be agreed in writing with the parties involved and appropriate advice taken.

Put the scope into a single dated document and reissue it when it changes, rather than annotating an old version or relying on later messages.

Scattered changes across conversations are the most common reason two people describe the same project differently.

Describe what each part of the scheme has to achieve rather than naming a particular product or arrangement, so professionals can respond properly.

A scope written as a shopping list closes off answers that might have suited you better.

Write what each stage would include in terms that an owner and a professional would read the same way, then ask whether that is how they read it.

Checking that your description means what you think is a short conversation that prevents a long one later.

Ask what is missing from your scope description before anyone could respond to it properly, and note exactly what was asked for.

The list of what is missing is a useful document in itself and shows how well the project is understood.

What information is needed before work can be described or carried out is for the qualified professionals involved to specify.

Go through your scope and rewrite anywhere you have described a solution as though it were a requirement, restating the need behind it.

Half of most briefs are solutions in disguise, and each one closes a door before anybody has looked through it.

Keep a short record of what changed between versions of the scope and why, so decisions can be traced rather than argued about.

The reasoning behind a change is the first thing lost and the thing most needed when a change is questioned.