MikeSharp01

cripes!

If you have the spare cash, why not put in a planning permission for a shed on your side of the fence a. You would dominate their shed as you have higher ground and b. you could expect a visit from the planning officer who would then spot the challenge. Also why not write to your local Councillor about the tardy response of the planners. @Bitpipe said it - fight fire with fire.

Concrete edge beams?

Brilliant: Is that 0.28 m3/hm2 ?

Listed walls, being quite old, may not to have ventilation blocks / slots but if there are any at the bottom then you may want to allow air out at the top somehow - how was the top finished before you built on it this may give you a hint as to what needs to be done? If no low vents then you may be able to rely on the breathability of the bricks - what is the inner side build up of this wall as this may have some impact again if changing from previous construction?

Did you chat this through with an architect as it looks like the space could be better used. Do you actually need 4 bedrooms or would three with one master ensuite and a family bathroom be a better option?

You could talk to the planners about the green wall before going to appeal so you give them the option to "look again" before committing to appeal which will cost them a heap of time and money. You have 320mm backset to play with and the green wall can sit quite comfortably just adjusting out the slope.

Its for a soil pipe by the looks of it not the foundations.

600 is too wide for one soil pipe and a small bucket can do wider trenches quite easily. You will find you first bite is wider at the surface than it is at the bottom and by the time you have cleaned it up to the required width it will be fine. You don't need 420mm for a 110mm soil pipe you just need to remember to go a bit deeper so you can put a pea shingle base in to get it flat then back fill with pea shingle around and above the pipe a little way before restoring the soil. a 450 trench will use more pea shingle than a 350 mm one.

If you can make it work structurally you could set the wall above about 2.4m back 300mm or so to accommodate the living wall this would reduce the overhang of foliage over the footpath and create quite an impressive feature with environmental and sight line benefits I would not slope the bottom as you have but that might work also but with the back set. This would increase costs but, as you would not need to use brick above this line on this face, you won't see them so they need not be there, might not cause onerous structural issues. PS I would also take it to full height.

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.

That does not look like it has been flashed well at all. Is the black stuff at the bottom the gutter and the shiny metal bit some sort of facia?

You could engineer a solution using a series of rotating mirrors arranged on poles with black rear panels so you can either have mirror up or black surface up and get the best of both worlds. If you actually need the sun to hit the under roof you can set the mirrors to normal to the roof. (That may need some care in aligning the rows so the sun can get in.)

Horses for courses - I am with @ProDave on this one.

You can, subject to appropriate skills / certifications and safety approaches, do what you like after the meter but generally NOT in the meter box. Many of us here have put second meter boxes adjacent to the main one, taken a feed into that and then split it out using and isolating switches to the various consumer units around the building. Here are our two, when the meter was installed I got the power company (In out case UKPN) to install to the isolator, bottom right and then we could do the work in the second cabinet with the power isolated anytime we like. The second cabinet has the two building isolators and a local service (garden power sockets & lighting, car charging and drainage services) consumer unit.

Why / how is three better than two?

Looks like fun, welcome to THE forum for people like us!

SVK 5mm Ardonit fibre cement, want a crisp edge if I can get one,

I am about to embark on the vertical tile hanging for our build and I am looking for recommendations for a good fibre cement cutter / Guillotine, preferably with a hole punch. The little hand held Plier type don't look they will work - but they might be more capable than I think, the slates are 300mm wide. Any body got any good ideas?

Sounds like a job for a bit of hands free car audio - they have no problem muting the music to let you take a call and you can talk through it as well.

Well its down to how well it will withstand being hit by the gate swinging back. We could do the maths but in reality 4 or 5 5mm x 50mm screws into suitable Rawl (other brands are available) plugs will do it.

Slightly bigger and longer screws on the bracket.

Create a stop, just a piece of angle fixed to the wall - it is not part of the security system so need not be too robust.

Probably not. They just want to be sure that the scheme works as it is their insurance and usually the architect is the final sign off. So they will take the drawings from the SE and integrate then with their drawings and check all is well. This would normally be part of the construction drawings process. You can argue that it is a double check for them, have they missed anything, do all their details still work after the SE has done their bit etc. If you are submitting the drawings that is not a problem but you need them to say they are OK for submission.

True and so the point loading needs careful thought as the transition on and off the slab offers a challenge and you can watch the load spread on a simulation tool but the essential point is that the point loading is actually quite low. 30T per track, and that spread across the area of the track in contact with the slab, but the track format is important as the tread type used also spread the loads differently.