Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/18/21 in all areas

  1. As an update, had the air test done today and it turned out alright. I wasn't sure what to expect, tbh I don't even care anymore, I'm bored with living in a caravan now and just want to be in the damn thing?‍♂️ must be 2.5 yrs in this van now! Anyway, got 0.2ach which confirms my suspicion that the horrendous condensation we had at Xmas was due to lack of ventilation. Thankfully the MVHR is jacked up now so no further issues. Living in a 30ft x 10ft caravan with two cats, a 9 and 11 yr old whilst staring at our 280m2 house for the last year has had its day now. Roll on move in day. The joys of self building. Champagne taste with lemonade budget = a long time living in a box?
    5 points
  2. Also the outside leaf of the lintel doesn't look like the plain edge of a catnic CG110/100. Again, I may be wrong.
    2 points
  3. Hi Loz. Can you confirm the opening size and also take a picture looking up at the underside of the lintel?
    2 points
  4. He said they were talking shite as the kit is all the same!
    2 points
  5. Yes Just slot a 50 mil strip in between the wall and the rafter
    1 point
  6. This is exactly what I have found, 150mm x 22mm sarking boards with a 3-5mm gap are very permeable and the roof performs really well, but as soon as you use sheet board it’s impermeable and need fairly serious ventilation below to stop moisture build up - this then leads to mould….. don’t ask how I know ? I would personally always use 150mm x 22mm sarking board on any future roofs I build but I also put a 50mm ventilation gap below them as well !
    1 point
  7. Given the photos and string line I reckon you are just seeing a dints and dings along the edge of the flange. As @Marvinmentioned above the strength is in the box section in the middle cavity section. I fitted KeyStone lintels and yours look very similar. In your situation I would be more interested to know if a heavy lintel variant was fitted over wide opening. Also if you can measure the clear span of the opening the experts here can work out if you have a decent amount of lintel seated on the blockwork. How heavy are your blocks?
    1 point
  8. Me too! Loz.. don't panic, could well be a bit of site / delivery damage.. however something like that will not look sweet over you doors if it's more than a couple of mm. It looks like the roof joists are not spanning onto the lintel? If so the loading could just primarily be from the few courses of block above. If you are rough casting the block you could bring a bellcast bead down just below the edge of the lintel and this would hide the bit that is bent and improve the drip over the doors. Just have a quick check to make sure that if the builder has swapped the lintel type it is still ok to use for the load.
    1 point
  9. Difference between a warm and cold roof construction (not to be confused with a warm/cold loft).... * Cold roof - the insulation is between and under the rafters. This means there are structural elements on the cold side of the insulation (eg the top of the rafters). * Warm roof - the insulation is above the rafters. This means the structural elements are on the warm side of the insulation. The vast majority of houses built now and in the past are of the cold roof type. The risk with a cold roof is that water vapour created by people in the house can escape through the insulation and condense on the cold part of the rafters or other structural elements. There are two main ways of preventing this, both are aided by a vapour barrier on the warm side of the insulation.. * Vapour permeable: If sarking boards and the roof membrane are vapour permeable then you only need to ventilate the void between the tiles and the roof membrane. * Vapour impermeable: if any sarking boards or roof membrane are not vapour permeable then you need a 50mm ventilated void below the impermeable layer. So the question you need to answer is : Are your sarking boards and roof membrane sufficiently vapour permeable that you can avoid needing a 50mm ventilated void below? My understanding is that narrow sarking boards with 3-5m gaps are considered permeable but large sheets of OSB with no gaps might not be. Discuss with your BCO or Architect.
    1 point
  10. I thought Catnics were black, could that be a KeyStone?
    1 point
  11. All metal lintels bend slightly when you build across them that's why you prop it until the work above it sets. In normal circumstances it wouldn't really matter but with your bi folds it will depend on how much deflection has occurred. It doesn't look that much from the pics.
