kandgmitchell

The criteria for being exempt is "substantially of non-combustible material". So not entirely of non-combustible, nor of a specific material giving a specific fire resistance over a specific time. Just non-combustible. Metal isn't combustible i.e it doesn't burn, it may melt but it doesn't combust. There is no requirement to build a detached building (over 15m2) out of block or brick if it's within 1m of the boundary - they obviously would comply as well but so would steel sheet. Or do as @DevilDamo says, keep it detached and under 15m2 and build it out of whatever you like.

Somerscales in Keelby, Jordan Got Wood Ltd in Grimsby (got all my sleepers from them) worth checking several places for that amount

I think the OP is concerned that BC will require substantial foundations above and beyond the existing reinforced slab they have. That slab can't be proved because of the boundary retaining wall foundations are not available for inspection. The OP is therefore exploring potential lightweight structures that will not involve the relevant authorities.

Well if it will be detached from the dwelling then you can do this... Small detached buildings 1. A detached single storey building, having a floor area which does not exceed 30m2, which contains no sleeping accommodation and is a building— (a)no point of which is less than one metre from the boundary of its curtilage; or (b)which is constructed substantially of non-combustible material. 2. A detached building designed and intended to shelter people from the effects of nuclear, chemical or conventional weapons, and not used for any other purpose, if— (a)its floor area does not exceed 30m2; and (b)the excavation for the building is no closer to any exposed part of another building or structure than a distance equal to the depth of the excavation plus one metre. 3. A detached building, having a floor area which does not exceed 15m2, which contains no sleeping accommodation. Or if it is not going to be a garage then you can build: Extensions The extension of a building by the addition at ground level of— (a)a conservatory, porch, covered yard or covered way; or (b)a carport open on at least two sides; where the floor area of that extension does not exceed 30m2, provided that in the case of a conservatory or porch which is wholly or partly glazed, the glazing satisfies the requirements of F2[F3Part K4, K5.1, K5.2, K5.3, and K5.4] [F2Part N] of Schedule 1. (i.e it's basically safety glazing - my comment) The above are within Schedule 2 - Exempt buildings and work. Perhaps a nice porch to keep your tools in (although a porch should enclose a door into the house to really be a porch)

Bath only with a maximum temperature of 48 degrees C, the intention was to prevent scalding by getting into/being put into a large body of very hot water and not being able to exit swiftly, presumably one can dodge out of a too hot shower easier (although most showers have a high temperature stop that has to be over ridden, if like my wife you want a shower hot enough to peel off the skin!))

Most SE's I've dealt with have specified what information they want from a site investigation before they will consider designing foundations..........

Ours had winders and was an awkward tight fit between two walls so the joiner needed a second pair of hands. A days work and it was £500

I speed read that and got "where I buried the spouse".......

The loss of the "free go" is a real concern, it can only encourage some LA's to see planning applications as a money making exercise. If it was bad before, it's going to get a great deal worse now!

Quite, so forget about thatched houses that don't meet the "Dorset Model" or houses with basements that have no alternative escape ..... the list goes on. As to the house you're looking at that'll be a risk assessment for you as a family. You can mitigate that risk by a good detection system and a proper fire drill for children to follow, decent escape from the first floor windows etc but ultimately it's down to how much you want "that" house.

We paid Protek £1400 or so for £400,000 cover last year so you're not far off the market.

Well I'd put my money on condensation. Penetrating damp would disrupt the plaster and leave a stain over a defined area as it soaks the wall. This looks like mould spots across a damp surface. This is a classic conundrum with modern life in older houses, lots of warm moist air and poorly performing thermal envelopes. You can't use the windows in the winter when it is most critical to remove the moisture laded air. Usually it's the colder surfaces in upstairs bedrooms that suffer the most. The first job is to kill the mould, the second is to get rid of the worst damp air at source so extracts in the bathrooms and kitchen are a must. You may want to consider a cheap dehumidifier. Going beyond that isn't easy as putting in trickle vents now isn't simple nor is insulating the walls. So the easier bits first.

Assuming there's no obvious ingress of direct water from outside - (as ST says, check for leaking gutters etc) then this looks like classic condensation. Corners and the bottom of walls are colder, condensation happens often without even being obvious. Dust in the air sticks to it and mould grows on the dust in a damp environment. Still air behind cupboards and the like makes it worse. First job is to kill the mould so it doesn't just grow back. Curing structural condensation is not easy. You need to reduce the moisture content in the air whilst getting those colder surfaces above the dew point

Try planning admin - whilst they can be a bit pedantic at times in some councils, I've often found them surprisingly human in others. They're more likely to know what goes on with the paperwork than the case officer. Think nurses in a hospital knowing far more than doctors about the "process".

