kandgmitchell

This is the letter content supplied by our heating/plumbing contractor: To whom it may concern. I hereby certify that all internal drainage on above project have been subjected to successful air tightness test using Bailey gauge and have been found free flowing. Pressure held above 38 after 5 minutes. In was in the pack of various certificates etc provided to BC and we had no comments back about any of it.

We used DW and were very impressed. Their site work ethic and attention to detail was excellent. They'll change one of their designs whilst we had own design and they adapted it to suit their system (that took a little time - we had to use their architect and pushed back on some changes they wanted to make). The one thing that attracted us was the speed on site, four days to weather tight and eight weeks to handover. We've been in for for about six months now and are very happy to have a warm, comfortable house. We used the Sheffield agent and found them helpful and experienced with the system.

Our kitchen supplier was a Bosch/Seimens agent so listed them in the quote and they matched well with the big sheds/on-line . My wife liked the look of the Bora hob in the showroom but it was too dear. Whilst sorting things out I found out the newer version was being fitted to the display in a few days so I asked about buying the display model, he did us a good deal on that and we bought the Fisher & Pykel fridge/freezer off display as well at a healthy discount. It pays not to be too precious over brands if there's a deal to be done!

Just think of the joy of living amongst them soon! I had a planning meeting where our scheme at the end of a cul-de-sac came up and I did my three minute bit. A neighbour whose house was opposite said his bit and he objected because delivery lorries would use his driveway to turn around. The chairman asked me about this and I explained all turning could be done within the site. The scheme was approved. Within days, despite explaining everything to them, a contractor used the neighbour's drive to turn around and stalled his all terrain forklift on it and couldn't re-start it.... you just couldn't make it up!

Thames Water used to check sewers on individual properties when an application was made. LA's and private BCO's then started sending every application to them for checking (I can't recall what prompted that) Thames Water responded by sending back a standard response saying you may need a build over agreement, basically putting the onus on you to check as obviously they didn't have (or want to use) the resources to look at each and every one. Your drain is private until it leaves your property when it become a public lateral drain before joining the public sewer proper. Your works appear to be at least 3 metres from the public sewer (the red line) and at least 1 metre from the point where your private drain becomes a public lateral drain at you boundary. You don't therefore need a build over agreement.

You'll need sound insulation as well so the celotex wouldn't help with that. I'd refer to specifications in British Gypsum's White Book or Knauf details. Find one that suits the situation and follow it to the letter. Give the BCO the spec and that should put their mind at rest.

So Wandsworth have taken away (nearly) everyone's rights in the borough to do this in their garden?: Permitted development E. The provision within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse of— (a)any building or enclosure, swimming or other pool required for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse as such, or the maintenance, improvement or other alteration of such a building or enclosure; or (b)a container used for domestic heating purposes for the storage of oil or liquid petroleum gas. Development not permitted E.1 Development is not permitted by Class E if— (a)permission to use the dwellinghouse as a dwellinghouse has been granted only by virtue of Class M, N, P or Q of Part 3 of this Schedule (changes of use); (b)the total area of ground covered by buildings, enclosures and containers within the curtilage (other than the original dwellinghouse) would exceed 50% of the total area of the curtilage (excluding the ground area of the original dwellinghouse); (c)any part of the building, enclosure, pool or container would be situated on land forward of a wall forming the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse; (d)the building would have more than a single storey; (e)the height of the building, enclosure or container would exceed— (i)4 metres in the case of a building with a dual-pitched roof, (ii)2.5 metres in the case of a building, enclosure or container within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, or (iii)3 metres in any other case; (f)the height of the eaves of the building would exceed 2.5 metres; (g)the building, enclosure, pool or container would be situated within the curtilage of a listed building; (h)it would include the construction or provision of a verandah, balcony or raised platform; (i)it relates to a dwelling or a microwave antenna; (j)the capacity of the container would exceed 3,500 litres

That's what I like about this site. The advice goes from "get rid of the TV altogether" through the practical "fit behind the carpet gripper" to the high tech stuff suggested by ProDave. All of it useful, well perhaps not losing the TV, that may be going a bit far...... I'll look at the carpet edge, we have form for this this. In the last house I arranged for the re-wire to include data on one side of the large lounge fireplace because that's where we expected the TV and other gubbins to go. After a few months of actually living in the place we realised that it was the other side which was better. Luckily it was pre- new carpets and I routed out a cable route in the floor boards. It just goes to show that no matter how well you plan, it's not until you've been using a house to actually live in do you get to understand how the space works for you.

Ah, that's what I wanted to do........ bother....... Mmmm.... decorated and carpeted room in a newly finished and moved in build. I'll let you suggest that to my wife!

Hi, So we planned the new house out fully before construction including locations for aerial outlets and data. However, after moving in we have decided that the furniture layout we thought would work, doesn't. The change involves moving the TV to the opposite diagonal of the living room. We can get the TV to connect to the hub via wireless but need to get an aerial connection across for the Humax box to work. We've only been in for six months and the last thing I want to do is run an aerial cable around the skirtings to the proposed TV location - this is meant to be a clean, fresh, minimalist hi-tech home!! Can you get a gadget to jump a signal from a traditional TV aerial from the wall socket to another gizmo across the room without a cable? Cheers

"Send three and fourpence we're going to a dance" sums it up. A fuller explanation at first post would help formulate the most useful replies......

