Redbeard

Or you can turn it into an insulated solid floor (depends how fundamental your 'redo' is), and have none of the possible issues which can (sometimes) occur with insulated suspended floors even if you follow all the best practice guidance.

If low cost is of the essence then 'contract matt' (once used by volume builders, AIUI, to allow painting a bit 'too early' over plaster - perhaps less so now with taped joints) is probably the one to go for. As @SimonD said, avoid anything with Vinyl in the title (and I think, but don't have evidence to prove, that anything 'silk' may/will be less breathable.

Which is better than many (but not all!) built-up felt roofs, but my slate roof is 130+ years old. Yes, it has had repair, but none of it has had any more than patch replacement. I think the copper roof on my old school is probably 65+ years old.

My first thought was 'yes, you can, but you can also paint jelly'. Slightly more context, yes the jelly would be less successful, but I always fight shy of building in a maintenance liability if I can. Can you reduce potential splash-up by, say, a small gravel-filled trench (even if not a proper French drain), take the cladding down to 150 above GL (The bottom plank may be 'sacrificial' as I would normally say 300) and just rely on the fact that you might not spend too much time lying on the ground looking at the orange bricks?!

Yes, that's effectively the 'Tony Tray' that many on here have discussed. Arguably yes, though it won't be as perfect as a Tony Tray Which continuous top plate? Not sure I get this bit. Can you explain, perhaps with a felt-tip annotation?

Good Q: *Looks* (I think) like a woodburner flue, but as stated above, that should be at v least above the eaves, and quite possibly higher still to avoid downdraught.

Silly quip deleted!

I have no connection with them, but I was looking for an independent WUFI-wrangler recently, and Greengauge https://ggbec.co.uk were apparently helpful to the person I was helping.

I am a little confused. The normal suspended timber floor consists of boards of some description directly over wooden joists (175 x 50mm is a fairly typical size but they may be smaller if they are supported mid-span). You say your floor is planks *over floorboards*, and you refer to the possibility of taking up the planks. My first thought/Q is whether a decorative floor has been laid over the original. Is there a 20mm step in the doorway? Pics would be great. Also how do you define 'wonky'. Loose, or far from flat (or both?). Or something else? The more info you can give the more accurate and useful will be the replies.

1st obvious Q: Is the old house to be demolished?

Last and last-but-one pics - what will happen next?! The phrase 'hanging in the air like bricks don't' - with a little modification - comes to mind.

Lead. Please. You could do stepped flashing or, if you have very good dust suppression on your grinder, do an angled chase. I prefer stepped, but cut-and-angled arguably quicker. Whatever you do it will get difficult as you get up neat the fascia. Are you already sorted for flashing at the top of the slope, at 90 degrees to the bit in question?

It needs to be designed by a SE, I think. If the walls are entirely separate, and not adding strength to each other, I have a feeling 225mm will not be enough. My 1200 - 1500 wall is 600+ thick at the bottom IIRC.

Can you clarify the depth of the PIR already fitted? To get a reliable 0.16W/m2K there should be at least 150mm total. I really do not like plasterboard/insulation laminates as you do not get a stab at taping the joints. When I did this sort of work I would (a) have tight joints unlike those shown (b) have taped all the joints on the (100mm) between-rafter PIR, then fitted 25mm PIR under the rafters, and taped) then fitted 25 x 50 laths across the rafters, with a further 25mm between, then finally a VCL ('ordinary' or 'intelligent', taped at all joints and perimeters) before the plasterboard.

Good point! I was generalising, and thus including some reports which may have 'liability issues'. However it would seem to me that in many cases you are paying for the consultant's depth of experience in their field. If you are 100% happy that AI has the same effect then I guess that as long as the LA accepts them it's 'OK'.

Do you mean Radon? And on the subject of your thread: I suppose the issue generally with reports is that they are 3rd party opinions backed up with PI insurance. I can see AI being your friend if it avoids you spending money but is it your ally when queries arise?

Hello! Have you got any pics of the internals? From the inside do you see just the sloping rafters or, given that you say ...is there a secondary ceiling, whether or not it is plasterboarded? Internal pics will help us see how you could fit a lintel. Then you can take out the existing and fit a new uPVC window from outside.

Gut feeling is that if it is EPDM it needs fixing with EPDM by someone experienced not just in new installations but in remedial work. Nothing wrong with bitumen/felt per se but I wouldn't mix it with EPDM. I cannot 'place' pic 2 w.r.t pic 1, BTW.

Is it only me finding it v had to reconcile the text and the pics? I think what you are saying is that the hole we can see in the roof will accommodate a fixed roof-light in 2 panes? The details such as: I can't reconcile with the pictures. Watch out also for the lead staining the glass when rain runs over it. I hope I am not being unhelpful, but my little brain needs a bit more explanation to make full sense of this. The way the battens are cut suggests the glazing will sit below the roof-line, but then it will 'pond' at the bottom, so I must be wrong. Will there be an additional softwood frame for the glazing to sit in *above* the existing rafters?

Don't hide the pipe? Paint to match background? Paint deliberately *not* to match background (as an adder, perhaps, if you like snakes).

Was the title meant to be *pipe* clips and zip ties? I had assumed not and was waiting for an exposition on the myriad alternative uses for paper clips (apart from temp. replacement clips on split-link chains and repairing my reading glasses).

Sorry to hear you have problems with a new roof. Tell us more. What is the covering? Did they replace the deck underneath?What are the problems? Could be major; could be minor. We cannot express a view till we know the nature of the issues.

I imagine the lack of replies so far is because people looked at it as I did and got stuck on questions and practicalities. I'll try to start now, and you can tell me if it is of no help! Do you consider that, before you dug out for your extension, your land was giving full, and adequate, support to next-door's conservatory? What it is, or isn't, sat on looks quite sketchy to me (sorry; I have not re-read your whole other thread, though I looked at the time). The question in my mind is whether you have an obligation to provide support or to allow access so that the neighbour can repair/strengthen their footings before you progress your build. You say Why would it be pointless? (I am beginning to remember why I din't get further with my reply last time!!). OK - rephrase that: I take it the main reason for the lump of concrete is to hold up the neighbour's conservatory. Yes? ... and the drainage at the bottom to allow any moisture trapped between the concrete and your membrane to seep down to a perf. pipe? And potentially the perf pipe also receives the neighbour's sh** if it all goes horribly wrong? How would that work? Can you add their soil pipe to your dwg? Surely no 'liquid' could run down 'their' side even if you had a dimpled membrane in (which would face the wrong way, serving 'your side')? And equally surely, a perforated pipe is the wrong 'conduit' for an accidental poop spillage. You would surely have less to do and worry about if your neighbour's 'outfalls' didn't 'fall out'. Lots more info, and details of any further thoughts you have had since posting, please! (Or tell me I have got entirely the wrong end of the stick!)

The sketch shows no insulation to the exposed side wall. Is this the intention?

Got it! OK, so as I understand it you are re-roofing from scratch including the whole timber structure. They show the roof effectively ventilated *over* the rigid sarking, which required the counter-battens which your current roof of course will not have (I assume). I see that Steico suggests the same lambda as Gutes, which makes you closer to complying with the 0.16 target. (I just checked that one. Look at table 4.2 in Part L, re 'new element in existing building', which your new roof would be - target goes up in stringency, down in U value, to 0.15.