jack

Are you near the sea? I believe that some ASHPs may not cope well with a lot of salt water. ASHPs, in general, work well with UFH because it only requires relatively low temperatures, especially in a well-insulated house. They can be less suited to - or at least less efficient for - DHW production.

The big issue with the RHI is that it rewards consumption. Even if you're using the ASHP to preheat your DHW, a well insulated house uses relatively little energy, meaning that the potential RHI benefit may not make up for the ridiculously inflated charges that RHI-registered installers demand. My electrician managed most of the electrical side of our 5kW Panasonic Aquarea installation, but I did everything else starting from a less technically experienced position than you. Assuming you can acquire the installation manual for whatever you intend to buy (ie, if you're thinking of one of the second hand units in this thread), I think you'll be fine. Plenty of people on here who've done it and can chip in if you get stuck.

Look into one-wire sensors. They're cheap and you can run several of them off one cable. You do need a way of reading the values - we have a one-wire module in our home automation system.

Don't Fakro do made to measure? Give their UK tech people a call - I found them very helpful

Not sure what Jeremy used. I bought two of these: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00FDEX6A4 To be honest, given how long they last and how fast they charge, I could have gotten away with just buying one. I know this is true because one of them went "missing" from the site at some point, and it took me months to notice!

Since buying a brushless Makita impact driver early on in the build, I now won't buy any other brand. I always buy the cheapest brushless version of whatever tool I need and am consistently blown away by their quality and performance. I don't use Makita's batteries though. You can get off-brand batteries for less than half the price that seem to perform perfectly well.

Maybe try again to be sure?

Another thing to do is look at planning submissions in your area going back at least a handful of years. It'll give you an idea about who's managed to get what approved. You might also get some clues about how nearby neighbours have responded to other planning submissions. We learned that our immediate neighbours had had a rotten time with several of the other neighbours, but carefully prodding around for information we discovered that they more or less brought it on themselves.

We wanted a 32mm pipe given that the point where the pipe enters our house is about 75m from the mains. We were told that the standard was 25mm and that if we wanted more we'd need to justify it. Oh, and we'd need to pay for a new water main connection, including paying for a road crossing!

No doubt experience will tell you the answers to all these questions. My best guess is that you'll have enough experience to know just as you finish the house!

I know, it's so frustrating when you're a beginner. That said, despite doing very little of it, I found plumbing far more interesting than just about anything else on the build. I fully expected to enjoy to electrical side of things but found it a very dry topic (not like plumbing, which was a wet topic )

Avoiding going to committee was one of our primary aims, based on some of the nonsense we'd seen others go through. That said, we fully expected it to be pulled in by one of the councillors who lives around the corner, and then expected to have to appeal the inevitable rejection. We were stunned when it went through first time without any significant comment from the planning officer!

I've just spent ages searching ebuild for one of the couple of threads where this was discussed but I can't seem to find them. Short version: we first introduced ourselves to all our neighbours when we moved in. Had them around en masse for Christmas drinks etc (I should add: this wasn't just a ploy to help us getting planning permission - we'd have done this anyway). Over time, we introduced the idea of extending, then significantly extending. We then moved on to the general idea of replacement in view of the costs of such a large extension. By the time we actually went for planning, everyone in the immediate vicinity expected us to be replacing the bungalow with a new house, so that wasn't a surprise (avoiding surprises is, in my opinion, the biggest key to reducing the chance of objections). It's a common mistake at this point to be open with your neighbours about your plans, and to invite their feedback. This would have been my approach had I not been counselled strongly against it by our local architect. He pointed out that once you ask for feedback, you plant in people's mind an expectation that you'll take their feedback into account, not matter how unreasonable it is or how much extra it will cost you. Most people will want you to make your plans smaller and more conservative, if they agree to them at all. Then when you say you can't or won't, they become emotional and object. Worse, you might have different people asking for different incompatible changes, in which case you're bound to disappoint someone even if you're willing to compromise. In the end, we told people we'd show them what we were building before we submitted the planning application, "so you know what we're doing". A couple of days before submitting the planning application, we provided them with an impression of the roadside view from Sketchup (the house is set back quite a long way and partially concealed by a tree, so this showed the house looking very small in the street scene), along with a letter setting out what we were trying to achieve. We talked about improving the street scene (the bungalow was pretty ugly, and we'd intentionally allowed the front garden to deteriorate!) and reducing energy consumption, but half of the letter was about the build itself. We explained how we were using a factory-built timber frame so it would go up quickly and with minimal impact on the neighbours. We explained that we would be onsite every day and welcomed any feedback about reducing the impact of the build on the neighbours. In the end, we had no neighbour objections, and a couple of letters of support. The town council objected, but they always do when anything that doesn't look like it was built in the 1930s is proposed. I have no evidence to support my opinion, but I believe that presenting the proposal as a fait accompli reduced the chances of objection, because people were less thinking about the planning application and more thinking about the (inevitable!) build. We may also have been lucky with "objection fatigue". Two other nearby properties (including our immediate neighbour) did very similar things to what we were planning, and both faced significant local objections. I do wonder whether the fact that both of those ended up getting through left people a bit tired of objecting and losing. But I also think that how you present your intentions will nearly always help your cause.

