Bancroft

Labour building 1.5m houses is all smoke and mirrors. They're not actually building any. They're hoping that private companies build them so that they can take the credit. If the private companies don't hit the targets then Labour can blame them. Welcome to politics. As for local authorities. They put a pre-commencement condition on our build for the landscaping. I queried why pre-commencement when landscaping has to be left until the house is built. No response. They then rejected our plan. When I asked them to state specifically in writing why it was rejected they then came back and said 'on further review we could not raise any objection to the landscape plan you have submitted as it meets all requirements of the condition'.

Interesting. Thanks for highlighting this. I was close to going with Protek but now may need to do a little more research. Even if using a main contractor, having the 2 year window just starts to make things messy and opens the door to 'not our problem' arguments between different insurers.

Two stupid elements to this government push towards ASHPs. First, ASHPs work best in well insulated, modern houses that can fit UFH. Most of the UK'd housing stock isn't either. Second, the price of gas is artificially kept low by heaping penalties on electrical prices. This is, essentially, to help the majority of people who rely on gas boilers and is a way of keeping their heating bills down (and gain votes as a secondary effect...). Ironically, if the price of electricity was not heavily penalised, more people would probably turn to ASHPs. Like tax on EVs, there will be a point at some time in the future when the government of the day decides to 'persuade' people to move to ASHPs and they will do that by switching the penalty structure from elevtricity to gas.

We're planning on full concrete slab at the moment so hopefully not an issue. Not sure trying to hold the builder back will work. I get the impression that once he gets going he's full speed ahead - which is another reason why I'm doing a bit of homework now.

Some really helpful stuff here, gents, many thanks. Feel better equipped to hold my own with the professionals.

Now got me thinking about what I might have missed! My list seems small in comparison.

Good point. I expect size of duct is a balance between being as small as possible to reduce space and any heat loss, but big enough to not make it impossible to thread stuff through.

Yes, I'm expecting this as part of the architect's work but I just want to make sure I'm happy in my own mind before him and the builder start trying to bamboozle me! Good point ref power for the sewage - had missed that one.

We're planning on a concrete slab foundation under an ICF build and I'm presently thinking about conduits required to run through the slab. And the list seems to be growing daily! I've got the basics like sewage out, and mains water and electricity in, but it's all the other stuff: Into the house - ASHP, aircon (split system so essentially another ASHP just providing cool v hot), solar/battery, broadband/fibre. Back out - electric gate power (and ethernet for video camera/security), lighting to garage, lighting to garden, water supply to external taps, power out to car charger. And so the list goes on. (Let me know if anything crucial missed). What's the best way to organise these without causing interference between different supplies or ending up with multiple conduits under the slab? Clearly water and electric should be kept separate but can electricity, fibre and ethernet go through one conduit? Is that a good idea? Could all electrical supplies go through one conduit or should they be split up? Ditto ASHP and aircon plumbing. Is it worth considering just a single electrical supply out and then putting another meter box in the garage to split all the external requirements from there? How have others approached this issue?

+1 for this. We had a planning officer visit when we were putting in a Pre-Application. She actually said "If that tree is still there when you put the application in, then it will need to be taken into account." She then looked at me in a way that suggested they didn't care what might or might not happen before they receive any paperwork...

You can get a copy of the Land Registry documents for your land/property for about £3 (last time I did it). That might answer some questions. Also, worthwhile setting up a Land Registry Alert on their system. That way, if anyone tries to put a charge on your property or land you will be informed and can stop them.

50 x 25 seems a very 'square' section for fencing - is there a particular reason for using that? Going to take a lot of fixings! Also, wider slats would reduce any bowing and thus remove the need for intermediate support. Wood tends to expand across the grain so two thoughts on this: You shouldn't need to leave expansion joints at the end as expansion lengthways over 1.8 metres should be minimal. 50mm across the width shouldn't create massive expansion but if you're only leaving a 8mm gap then that expansion might be noticeable if one timber decides to expand down and the adjacent one expands up. To be honest, though, probably only noticeable to the person who fits it (ie you!) No experience of the privacy screening fabric but I'd imagine it will decay/split well before the fence needs replacing. Also, I presume the privacy screening fabric must be on the outer side of the fence (if you get the shadow effect from your garden) which must make the outside look just like a wall of black fabric? We're looking at a similar style of fence but using wider timbers alternately attached to each side of the post. This should allow wind through but still create a visual barrier - plus allow plants to grow both sides of the fence at the same time.

We're still sorting our electrical out with SSEN (they're re-doing the third quote at the moment having screwed the first two up...) Looking at SSEN's paperwork we too can use an Independent Connection provider. HOWEVER, the elements of the job the ICP can do are very limited, and it still looks like SSEN require the ICP to: submit a full design to them (for their approval) and enter into an Adoption Agreement (written by SSEN). That has delay (and frustration) written all over it from my point of view so if you're in any sort of hurry it may be easier simply to go with what your electricity company say. Annoying but that's reality with these monopolies.

Captive audience - too true. SSEN quoted me £8.2k for single phase or £8.9k for three phase. As the difference was so small I paid for three phase. Then, a day later, I got an email from them saying they'd forgotten to add in some costs for the three phase cable and the new quote price is £11.3k... It's as if they just roll a dice.

