RichS

So Isolohr have moved the training day back from Thursday to Friday of this week. Unfortunately I already have things booked in for Friday so can't make it. If anyone is going I would be interested to know the answer to @PeterW query regarding needing a screed instead of just placing heating pipes in slab.

Make an upside down U shape out of 50 x 100, stand it on the temporary stairs so the bottom of the U is about level with 1st floor and then batten over the biggest drop area. The remainder is safe because of the handrail and you should still have access by walking through the supports.

For the door casings, if you're using loose rebate laths, just screw fix behind where the laths will cover. No need for any filling then.

Ahh, glad I put my "get out clause" last line in

Ply flush internal fire doors are fairly solid and not too expensive. Have a word with your local locksmith for keyed alike locks. Cobble frames out of 50 x 100. Job sorted.

Never done it, or seem it done. I would have thought a brick slip would be quite brittle and not really suited. But, I've been wrong before.

It will if someone flushes the loo while you're having a shower.

I've had a reply from planning on my request for removal of the watching brief, see attached; I have discussed this with my manager and we are of the opinion that the condition is still valid. Our conservation officer has confirmed that the area lies in close proximity to evidence of Roman occupation. The condition does refer to Areas of Archaeological Importance in the reason but does not refer to any specific one and does not make reference to the Local Plan. The condition simply mean it is in an area where archaeological deposits may exist. Just because the site doesn’t lie within a formal AAI doesn’t mean it isn’t within an area of interest. The condition has been amended recently to make reference to areas of archaeological interest to make it clearer to interpret. However, if you think the condition is not enforceable or does not meet the tests of a ‘condition’ you can apply to have it removed from the application. However, as we are of the opinion that there may be deposits on site it would be unlikely to be removed. If you chose not to undertake the watching brief we would have to assess whether it would be expedient for us to take enforcement action or not So what are peoples thought on this?? I have made enquiries re. the large site adjacent to my plot and can confirm that this is not subject to the same condition. I really can't believe the the Romans camped on my 40m² of garden and completely ignored several acres of field 15 metres away.

@Temp Thanks for that Temp. I've emailed my contact in Planning and she in turn has passed it onto the councils archaeologist for her comments. I'll be very surprised if they don't just remove the condition as the reason for it being applied is totally incorrect, which I would have thought invalidates it. Watch this space

I'll make the phone call a little later, give them chance to wake up on a Monday , and let you know the outcome.

@JSHarris Thanks Jeremy. I have just read my condition. The reason for it is "The site lies within an Area of Archaeological Importance". Now the good news (I hope), I've googled those said areas and although they take in a large amount of the city centre, and a few outlying sites, one about a mile away from me, it doesn't actually cover my land. So as far as I can see this condition surely cannot be valid.

Thanks folks, not good news then!! @JSHarris, if it costs me £20k i'd have to pull the plug on the whole idea. Will have a word with my local council later and see what, if anything, I can do to remove the condition. Just a thought, do they have to have a certain criteria before they can make this a condition. Directly across the road from my site there is a LARGE housing development in progress (100s) and as far as I can make out these did not have this condition imposed.

Has anyone been hit with one of these????????? Unfortunately I have and am looking for any info on what it entails, cheapest way to carry it out, or is it possible to have it removed. I understand the idea of it but on my site, If I go passive slab as planned, I will only be scraping off about 600mm over an area of about 150m² and a lot of this area has already been disturbed a number of years ago when I installed some deep soakaways. Would that be good enough reason to have this condition removed??

@Triassic Thanks very much, guess I should have done a search first but posted it just as my dinner was ready

I have been in touch recently with Lance from Polarwall regarding my build. He has asked me the question, "Does Kore have BBA approval" Does it???????????????? I know plenty on here have built using Kore so I just assumed that it had. Was that assumption correct or misplaced?? And if it doesn't does that throw up any problems/issues.

Sussed it!!!! The horizontal "skirt" that I was referring to is a "Frost shield" apparently. http://crsfuturebuild.co.uk/?page_id=257

Can't see any problems with that, it will certainly keep it in place better.

Sorry, probably a bad description. I mean the EPS that is outside the perimeter of the building envelope, only appears to be about 50/70mm thick

So, which is the better for foundations. It seems that Kore uses EPS while IsoLohr use XPS. Kore claim that their product is "unaffected by water". Is this a bit of creative terminology . The product itself may be unaffected but I've just watched a couple of Youtube clips and it seems that EPS allows fluids to permeate through while XPS doesn't. Does anyone have any thoughts on this??

@recoveringacademic, Sorry, I missed this post, thanks very much for the reply. I am sorted for the April training day in Yorkshire. Why do IsoLohr always seem to put the "skirt" around the outside of the slab, surely this will interfere with top water drainage arrangements.

Or, as in my case, you submit the application and then argue about it for 2 years before they finally agree. Hope your LPA are a lot better.

When I tried to renew ours about 9 months ago I bought the bearings off the internet, spent about 3 hours to get the drum out of the machine, and then about another hour to knock the bearing out. I then found they'd sent me the wrong bearing. At that point I lost the will to live, skipped the lot, and went to Curry's.

The drawing states breather membrane on ply sheathing etc etc etc. You can't possibly build that arse about face.

@ProDave, Think I've found the solution to both our issues, this place, https://www.plastics-express.co.uk/ducting/perforated-gas-ducting?kw=%2Bservice %2Bduct&fl=902740&ci=16850003130&network=s&pm=&gclid=CLu3ku6GgdMCFYOfGwodzi0ENA They have 25m rolls.

How fussy have people found service providers to be on the colour of underground ducting. I intend having the gas and electric meter boxes remote from the house by approx 14m and approx. 8m from my boundary, so a max of 25m would suffice for each ducting. The issue I'm finding is that the ductings tend to come in a minimum of 50m rolls so that would waste 50% of each if they insist on them being correctly coloured.