    1 point
  12. Not much weight on that lintel yet, I wonder if you are seeing some transport damage in a short section of the lintel or is it a progressive bend across the whole length? A photo of a taught length of string end-to-end would help. Is your lintel from the standard or heavy duty range?
    1 point
  13. I do not know if this is the case but if I remember correctly, the strength in the lintel is within the cavity space part which supports the leafs holding up the outside and inside wall skins. I believe it is possible that, if you load one leaf too much before the other leaf it can distort the lintel. Anyway I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong ?. Marvin
    1 point
  14. For that reason I would never use a lintel over bifolds Or any other large opening A steel with a hit and mis welded plate is a better option It will be a pain to swap it But worse later with the bifolds and render done
    1 point
  15. Here's the starts to a plan of attack: 1. ... An 'overdominant rear extension failing to respect the character and appearance of the subject property' , does not deny you the chance to make an extension that isn't over dominant. What is meant by over dominant? Its either dominant or not. Over dominant means - to me - the author isn't quite sure of him(?)self. Chink of light already. '...would adversely reduce the size of the garden and affect the existing sense of openness....' Any extension reduces the size of any garden and always of necessity reduces openness. I smell weakness in the agument application site is constrained by containing a narrow, irregular rear garden compared to other buildings. Is this correct? In percentage terms, how correct is the author? If for example you garden is 20% smaller - would a 20% small extension help things? the result of which would be a cumulative harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area. So is the argument that yours is the straw that breaks the Camels back? If so , BINGO. Principle of Consistency applies (more on that later - just got in from work, knackered) 2 How correct is this as the additional bulk would result in a two storey height flank wall on the boundary of a public footpath, which would create an oppressive sense of enclosure to the route, that the existing set back respects. Look for local precedent: Argue along the lines you allowed this here, here and here so why not now. Principle of Consistency applies 3 Same argument as 1 above More particularly, the depth and bulk of the first floor level extension and its close proximity to neighbouring residential properties, results in an overbearing and dominating effect for the residents Can you reduce the depth and bulk? Map? Plan? so we can help more. Sorry this is a bit hasty - in a rush. Regards, Ian
    1 point
  16. As said before pics would be good!
    1 point
  17. I suspect the problem is with the large flat roof that I assume lurks behind the new parapet wall along the side of the extension. Does this side wall of the upper floor move towards the viewer by about 3m or 4m?
    1 point
  18. we have 6m front garden outside space, and we have 5.5m rare outside space and we are only asking for 1.4m - hopefully we are withing 'less than half' overall?
    1 point
  19. Right. Now we can do something about it.... I'm on a phone browser, let me switch to a decent machine....
    1 point
  20. This is what I thought, just found confirmation. “the extension must not take up more than half of theoutside space
    1 point
  21. The best (and probably most expensive) is Intello. Second best and cheaper but not as tough is Proteck Barriar
    1 point
  22. @oxo I would drop this element of your objection because it is weak compared to the other points you are making. Using your logic anyone could over populate a home and then demand rights to extend based on a need for extra internal amenity space.
    1 point
  23. I can see why you are frustrated, they are very negative. My thoughts are, when referring to Conservation Areas, I've found planners don't care about what you need, only on appearance. When they mention amenity in a Conservation Area, they are referring to the external appearance to passers by, frustratingly, not to your right to enjoyment of your home. They seem fixated that you are the end terrace and so the guardian of the views. Maybe if you post some images people can give a reaction ( and see if they concur with the planners (don't take it personally)and see if they can help identify the problem and how to move forward. Is it worth 3D mock up for the future attempt?
    1 point
  24. Yup indeed. Ive just cut my 6x tiles bits.. no clogging & a breeze of a job too. Great that's one stress out the way.. unnerving things, you gotta keep total concentration. Useful for my balcony project to come, cut metal threaded bar as per my cabin base. Thanks chaps.
    1 point
  25. 20kgs is very light as rads go, i have one in my kitchen that weights around 80kgs full and it is hanging on 4no 10 screws. plate gauge really doesnt matter as you are nowhere near the capacity of steel in shear.
