MikeSharp01

Good question - at the low end you might not be able to show enough ventilation - but you can always drill some more holes, at the high end won't you be outside building regs?

That looks bad, at least they are going to replace them, but that does not exclude poor design.

Yes, think that changes takes effect today. I think they are dealing with that for small sites as well so some of the habitat rules are being removed for small developers, which includes self builders!

You do need to ensure the new one will match the lamps - either incandescent or LED.

The problem with N+ consequences is that they are often, usually probably, unintended because nobody looked at / for them at the outset and in the end you can go to far in trying find and manage them that the cost of doing anything closes everything down. This is the same at the other end of the problem with requirements complexity. So if you want a new way to buy / sell electricity you will set out a few requirements, these will have relationships with one another (interdependency) and you will want traceability as well. You are now looking at the N+ consequences of many interrelationships in the requirements which makes life difficult so most people don't go much beyond N+1.

It's mad but breaking the link is tougher than most people think. It's all about the 2nd and 3rd order consequences (consequences of consequences and the consequences of those consequences). You can read more here: https://ecotricitysmartgrid.co.uk/news-and-views/breaking-the-uk-power-price-linkage-to-gas/

Feels like there is risk either way. My analysis runs thus: A pre app and a full app are treated differently in my experience. Some things are fixed - boundary distances etc and going past them is difficult. The pre app is an opportunity for the planners to manage you into their preferred box - once you have a full app they are obliged to process that against the local plan etc and would want to be almost sure that they would win an appeal if you went to one. So the premise is you would likely get a bit more than they would encourage at pre app but won't let you bust any of the fixed / local plan points unless they feel they might lose an appeal. The 1200sqft version sounds like it overcomes the main objections so should go though but is is not what you really wanted so you risk getting that permission and not being happy with the house. The perhaps 1400sqft version does not address all the issues but might squeeze through on grounds of such things housing targets, the planners not being sure they would win on appeal and it being a good day in the planning office. Putting two in at once could both muddy the waters as @Pocster says and have the effect of encouraging the planners to go for the smaller house as it more closely matches their 'rules'. You can still appeal on either if you put both in however. On the whole, if it were me, I would put in the slightly bigger one making sure the majority of the red lines highlighted in the pre app are addressed fully / carefully and the remainder are as minimised as your team can do - looking to max your appeal winning opportunity and so give the council more reason to let it through and so avoid losing an appeal. This outcome is more like the house you want and you can always revert to the 1200 model if knocked back and not confident of winning on appeal. I appreciate that your outline planning permission deadline is approaching and that this adds another dimension but getting one planning cycle in before October, without going to appeal, is more than possible.

Reading this thread I would agree. You can check the probe with a cup of boiling water, allowed to cool for a few minutes and a kitchen thermometer it looks to be a DS18B20 or some such and to be on the safe side put the kitchen thermometer and the probe under the cup (not in the water). If the ASHP reads the same (roughly) as the kitchen thermometer under the cup then all is well and you can crack that bottle of Merlot you have been looking forward to all day.

Actually you can avoid going to page 22 as the 'Key Findings' from the link above say it all - finding 'C' mainly, an image of which is below, and leaves you with the gas pipe answer 'NO' - long term anyway.

We put the infrastructure in but disconnected the gas and had the meter removed so no standing charge but can be reinstated when Hydrogen is cheaper than air 😅 which will be never so anybody want a 12m length of track pipe?

Who are you quoting, reference / citation needed!

Bed 1 downstairs indicates that you want to be ready for older age - if so do the CBD / WC swap make the WC a bit bigger, make it a wet room and Jack & Jill it with the Bedroom.

Well essentially because I want 2 pipes going up the wall and 3 pipes going down so I thought this was quite elegant in its way, the ball valves are full bore and fast to operate.

I have come up with a manifold (I need 2 one for hot and one for cold) that is fabricated from soldered copper. Before I put them into manufacture I thought I would seek the collective wisdom's view on the idea - what have I missed / got wrong / forgotten. It has single 22mm inlet two main runs leading to 15mm outputs with a central balancing support run. We have good water pressure, 3 Bar at this point and very good flow. See image below and let.

We have Norrsken and air tightness is perfect- we scored 0.2 on PH basis with only the locks leaking a bit so we put the keys in for the air test and even without them blocked I don't suppose there would have been a measurable difference but the whistling was annoying before we blocked them.

DO THIS FIRST DO NOT START ON SITE - NOTHING GET THE CIL EXEMPTION IN FIRST.

Sadly this appears NOT to be reasonable but sadly it seems to be par for the course. We have had quite a few discussions about this on here and the conclusion is usually the same. Anecdotally the grant just adds to the normal, whatever that is, price. You do need to remember that there is a thing called supply and demand which brings a few more challenges. Firstly high demand often brings a lot of sub standard supply - so we see a lot of expensive but poor quality as companies bundle into the vacuum. So finding a reliable installer adds to one's angst. Secondly because a "proper" (note the quote marks) install needs MCS approval which drags in over specification which amplifies the issue above so increasing costs. You do have some options. For a saving on an MCS install seek out an umbrella scheme- which allows you to do a load of the work and the MCS installer just does the design and commissioning drawing down the grant for you. Alternatively do it all yourself with some advice on here to help you size the pump a local plumber and electrician to wire it all up. It will need planning permission to go this route.

You could interpret this as just trying it on, the apparently poor MCS size matching and perhaps a lack of technical knowledge / understanding by many putative installers has been discussed here, and elsewhere, frequently and the experience we see above tends to reinforce this.

onshape is very good, free - as long as you don't mind your drawings being public. and although a bit more complex than sketchup it is full featured.

We have just bitten the bullet and put an ensuite wet room off the snug area, which also serves as an accessible WC.

Will do, when they finally tie down the spec, as things stand it keeps coming and going from their web site, something to do with MCS certification.

The one we are looking at has a Panasonic DC Inverter Compressor - which is the real heart of the machine I guess.

The ASHP we are looking at says the COPs up to 5.56 is that the limit should I be looking for one that get up to 8 or is the quote from the manufacturer based on some output value?

here are the basic logo's ! Not dimmable: Dimmable:

Some of them yes. Look out for the logo on the box.