jack

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.

Interesting. Would you call foil-faced PIR "foil insulation"? If so, I think even this carefully worded bit of misdirection is arguably inaccurate!

We still have some cladding to do (eaves) and I think we'll just scrape by with our 10% over estimate.

Personally, I'd keep the MVHR within the heated area to avoid potential condensation issues. I can live with a little bit of condensation in the external ductwork. I'm less happy with the prospect of condensation within the MVHR unit itself, mainly for the longevity of the electronics and fan bearings etc. The actual difference in heat loss between the two scenarios will be difficult to quantify. The performance of an MVHR unit is hit surprisingly hard by the length of uninsulated external ductwork coming into the heated area of the house (for an internal MVHR - vice versa if it's outside). The unit itself will also contribute some losses, but I suspect you'd need to know the exact makeup of the interior MVHR insulation relative to the duct paths to understand whether internal or external mounting will give higher losses. This is because the one side of the MVHR is at the external temp and the other is at the internal. When it's very cold outside, there's a big temperature difference between these two, and it's hard to model how the unit as a whole will act in terms of heat transfer. I suppose you could negate this issue by heavily insulating the unit itself.

I don't think you want to remove it. Saturating it could work, although awkward to get to it before the walls come down (be a bit time consuming drilling holes for a hose or spraying water in through top of cavity if you can get to it). I'm not familiar with cotton insulation, but assuming it's a bulk product like batts, it'll likely be clumped together pretty well given how long it's been in the cavity. Can you knock a hole in a wall somewhere and see what state it's in?

How expensive is "incredibly"? Our (Siberian, Russwood-supplied) larch has been up about a year and is so far weathering pretty unevenly in places. As you say, underneath overhangs has hardly weathered at all, plus we have places where there's uneven staining from water movement. It'll mostly even out in the end I suppose/hope. In the meantime, I just tell myself that wood is a natural product and this is how natural products behave. Sioo wasn't available when we needed our larch, although even with what we're experiencing now I'm not sure whether I'd have used it. The uniformity is very nice, but I do wonder whether there's a loss of longer term character compared to letting it weather naturally (with all the flaws that that might bring).

I've generally got a pretty good memory, but within a few weeks of putting plasterboard up, I'd completely forgotten where just about everything was routed. Even though we took several photos of every wall before boarding, we've still had one or two situations where a crucial angle is missing and we've had to dig around.

Ours was around £7k to knock down and remove a small bungalow and detached concrete prefab garage in Hampshire/Surrey borders, including disposal of (low risk) asbestos floor tiles. That was the cheapest quote by some way - wouldn't have taken it if we hadn't had a recommendation from someone else who'd used them.

If you paid by debit card rather than bank transfer, you may still be protected: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/visa-mastercard-chargeback They don't listen to self-builders, but they might listen to a bank.

Ouch. Really sorry to hear this. Things inevitably go wrong when building. The real difference is when suppliers acknowledge their cock-ups and do what needs to be done to rectify them. Did you pay by credit card?