    1 point
  26. Have you not seen 2001? It will soon be singing nursery rhymes and locking you out of the house. 'Turn on the hot water Grundfos'. 'I'm afraid I can't do that Andrew'
    1 point
  27. I enjoy HUTH. Particularly when an agent says it's been decorated to a decent standard and the camera man zooms in on the light switch which was cut in by someone using a broom. I agree though, when I see a 100 sqm block paved driveway, full replacement render and decoration throughout with kitchen and bathroom and it's cost them just several thousand and they have done none of the work themselves, my teeth start to itch. Do aspire to be on there one day though.
    1 point
  28. I live next door to the site and can actively monitor what they are doing (also a time lapse camera is set up). Things have got better and and hopefully for the next bits of ground works will progress as expected (last weeks invoice reflected the reduced work on site). I have my guard up though on the work they are doing. Yesterday me and three of the ground workers got the two layers of retaining wall / slab mesh installed, me being on site getting my hands dirty seemed to progress getting the work done, also i was there to make sure it went in properly. I am going to tie in the starter bars over the weekend, and BCO / architect inspection scheduled for Tuesday morning. Hopeful for the slab pour on Tuesday afternoon / weds, and brickie's on site for the retaining wall on Monday (different firm). There is also the availability of slave labour if things get really tough (my little helper setting out mars bars, i should have paid her a proper one for her efforts)
    1 point
  29. here we go.. sigh... (1) The proposed single storey rear extension is considered to be unacceptable in the interests of visual amenity and loss of amenity space. More particularly, the proposed rear extension, combined with the existing back addition, by reason of its resultant scale and depth would introduce an overdominant rear extension failing to respect the character and appearance of the subject property, and in turn would adversely reduce the size of the garden and affect the existing sense of openness. Furthermore, the application site is constrained by containing a narrow, irregular rear garden compared to other buildings along the same terrace, the result of which would be a cumulative harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area. In this respect the proposal would be contrary to Local Plan (2018) Policies xxx, as well as SPD Key Principle xxx of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018). -- this is the 1.4m ground floor extension that the officer didn't have an issue with in pre-planning stage. Also 'loss of amenity space' is strange because we would be gaining valuable family space on the ground floor that the house otherwise lacks. We'd still retain reasonable (for London) garden, and our garden is only marginally less deep, by some 0.5m compared to others, but by being end of terrace and openly west facing - our garden aspect is a lot brighter than others so a small reduction in its depth would not matter, especially when the trade off is a better internal amenity space - all in glass so bringing outside to the inside.. (2) The proposed first floor level rear extension would have a detrimental impact on the established historic pattern of local terrace houses, as the additional bulk would result in a two storey height flank wall on the boundary of a public footpath, which would create an oppressive sense of enclosure to the route, that the existing set back respects. The proposal would therefore harm the character and appearance of the xx Conservation Area which is not outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme. The proposal would therefore result in an unacceptable impact upon the Conservation Area which it is desirable to preserve in accordance with s.72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This is contrary to Policy xxx of the Local Plan (2018), Key Principles xxx of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018). -- 'the established historic pattern' is such that we are the only house on our side of the street that didn't have 1st floor extended, including 3 other end of terraces. We were aiming to continue the current existing pattern and bring it in line and homogenous consistency - both of our heritage expert and planning adviser totally agreed on that. Also the public path was not historic, it was created much much later, and it's not used by many people as it's a tiny shortcut from the square to a bigger street and a pub. We were to match all brick work and restore original decorative bits below the roof line (forgot the name), which was lost (3) The proposed first floor level extension is considered to be unacceptable in the interests of residential amenity. More particularly, the depth and bulk of the first floor level extension and its close proximity to neighbouring residential properties, results in an overbearing and dominating effect for the residents of the neighbouring properties located in the opposing terrace at 9 xx. This results in loss of outlook and an increased sense of enclosure from windows located to the rear of 9 xx. Accordingly, the first floor level extension constitutes an overdominant, inappropriate and un-neighbourly form of development and in this respect is contrary to Policies xx of the Local Plan (2018) and Key Principle HS6 of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018). -- we are talking about extending half width of the building out to the existing line of the other half - 'increased sense of enclosure' would not stand to scrutiny, especially that there was no site visit and the extent of the extension is disproportionally small in relation to what's in the square and the area and the fact that #9 is already so overtowring us and was a much later addition to the area - suddenly they gain total prominence in their exaggeration. ?