I don't believe there's any numerical rule unless you're in the green belt (I think the number is 40% in that case). We replaced an 87m2 bungalow with a 289m2 two storey house in approximately the same position on the block without so much as a comment from the planners. A significant question is what impact the replacement house will have on the street scene. If you're in a row of bungalows, you'll face a much bigger battle than I'd you're the only bungalow in a row of large two storey houses. I'll try to find some conversations we had about how to approach neighbours. It's a very fine balance to be drawn between making them feel involved and appreciated, and making it clear that you aren't seeking their permission or input on your plans!

We went with Scolmore lighting retractive switches. Pretty good quality - a little stiffer than would be ideal for fast double clicks, but you get used to it (plus you can program around the need for double clicks in Loxone if you want to). The stiff mechanism means they can be a bit loud in operation if you're not careful. Actually, when I say good quality, I mean the switches themselves. We went for the screwless range of faceplates and I can't say I was overwhelmed by their quality. Very thin metal and not always a very positive click into place. The edges of the plates also have visible dents where the clips are formed. Again, you get used to it, but if I had my time again if have gone for far cheaper screw-on plates.

Yep, that's what we're running. Let me know of you want to drop over again for a look.

Interesting family dynamic. Glad it's working for you. Suspect it depends on who you get. I've heard of great local BCOs, and absolute nightmares, even within the same council. We used an independent and he's been great. I do get the feeling that if you want/need guidance, you'll get more from the local guys on average.

I agree Terry. In addition, what little guidance can be found from the MVHR manufacturers seems to suggest fire-closing extracts in the kitchen, and switching off the MVHR in the case of a fire. If you follow that advice and meet building regulations, I can't see why an insurer wouldn't pay up. Indeed, departing from that approach (which, Warby, I respectfully think you are risking when you propose boosting during a fire) seems more likely to raise question marks with an insurer. If insurance is of concern, the safest thing is to ask two or three insurers for their written recommendations, or better yet get their written approval of what you propose to do. If you follow that, they can hardly complain!

Good to see that confirmed. I'm sure I saw one that was only for use in brickwork - obviously a different beastie to this. Yes, this was the bit that concerned me. I suppose that at the sorts of temps required to activate the intumescent material, a semi-rigid MVHR duct should be soft enough to be squashed closed by it.

One of our smoke/heat alarms (Kidde brand, I believe) is mounted to this optional pattress that contains a relay. When any of the alarms is triggered - they're all linked to each other, per building regs - the relay is tripped. We have it wired into our home automation system and I'll eventually use it as a trigger to send us an email and/or text if we're out and the alarm goes off. It could also be used to close a volt-free contact on an MVHR, or as a control signal to a relay that does the same. Re intumescent seals, I think you need a special type of pipe that can be crushed by the intumescent material, plus it needs to be surrounded by brickwork if I remember correctly. I've seen MVHR inlets with an internal intumescent closure or collar that operate in a similar way - might be a simpler route to this functionality?

The original question was about shutting down certain MVHR vents and turning on full boost in the event of a fire. We've drifted a bit from that so I think it would be useful to briefly summarise the thread for those who might find it in the future. It seems that best practice for what to do with an MVHR system in the event of a fire is still developing in the UK, presumably because building regs haven't yet caught up with the increasing use of such systems. One thing several posters seem to agree on is that MVHR inlets and outlets should ideally be closed when a fire is detected. There also appears to be some consensus that shutting off the MVHR in the event of a fire is useful. As far as anyone who posted on the thread knows, building regulations do not seem to require either of these actions to be taken, nor do they require full boost in the event of a fire as was mentioned as desirable in the original post. There also seems to be a consensus that getting people out should be the first priority where there is a fire. To help keep this information together, I note there's also a broader discussion of fire regulations (including some input in relation to MVHR) here: Many thanks

Git

We used recycled crushed concrete for our 45m long driveway, which came in all sizes from fines to something approaching half brick size. It wore remarkably well for 18 months and is now a base for our gravel driveway. Do you need it to be permeable (eg, to meet SUDS requirements?) You should also put a geotextile membrane down to prevent migration of the new layer into the ground beneath.

Well done. The price you paid should have gotten you a highly competent piece of design work (the cost was more than a full day's work for most trades, even in the south east). Stick to your guns and let us know how you get on.