howplum

Thinking about our new kitchen design, I'm wondering about the best way of accommodating the various appliances and storage vessels that currently have taken up permanent residence on a fair part of the 600mm wide worktop in our current home. They include, but are not limited to, toaster, bread bin, kettle, fruit bowls, rice container and chopping board rack, occasionally joined by a broiler and/or slow cooker and/or food processor. Obviously they limit the amount of convenient working space. To further make the problem relevant my wife has problems lifting things, so storing them in a cupboard is not a viable option. One thought I had was to utilise a wider worktop, say 750mm, but this would then make access to wall cupboards tricky, although in an ideal world I would like to dispense with wall cupboards altogether, but that might be a point for discussion! I also appreciate that a wider worktop would potentially lead to wasted space behind the units, although drawer runners up to 700mm are available, which would mean deeper base units and drawers, which might have to be built to order. Still, it would mean about 40% more storage, and therefore help to compensate for the lack of wall cupboards. I am planning to have all drawers anyway, since it makes life so much easier. Another fanciful, and probably dangerous, idea I had was to have a tall cupboard with pullout shelves on which would sit the various appliances and storage containers. Any alternative ideas or experiences would be appreciated.

So I'll cross that idea off my wish list then!

Wall sockets with built-in WiFi extender, such as: https://www.screwfix.com/p/british-general-2g-13a-sp-switched-wi-fi-extender-socket-white/7706V?tc=KT5&ds_kid=92700038618050646&ds_rl=1241687&ds_rl=1245250&ds_rl=1249401&ds_rl=1245250&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIjoja5-eU3wIV7pztCh0CWQ4YEAQYAiABEgKbcfD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

Or you could consider an electric portable scissor lift, possibly set into a shallow well in the garage floor: https://www.automotechservices.co.uk/products/as-7630-mobile-scissor-lift/

Shadow gap instead of skirting boards and architrave. Well for door mats, especially with low threshold doors. Remote control central locking, although it might stretch the definition of simple! http://www.home-security-action.co.uk/central-locking.html

Yes @KarlisR, the seller of the main plot is pursuing purchase of the side strip and is in contact with the appropriate person at the Government Property Office, but it could be many months before resolution. Still, on the positive side, it gives me an opportunity to more research and to declutter!

Since it's temporary, how about a planed timber batten at the back, painted or stained as required to complement or contrast. At least it would give you a wider choice of suppliers for the 600mm wide laminate.

Thanks @scottishjohn. I'm still pondering on which build system to use, and since I'm building a bungalow I can't really see what advantage a steel frame would have over the timber alternatives, especially SIPs, since I'm hoping to put rooms in the roof space. At the moment it's all about research, including reading this excellent forum!

I've just spotted an advertisement for this company in a magazine, which piqued my interest. They seem a newish venture and offer a shell build service only. The screwpiles seem to be optional. They quote a u-value of 0.16 using SIPs - is that good? Any thoughts?

Something like this might be a possibility, although I can see a potential issue with plugs that include a long moulded grommet: http://floorbox.co.uk/stainless-power-grommet-usb I've noticed that they come with a 2m lead and plug, so are really some type of extension, although perhaps they could be "hard wired" in. The company do a range of products, although some seem less aesthetically pleasing than others.

Every question opens up a whole raft of new terminology and knowledge to a novice, which will all come in very useful when talking to a designer, so that hopefully I don't get blinded by science. I can certainly see there are pros and cons for every system, so food for thought indeed.

Thank you @Peterw, now I understand. I'm guessing the metal web joists could not work too well as the bottom chord of a truss, since I assume they might not be designed to work under tension. A friend of mine suggested what I now know to be celestory windows, but the bungalow will be next to a conservation site, and from the comments on the current PP I suspect that nothing too eyecatching will be allowed. However, the atrium, or light well, is an excellent idea which could illuminate both the ground floor and roof space without using too much space.

Thank you everybody for your comments, information and insights. Having looked at the Kerto beam span tables it would seem there is a balance to be achieved between between span, beam depth and spacing, but a span of 5 - 6 metres would not require overly deep floor beams for the roof space, for instance. Obviously these issues will be addressed properly at the drawing stage, but at the moment I don't want to come up with an "ideal" plan to then find it is not technically viable, at least at a reasonable cost. Another option for the floor joists might be the metal web type, which at least make running services a lot easier. As for the ridge beam, I can see that at least one load bearing support would be needed for a 14 metre length. However, I do have a further novice's question: what is the primary function of a ridge beam?

Despite the hiccups with acquiring the land, I am still being optimistic and playing around with various floor plans. However, I have paid no attention to the roof design or construction, other than to include a proper staircase for access to the roof space, which would possibly be used for a bedroom and/or hobby room and/or storage and a shower room. In other words, should I be considering placing internal walls to support the bottom chord, or can the truss accommodate a wide span? The footprint will be no more than 12 metres wide, but more likely 10, and 14 metres long, with a stepped design at the front to suit the curved plot frontage. The maximum ridge height allowed is 6 metres. Although the existing approved design includes a double hipped roof, I favour a simpler design with gables either end. If I understand correctly, the main options are: 1. Attic trusses 2. Cut and pitch on site 3. SIPs I did notice in an episode "The House that £100k Built" that a steel ridge beam was used, in conjunction with rafters cut on site, and I wondered what the pros and cons of that system are. I am still undecided on the build system yet, which may be affected by the best roof option, or is that the tail wagging the dog? In any event the roof space needs to be insulated, and heated, but as it would probably only be used occasionally, I was thinking of perhaps boxing in the stairs and fitting a door to avoid heat from downstairs rising to the roof space when it's not in use. Any helpful information and opinions would be appreciated

Thanks for the offer. I'll bear it in mind.