    1 point
  30. The furring strips are going to be used to create the fall on the flat roof. I just wasnt sure if they had to be the full 6 meters on top of the joists or not. Yes, the calcs is for the slope that I would need for run off.
    1 point
  31. Vertical pipes coming up to feed sinks, shower mixers, basins. Everything has to come up or down to its final destination, not a lot of things are actually fitted to the floor.
    1 point
  32. the regs say that it should be designed for a 1:40 fall to achieve a minimum 1:80 fall when constructed. 1:40 is 0.025, so for a 6m length you need a drop of 150mm (6 x 0.025) over the 6m length.
    1 point
  33. I use Loxone to run it for a few minutes when someone enters a bathroom (and then again after 10 mins if they are still in there). That doesn't include the Kitchen, otherwise it would be on most of the time, but we don't seem to notice when the Kitchen takes a little longer to warm up.
    1 point
  34. You can do them in shorter lengths and pack under the bits that need to be fatter with some timber.
    1 point
  35. This is what they are doing.. https://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/legal-updates/planning-and-compulsory-purchase/update-on-agricultural-occupancy-conditions/ MARKET TESTING It is possible to remove an agricultural occupancy condition though the applicant will first need to demonstrate certain things. This includes adducing evidence that the property has been marketed for sale or rent, at a substantially reduced price, to agricultural workers in the area for a significant period of time. In April 2019 the Planning Inspectorate emphasised that evidence of a robust marketing exercise is essential when applying to remove a condition. This related to an application to remove an agricultural occupancy condition at Sutton Springs Trout Fishery Grounds. The Inspector found that there had been sufficient marketing of the property as it had been consistently publicised online, included in various publications and promoted in mail campaigns. The agricultural occupancy condition was therefore successfully removed. This decision is illustrative of what level of marketing is acceptable and adds to the tips provided by the Upper Tribunal in the case of Rasbridge, Re Cefn Betingau Farm in 2012. The Tribunal found the applicants' market testing exercise was not sufficiently rigorous and suggested that the applicant should have: offered to rent the property in order to establish if there was rental value to the land; advertised the property in the specialist farming press; and made adjustments to reflect general market movements.
    1 point
  36. 1 point
  37. Ours is 5.5 Warm roof I ordered strips from a local timber merchant that ran the full length 75-0
    1 point
  38. I’ve made some hardwood pads before, chamfered edges so they look good and fixed these and painted the same colour as the wall. it allowed the vertical radiator bracket to be supported perfectly.
    1 point
  39. Furring strips can be any length, what are you trying/wanting to do? and when you say calcs for flat roof, do you mean the fall required to allow water to drain?
    1 point
  40. There's no place for emotion on this... let's focus on facts. What does the decision notice say?
    1 point
  41. That would be fine, Radiators are heavy but they are close to the wall so most of the load is down and not pulling on the wall (unless kids use them as climbing frames). These plates would certainly help to transfer the load.
    1 point
  42. Great idea - you can remake the whole thing out of walk on glazing, this would cause a shortage in the market for such material and you could clean up selling it to yourself - economics is a wonderful thing AND because the whole place would be see-through no one would notice it was there - thus not offending the neighbours AND you could disport (enjoy oneself unrestrainedly - frolic) yourself about the place quite safe in the knowledge that you will be on full view ( I suppose this may offend the neighbours - but nothing one or two bands of obscuring film around the building at appropriate heights would not solve). Had the caravan man built similar structure outside the caravan he may have got away with it. Hiding in plain sight. Possibly not given the result in the Amersham byelection.