I had a chat with my tame electrician to see if he knew anyone who could do it but he said he didn't think anyone was able to. As it happens, I've found a way around my immediate issue - I've re-located the consumer connection box and taken as much slack out of the system as I can and it seems to have worked - just. However, I'll still need to pay them for a survey for supply to the new house...

From my recent experience on this topic I would ask your chosen Structural Engineer for a detailed explanation of exactly what information he/she needs in order to correctly design your foundations/house. But still be prepared for some vacillating from them. We needed to have some ground investigation done (planning requirement) regarding percolation rates, drainage etc. I found a suitable company and got a quote from them for the work. I then sent that quote to the SE and said "Will this survey be sufficient for you to do the foundation design work?". Yes, was the answer. When the results came back, I sent them to the SE and told him to crack on. He then said he didn't have all the information he needed and suggested I might need another survey... A short re-briefing ensued, I told him to speak directly to the ground investigation company, and harmony has now been re-established.

I think a useful topic to have pinned on this site would be one entitled "Costs I hadn't budgeted for". Joking aside, I think it could be a useful thread to help people get a more comprehensive idea about all those little things that no magazines, tv programmes, or manufacturers/suppliers tell you about. I'll start the ball rolling: Our internet fibre comes to our property via overhead cable. The cable runs across our driveway/site access point and is about 3.5m above ground height. To get concrete lorries in we need a minimum of 4m but there isn't enough slack in the cable to simply raise it. What we need is for the consumer connection box on the side of the house to be unscrewed and raised about 2m to give the slack required. Then a new cable needs to be added from the box to our internal connection socket. I've sent photos to Openreach and spent an hour on the phone explaining the situation. Andy, the nice man at Openreach, has said they need to do a 'detailed survey' to determine exactly what needs to be done. What needs to be done is clear from the photos and Andy privately agrees with me but the system says we still need the survey. Out of the goodness of his heart, Andy has kept the costs of the survey as low as possible so now it will only cost us £633. Only £633! That doesn't include any work needed to fix the issue and could actually be more '...if we find any issues...'. When I suggested he had me over a barrel with my trousers around my ankles because only Openreach could do this work, he said, "Yes, we have". So, new builder, if you ever have a reason to speak to Openreach regarding your new property, be prepared for an eye-watering experience.

HRH has seen the sense in us buying a van during the forthcoming build but I'm swinging between which option to go for. Just a straight dropside? Or a tipper? Or one with hydraulic tailgate? The variant doesn't seem to make much difference to the price so that doesn't help. I don't plan to be picking up van loads of aggregate - but you never know... Hydraulics are useful but they can also go wrong (especially on an elderly van) I've thought about trailers but (apart from lower price) not really sure I want the hassle of trying to manoeuvre car and trailer around builder's yards/B&Q. And (just checked) our local authority requires the same permit at the tip for vans or trailers over 1.8m long so no trailer benefits there as i want something that can take 3m loads as a minimum. What have been your thoughts and experiences from your build?

Can I ask why you need the cladding 150mm off the frame? Is it simply to align with the rendered section or is there another technical reason?

Multi-tool cutter or Dremel with cutting disc (depending on how fine you want to be able to finesse the gap)? I would have thought a sawing/rotating motion blade would be less likely to cause the plaster to chip.

I did exactly this. Emailed them in June shortly after we got PP, saying we expect to start work in September but in reality it's likely to be long after that. They got back to me within the same day confirming no CIL responsibility so I now just have a note in my diary/project management stuff to call/email them about completion idc.

+1 for this way forward. We're in a national park so having a local planning consultant who knew the local planners was, I think, a real bonus. A couple of meetings between the architectural consultant and the planning consultant gave us a strong application and the planners passed it first time.

I'm planning on using timber cladding but want to use cladding that is about 2" x 1", stood on end away from the backing board. This board on board/Yorkshire style will give a more three-dimensional effect than what is normally seen with tongue and groove style cladding due to the increased depth between slats. However, I don't want to have the fixing screws/nails visible. The two options I've come up with are shown here but both have issues. Option 1 leaves the darker coloured slat untethered to the back board and thus it might be subject to warping away from the back board. A fixing could be driven through the darker slat at 45 degrees into the back board but this might then impact the next light coloured slat's positioning if not fully flush. Option two avoids this by having two fixings in the light coloured slat but increases the work(cost) of profiling the light coloured slat, leaves less wood to tether the dark slat to, and adds 50% more fixings. The only other option would seem to be to have tongue and groove but just make the wood a lot thicker (but still nowhere near 2") and have thinner than normal tongues to allow more of a shadow gap between slats. Am I overthinking this/making things difficult for myself? Is there an easy solution? This can't be the first time the issue has arisen.

It would seem cruel to have them sitting there but not free for them to use! Also, that could be the draw for people starting out who can't afford things like bandsaws, planer/thicknessers etc Granted there might be insurance issues but not insurmountable and, done properly, I could buy new toys (I mean tools...) and have others pay for them.

What are the downsides of only having a single zone?