The doors are fire rated for a reason - they protect the means of escape in case of fire, down the stairs and out the front door. The proposed layout negates this with any fire in the lounge/kitchen making the stairs unusable. Those on the first floor may have access to escape windows but those on the second would have no way out. It'll contravene the Building Regulations and be too much of a risk. At least retain the separation between the lounge and the hallway to protect the escape route.

The cable runs direct - a male connector in the services room ( worth building your own house just for those two words...) with a female wall outlet. My electrician has checked the "punch downs" and says they're ok. I'll buy a long Cat 6 cable from amazon and try that.

We had 20 odd on a 4g router in the static caravan and to be honest we had no trouble. We went for 200mbs because at £20/month it seemed a good deal. It's more case of why is there 200mbs at the modem and only 100 max at the other end of the cable we paid extra to have installed. Sounds petty but we've had a few issues with the house wiring so are being a bit bullish with this.

The installation to the house was done a few weeks ago. The internet supplier's engineer checked the speed using his equipment on the day and found the query. Since then I have connected my laptop directly to the router and used a couple of free speed testers, both give very similar results. My electrician also used a tester plugged in at the service room and in the living room - again only 90 odd mbs. No other activity at the time.

Hi, In the new build we specified just one fixed Cat 6 connection - from the services room to the living room to service a smart tv etc. Now had FTTP installed with a modem in the services room. The internet provider supplied a router, and plugged direct to the modem it achieves 200mbs (the package we've chosen). However, the wireless coverage was poor which was put down to all the equipment in the services room. So, we relocated the router to the living room which is more central and open plan and connected it to the cable outlet and plugged the other end into the modem. The wireless signal is much better but the maximum speed is now no more than 90 odd mbs. Both locations have been tested with a cable connected direct to the router - 200 in the services room at the modem and 94 -95 at the end of the cable. So it's the cable. Both the internet installer and our own electrician (not the cable installer) have checked it and say it's wired correctly so why can't I get full speed?

Requirement B5 is more about getting a fire appliance to within 45m of the house and allowing it to turn and leave. You'll only need a private hydrant if you are more than 100m away from one AND you have a compartment of more than 280m2 in area. So if your house is really big then split it up into distinct compartments with the appropriate fire resistance between. Wales do ask for sprinklers and Scotland is simply another country.

I'd say there's sufficient information on your drawings to establish what you intend to do. There are two aspects to this: planning and building control. For planning the removal of the unwanted part of the extension should be "permitted development" that is allowed without planning permission as it's the "alteration" of a dwelling house and since you are taking it away, the usual constraints on height, size for new extensions etc do not apply. You can apply for a Lawful Development Certificate from the local council to confirm this. You will also, separately, have to apply for building regulation consent to form the new internal arch as that wall is probably loadbearing and supports the floors above. The new roof light also comes under their control. These are technical requirements making sure things are structually sound etc. I would strongly suggest you find a local professional to help you with this process. You seem to have the right ideas but need someone with experience of the actual process of dealing with authority to guide you through it. It can't really be done on a public forum.

So going back to the OP's query - I paid £300 extra for three phase which goes to external cabinet. 3 phase cable to house but currently on single phase only but the extra is there if needed.

If it's in use for your build then no, PD regs say: PART 4Temporary buildings and uses Class A – temporary buildings and structures Permitted development A. The provision on land of buildings, moveable structures, works, plant or machinery required temporarily in connection with and for the duration of operations being or to be carried out on, in, under or over that land or on land adjoining that land. Development not permitted A.1 Development is not permitted by Class A if— (a)the operations referred to are mining operations, or (b)planning permission is required for those operations but is not granted or deemed to be granted. Conditions A.2 Development is permitted by Class A subject to the conditions that, when the operations have been carried out— (a)any building, structure, works, plant or machinery permitted by Class A is removed, and (b)any adjoining land on which development permitted by Class A has been carried out is, as soon as reasonably practicable, reinstated to its condition before that development was carried out.

How about thermalite or celcon? They weigh next to nothing. The steps will not be solid per se surely, form hollow "boxes" and span the internal spaces with the limestone flags

This area is very complicated, my impression is that the LA ought to have issued a notice of cancellation as soon as it was obvious the AI was unable to continue with it's work. That triggers a defined period for the client to seek another AI to take over or else the project reverts to the LA. I suspect however that all parties tend to take a sensible and pragmatic approach in these extreme circumstances and I guess if the project has hardly started it makes sense to in effect start again. I agree the regulations used are those in force at the time of the initial notice. If the OP wants to avoid a particular requirement in the latest regs that significantly affects their design then they need to engineer a transfer pdq from the original intial notice. If they aren't bothered then simply start again with the latest regs.