Thank you @Temp, excellent advice.

IF I ever manage to acquire the plot I cannot see anything being built before 2020, by which time the CIL may well be applicable. I could not find any national charging information, so I am assuming it is determined by the local Council. However, it would seem self-builders can claim exemption, even if the net floor area is over 100 square metres. If I understand correctly there are a couple of possible scenarios: 1. If the act of demolition is deemed to have started the development, which can only determined by the Planning Dept., then presumably there is no need to claim CIL exemption because it doesn't yet apply in our area. Hopefully the CIL cannot be applied once development has started, because as far as I can see, exemption can only be claimed BEFORE development starts. 2. Don't invite the Planning Dept. to rule on the demolition aspect, but submit revised plans, without mentioning demolition, perhaps different enough from the original plan to justify a new application. In fact, the seller said he was going to do this anyway, to include an additional two bedrooms and a bathroom in the roof space. On balance then, option 2 is probably the best course. In any event, an eye has to be kept out in case the CIL does become due, presumably by keeping in touch with the Planning Department.

From what I have found on the local Council's website, updated only last month, the CIL has not yet been instigated in Milton Keynes.

Thank you all. So, not quite so simple then. The seller is apparently complying, or has complied, with the three conditions that must be met "prior to commencement of the development". As more than one person has said, it's obviously best for the seller to speak to the Planning Dept. to get a formal response.

Me again! The plot I want to buy has PP to "demolish an outbuilding and erect a new bungalow". The owner has now demolished the structure but done nothing else at the moment, pending negotiations about a strip of land next to the plot. Maybe I am reading things too literally, or being obtuse, but does demolition of the structure constitute commencement of the development, thereby removing the 3 year time limit? I assume/hope this does not preclude me from submitting a new application once the plot is acquired, should I choose not to use the currently approved plan. Apparently "minor" changes can be made to the current PP online, without the need for a new application, but as yet I'm not sure what constitutes "minor".

I met the seller last night and after a bit of gentle questioning it turns out that the size and location of the turning area was in fact drawn on one of the previous planning applications by a highway engineer at the Council, who effectively supplied the solution to his previous objection to the development. I therefore cannot see that the turning area can be modified or removed without incurring a further objection from him. In answer to my original question it would therefore seem that the adoptive status of the road is irrelevant, from a planning point of view. Anyway, thank you all for your replies, they have been very helpful.

I spoke to the seller last night and he is pursuing purchase of the strip of land, although it may take some time, as mentioned before. However, it now seems there is a slight difference in the boundary of the strip and the land already owned by the seller, so he is arranging for a site visit by someone from the Land Registry, who hopefully will give a definitive answer. In any event, I have told him that we only want to buy the plot if it includes the strip of land. Anyway, thank you all for your replies, they have been most helpful.

The red shaded area is already part of the plot - I understand it was acquired separately many years ago by a previous owner. So yes, it is just the grey shaded area that the plot owner is trying to acquire and which will eventually be included as part of the sale, should he succeed. If he doesn't then that could be a deal breaker.

Another question for the seller to answer. From his comments I very much doubt he or the architect suggested it though. I have his name and number, so will ring him next week. A copy of the Land Registry Title is attached, and clearly shows two separate plots. The seller lives in the house on the south side of the road, which is physically separated from the building plot on the north side by the road. However, they are currently both part of the same title, but are being separated by his solicitor. The seller's original intention was to build a bungalow for himself on the plot and then sell his current house, but he has now decided to sell both, having found himself a project elsewhere for his retirement (he's a builder). Ultimately I don't actually have a particular problem with providing a turning area, and it's probably not a deal breaker. I could take the positive view and use it as the driveway to my hoped for garage. The garage could be set far enough back to allow me to park in front of it without interfering with the turning area. Obviously, it would better not to have the turning area taking such a chunk out of the plot though. Land Registry title plan.pdf

Thanks @Ferdinand. After some digging on the Council's website I found the Highways Development Management's observations: "I have previously objected to applications on the site due to the unsuitability of the width and alignment to accommodate the additional traffic generated by proposals. The current proposal is a significant improvement over the previous applications as an enlarged area is now provided for vehicle turning. This is acceptable. Parking for the site is provided in accordance with the parking standards and is acceptable (a visitor space is also provided). I have previously commented on the layout of Park Gardens to accommodate the additional dwelling. This comment is reproduced as follows: “Park Gardens is mostly a single track road with the two way sections being in the area close to Whalley Drive. Within the single track sections, width reduces to 3.1m but generally varies in width along its length. Overall Park Gardens is sub-standard for the number of dwellings served off a single track, private road. We would normally expect that single track, private roads should serve a maximum of 5 dwellings. There are 10 dwellings in Park Gardens.” There remains a concern of general width but this is not so severe as to lead me to object to the proposals. With the enlarged turning area provided this overcomes my primary reason for objection to the previous applications. I have no objections to the planning application subject to the following condition: 1. Prior to the initial occupation of the development hereby permitted the scheme for parking and manoeuvring shown on the approved drawings shall be provided and shall be used for no other purpose thereafter. Reason: For the safety and convenience of users of the highway and of the access." I think I may therefore have found the answer to my original question, and from the above comments I would imagine the condition cannot be removed, and it's difficult to see how it might be modified, given the lack of room. Thank you to all of you who have responded - it was all most helpful. All that remains now is to keep in touch with the seller to see how acquistion of the strip of land next to the plot is progressing.