Then you need to consider the additional fire precautions as per this from Approved Documents Part B Volume 1 - Fire Safety Loft conversions 2.21 Where a new storey is added through conversion to create a storey above 4.5m, both of the following should apply. a. The full extent of the escape route should be addressed. b. Fire resisting doors (minimum E 20) and partitions (minimum REI 30) should be provided, including upgrading the existing doors where necessary. NOTE: Where the layout is open plan, new partitions should be provided to enclose the escape route (Diagram 2.2).

Not sure what you means by a "SAP's test"? How it normally works is that you submit a SAP calculation (actually it's a suite of calculations) as part of your design, this demonstrates that your proposal meets the requirements for new dwellings for energy efficiency. Then at the end of the work the process is repeated using the "as built" information (e.g the actual pressure test result rather than an assumed one). That final calculation should be no worse than the original "design" calculation. So you don't need that first SAP calculation before you appoint a BC body but you will need it when you submit your application to them.

I'd say this is pretty standard these days. Usually best to go along with it, there's not much alternative to be honest.

We used 127mm x 76 UB's and dropped the sleepers into the flanges. Painted the steels in Everbuilds Black Jack bitumastic paint first. Doesn't get sticky in the sun and I would expect the steels to last a very long time and it'll be my children replacing the treated sleepers I reckon.

My thoughts would be to apply for planning permission for the sub-division of the main dwelling but include the annexe in one or other of the gardens (with an eye to a future use) but making the extant approval and start for it clear in the application. Presumably the council would no objection to approving the building again per se i.e scale, mass, appearance but may of course raise a concern about how it's use would now relate to either of the divided plots. If the sub-division was refused then simply proceed with the original annexe as approved.

It is or at least it was 6 years ago when we bought a half finished project and found the owners were paying Council Tax on a shell with no floors, no windows or doors and no services connected. When we queried this the Council said the only way was to get the VA to remove it from the list. The VA inspected and agreed it could be removed from the valuation list and so no CT was payable. We got it re-valued and put back on the list upon completion and luckily sold it before the CT was due (that council allowed 6 months free for empty properties).

Not sure how removing the doors will improve the situation? Even a non-compliant closed door will hold back smoke within the living room for a short time. A three storey house requires a protected escape route for the upper floors. Those on the first floor in extremis could hang from the first floor windows and drop to the ground, those on the second floor can not and so need the security of being able to get down the stairs, hence the protected route. This is the requirement: Loft conversions 2.21 Where a new storey is added through conversion to create a storey above 4.5m, both of the following should apply. a. The full extent of the escape route should be addressed. b. Fire resisting doors (minimum E 20) and partitions (minimum REI 30) should be provided, including upgrading the existing doors where necessary. The glazed side panels will need to be addressed as they need to be 30 minute fire resistant as well. Didn't your designer mention any of this?

One issue I had with our raft which was 250mm deep was getting the correct cover to the steel plus the thickness of the main bars, plus the thickness of the strirups which fit around the main bars, then the space between the upper and lower main bars, the bars and strirup depth again and finally the bottom cover. It's surprising how soon all that uses up the depth of the perimeter insulation on site that you bought compared to the SE's drawing!

We had 3 phase supply and the 150mm is what they wanted to the cabinet. As far as I'm aware extruded polystyrene is very closed cell and doesn't absorb water whereas expanded does hence the drainage requirements for the latter. We used extruded and it certainly was waterproof.

You have what's known as a "cold roof" i.e the insulation is at ceiling level leaving the loft space cold. The loft should be ventilated to remove the moisture. It looks like there's plenty of insulation, is it blocking the eaves ventilation route (if there is one)?

Well one thing is those aren't celcon high strength blocks. If they were then they'd be smoother and have a black coloured band painted on the ends to identify them. It would be interesting to know what the blocks were as their insulation value could be a lot less than the celcon's, leading to the wall having an overall lower U value. Wouldn't affect the draught problem though, has to be air running down the back of the plasterboard somehow.

A change of use in planning terms will still require a "full" planning application. Your council may well require various reports etc to support the application. If you look on their planning website under "validation" many Councils list what they require to be submitted against the type of application being made. You'll also need a Building Regulation full plans application.

Absolutely - that new bedroom would be cut off from the flat exit by the room with the highest fire risk; the kitchen. The flat was deliberately designed to have it's bedrooms nearer the exit door than the kitchen. I'd also expect that there was a door on the opening from the kitchen onto the inner hallway originally. As to the structural bit, you can just see the arrangement of piers holding up that large ceiling beam. Doing all those changes within a flat is going to be a very big ask.

We used the left over 150mm rigid electrical duct Northern Power insisted we use for our power connection. Cut into short lengths and slid over the drainage connections. It was cut tight to the insulation and then the gap within the duct around the drain pipe sealed with foam.