The floor is the easy part.
The slab under it,
and staying open, are not.

Nine times out of ten it is moisture in the slab rather than a defective product. Bonded floors have manufacturer limits for slab relative humidity, and when those are exceeded the adhesive fails. It is testable in a day, and testing it before the next floor goes down is the whole point.

Usually, yes. The new covering bonds to what is underneath, so the old adhesive has to come off and the slab has to be sound. Laying over an existing floor is occasionally possible but it inherits every problem below it.

Yes - most commercial flooring is done that way. The area is split into phases, work runs out of hours where it has to, and each area is protected and handed back before you open. It costs more per hour and disrupts far less.

For most spaces, resilient plank or polished concrete. Polished concrete has no covering to lift and no adhesive to fail, which removes the most common failure mode entirely. Resilient plank is more forgiving underfoot and individual planks can be replaced.

Tile, in almost every commercial case. A stained or damaged tile is swapped individually instead of replacing a room, and holding attic stock means later repairs actually match.

Yes, and it is a specification requirement rather than a preference, particularly at entrances, in wet areas and anywhere food is handled. It is confirmed against the use of each space rather than applied uniformly.

Probes are set into small drilled holes in the slab and left to equilibrate before relative humidity is read. It is done on the bare slab, because a reading taken through an existing covering is only indicative.

Either a mitigation coating goes down first, or the specification moves to something that tolerates the condition - polished concrete or a loose-lay system with no bonded adhesive. Both are legitimate; we will price both.

Flooring on its own frequently does not. Where it forms part of a wider fit-out, or affects fire-rated or acoustic assemblies, it does. We confirm it for your specific scope rather than assume either way.

Usually working hours, noise, the acoustic build-up between floors, protection of common parts, and how waste leaves the building. It is worth getting the fit-out conditions from them early - they frequently drive the programme.

It depends on the material and the adhesive, and again before furniture goes back. Those cure times are built into the programme, and they are the one part we will not compress.

Either of us, but it is agreed and priced at the start rather than discovered on the morning. It is a real line in the programme, not an afterthought.

Removal and grinding are genuinely dusty. Containment goes up first and extraction is used at the machine, but in an occupied building this stage is scheduled deliberately rather than just started.

Because it is a big part of the work. Removing old adhesive, grinding and levelling a slab is slow, and it is what the finished floor depends on. A quote that looks cheap has usually assumed the slab is perfect.

In rough order: adhesive removal, moisture mitigation, levelling a poor slab, out-of-hours working, heavy phasing, and stairs. The covering itself is often not the largest line.

The product documentation, the warranty conditions and the manufacturer cleaning regime, plus any attic stock. The cleaning regime is the one that matters - most premature commercial floor failure is a maintenance problem.

Follow the manufacturer regime for the specific material, and put proper matting at entrances. Entrance matting extends the life of everything past it more than any other single measure.

With modular materials, yes - that is a large part of why they are specified. Individual planks or tiles are replaced, which is why holding attic stock from the original batch is worth doing.