    1 point
  43. Is that what's called "roller wave"? @craig will hopefully be along shortly.
    1 point
  44. Oh yes, he was very good, not expensive and claimed VAT that I had missed so his fee was more than covered. He specialises in VAT fir self builders. His details are. Office: 01269 825248 Mobile: 07816 825248 Email:andrew@vat431.co.uk
    1 point
  45. A word on objections and planning. You can have zero objection and still get refused. You can have a hundred and still get planning (over a certain number of objections it gets pulled into committee vs being at the officers discretion). What is relevant is planning law and your LA's planning policy - some of it is very subjective ('not in keeping' is the alternative to 'out of character') but that cuts both ways when you appeal. TBH - I would not have made the initial withdrawl and changes unless the planner hinted heavily that it would have got it through. I would appeal and maybe re-submit option 1 also and be prepared to appeal that too. I do believe planners like to justify their existence somewhat and rely on compliance by the public. They don't like appeals as they need to defend them and if they loose too many it does not look good. Get a planning consultant on your side, maybe one who is an ex LA planner (they tend to have the local understanding and also relationships). One of our neighbours is a conveyancing solicitor. For our application 1 (rejected) and 2 (largely the same as 1 with a few minor concessions) they wrote 8 page objections with every possible angle explored. Planners did not take any of their points but rejected 1 on separate issues. They were poised to reject 2 as well until the consultant got them on the phone and said we will be appealing both schemes and we both know applicant will win. He then gave them a graceful climbdown option of 'what do you need to see to make you comfortable' (n.b. NOT what needs to change, we had already compromised to our limit in app 2). They settled on a seeing 3d render vs the starker 2d elevations and low and behold, problems evaporated. As @the_r_sole says, many ways to skin the cat wrt schemes but you need to know where the red lines are, if they really exist. And finally, while everyone invests a lot emotionally into these processes, do not take it personally. It is just one of the many mountains you will climb on this journey so just treat it as an unpleasant bit of necessary bureaucracy. Good luck!
    1 point
  46. Also, a lot of trades aren't sourcing stuff weeks or even days in advance. I regularly witnessed trades finishing one job, then having to go out in the middle of the day and buy stuff to start the next. Had they thought ahead, they could have grabbed stuff on their way in rather than making another trip, or even ordered online and gotten it cheaper, but they didn't seem fussed. I assume they also get stuff cheaper from the big builders' merchants than anyone walking off the street would manage. I used to get frustrated about always having to ring all three of the local BMs for pricing every time we wanted something in a hurry. It seemed completely random who'd give us the best price on any particular item, and the difference was often 20-30%, even though we had accounts with them all. At least with online you got to see exactly what brands are in stock, and get clear upfront pricing.
    1 point
  47. We're going with metal studs... Because nobody is doing timber anymore here. Much better sound insulation. Also means the dead straight walls mean you can get away with tape and jointing the boards rather then needing to skim. For light things like skirting, self tapping screws will do the job. For mounting anything heavy, the guys say to fit 3x2s inside the channels and some noggins. For my plant room and the kitchen, I'm screwing sheets of OSB before they plasterboard.
    1 point
  48. It works for us. We have reliable and hardworking groundworkers. £250 a day each (two of them) including their equipment and £120 per 12 tonne of soil should it have to be removed. Turn up on site for 7.30 each day and work beyond 4pm if required for an hour without additional pay to get the job done. Has saved us a fortune over a fixed price contract. The guys are known to our builder who and all work within our small town of approx 8000 people so reputation is important to them. They are chocka block for the next 6 to 9 months at present.
    1 point
  49. That's probably my main objection, the scheme forces the use of a thermally poorer foundation system, just to meet a desire for design harmony and comply with the inflexibility of the VAT legislation. Why on earth the government, who encouraged schemes of this sort, couldn't have simply amended the VAT legislation to make bare plots zero rated, as they would be in any virtually other circumstance, is beyond me.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...