• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Coops85

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks Jeremy. The uPVC sounds a lot cheaper than the Aluminium. Where did you get your uPVC cladding from and what sort of profile works? How did you fit the mesh and cladding to the EPS? Sorry for what may seem like daft questions.
  2. Quick question. The yellow membrane which goes on top of the EPS but under the concrete and UFH hangs over the edge of the EPS on various amounts round the perimeter of the house. What do we do with this? We are thinking of having like an aluminium fascia (?) going round the bottom below the render or cladding to cover the EPS. Our internorm Lift and slide doors are just going in and the are wondering what to fix the external sill (?) onto with the yellow membrane being there. Any speedy helpful comments would be very much appreciated.
  3. Anyone else thinking of changing to octopus and would like to use a referral code here is mine:
  4. I have just used your referral code. Thank you!
  5. Which internorm supplier did you use? We love the internorm product, but worried about reviews on suppliers and installers! Would love to have a recommendation!
  6. Oops I think I meant to put rafter depth rather than eave depth being extended. Our house is not on a main road and is at least 25 metres back from the private road so hoping a small increase in ridge height will not be too noticeable!
  7. So basically our architect presumed that the eave at the ridge would be 200mm depth however the timber company do a 375mm depth eave. We will increase our ridge height a little so that it doesn’t compromise the rooms in the roof. However the timber company have now asked us to decide on what to happen to our fascias and soffits due to this change... here are the options: Option 1: Would you prefer the soffit to move up the building by equivalent to the ridge height change Option 2: Would you like the fascia depth to increase equivalent to the ridge height (I don’t recommend this as the fascia will be very deep. Approximately 440mm) Option 3: We could combine options 1 and 2 and raise the soffit by say 119mm and increase the fascia depth by 100mm Option 4: Extend the overhangs slightly to compensate for the increased ridge height, which would minimise the increased soffit height requirement. This option would change the architect’s sun position lines, could make the house darker, and might raise flags with planning, so I don’t recommend. anyone have any thoughts on these options and what would be the best option. We have quite a bit of first floor glazing on the south side so would probably have chosen option 4. But that is not recommended due to planning. Thought I would post this in here before replying in case there is anything I should know before answering in the question. I really can’t picture it at all.
  8. There are about 20 or more plots or new builds under the same scheme as us with exactly the same conditions so between us we will have a fairly hefty amount of PV panels between us... I reckon the DNO are protecting their supply/line with demanding that we all have 3 phase. Is this a plausible reason? Many of the houses already built with have benefited from getting up and running before fit ends.... so they will be exporting a huge amount of their generation.
  9. How long does it usually take for a challenge to be accepted or declined by planning? So we will be an all-electric house too about 300Sqm, heat pump, MVHR, intend to put in an electric car point for future use and we put 8kw of PV on roof . Would that all be within a single phase supply bearing in mind we have got 2 adults and 4 children using the house! Also treatment centre and rainwater harvest pump to use energy too!
  10. Thank you for your responses. The planning legislation and frameworks that we are meant to comply to use to be demanding code 6 houses. Then obviously the sustainable houses codes were abolished so the frameworks had to be modified to try and make a planning stipulation of a very high sustainable home where it suggests we need to offset both regulated and unregulated energy usage... which in essence is an old code 6. However as there are no such terminologies or standards no in place for wide spread assessment of home sustainability it is going to be difficult for them to enforce anything. In the framework it talks about carbon zero and carbon neutral. Our own set planning conditions relating to 3 phase power and water usage both use the word carbon neutrality: - 4. No development above slab level shall take place until the applicant has provided evidence of a formal application for, and written confirmation of,agreement to provide a new 3 phase electrical power supply onto the site, which shall be obtained from the local Distribution Network Operator (DNO). The 3 phase power supply to the site shall thereafter be maintained in perpetuity. (Reason: The provision of a 3-phase power supply is essential infrastructure to enable delivery of a photovoltaic renewable energy supply to the site, in order to achieve carbon neutrality of the dwellings hereby approved, as required by Policy H/5 of the adopted Local Plan 2018 and the Fen Drayton Former Land Settlement Association Estate SPD 2011).5. No development above slab level shall take place until the applicant has provided evidence of measures to ensure the water calculations demonstrate a maximum of 80 litres per person per day to ensure the proposed dwellings achieve carbon neutrality. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter.(Reason - The provision of water useage of a maxiumum of 80 litres per day is a requirement in order to achieve carbon neutrality of the dwellings hereby approved, as required by Policy SP/11 of the Local Development Framework, 2007 and the Fen Drayton Former Land Settlement Association Estate SPD 2011).
  11. Trying to get my head around SAP calculations etc... What is the difference between Carbon Neutral and Carbon Zero? My Sap is currently giving a target Calculation as 114 A. According to my architect the planning stipulation is carbon Zero. He seems to think that 100 A would be carbon neutral and what would have been an old code 5 house. So carbon Zero is an old code 6... Is this correct? I think tonights reading will be the local land setlement agreement where all the conditions of the house stem from!
  12. Thanks for all your comments. We are having an MBC 0.14 build with their insulated Slab. I would have thought that would have been good enough. I will re visit the SAP and challenge it again before committing to any PV supplier. Any thoughts on the battery and inverter?
  13. Hi all, So as our planning conditions stipulate that our house has to be 'carbon neutral' we have planning for a fairly hefty amount of PV panels (11.7kW)! Not exactly what we want really but cant really escape it according to our as designed SAP calculation and architects advice. So I have had Wagner Renewables design and quote us for this with battery storage added on. They have suggested a Solax battery and a 3 phase compatible inverter to go with it. Does anyone have any comments on Solax batteries or inverters for that matter? Or do you suggest we try a different battery? What should I be looking for the battery to be able to do other than store energy for non-daylight hours? Exporting power to grid? Taking E7 electricity from grid? Wagner and some companies we talked to at the H&R show are confident that there will be other export tariffs being introduced soon which will help us to recoup some of this cost. They do say that the system has to be MCS installed to be able to reap any benefit from this though. Do you reckon this is just salesperson talk?!? Thanks in advance of any replies.