IanR

The limit is 5m³ discharge a day. As long as you meet the general binding rules, you do not require a permit from EA to discharge from a small treatment plant to a watercourse (in England). https://www.gov.uk/guidance/general-binding-rules-small-sewage-discharge-to-a-surface-water

I've got two extracts in the Kitchen, and it works well with steam and smells, but I will give it a quick 5 min boost sometimes No problems in the bathrooms either.

No that doesn't loose it, either option could be developed.

Thank you. No, mine didn't. Mine came from Brooks Bros Timber and that wasn't an option.

I have fresh sawn European Oak, feather edge, horizontal cladding through the top half of my build. Mines an agricultural conversion and needed to link to an old oak framed adjacent barn. The board size I went with was 17mm to 5mm x 175mm ranging in lengths 2.5 to 3.5mtr My thoughts are that I love the finished look, but if I did it again I'd change what I did a little. 5mm is too thin, there are some splits, and it is in the thin area of the board that the splits occur (around the fixings). I went with around a 30mm - 35mm overlap, which I would increase to 35mm - 40mm. I was persuaded by the very capable chippies to not go with the pre-drill and screw fixing that I had planned, and to go with 1st fix nailing. I'm on the fence whether that was the correct choice. The 1st fix nailing is not strong enough to hold the boards that want to twist, but perhaps screwing would have caused more boards to split as they shrank. All sides of the house eventually silvered evenly, but it did take 3 years or so. The NE & NW facade distorted less and split less, SE & SW have more boards needing some attention. I have probably 4 - 6 boards in 180m² that need replacing, and another 10 that need re-fixing. NE facade SW facade It does take some time for the "fresh" honey colour to start to grey, so you may have to live with a colour clash for a couple of years

Agricultural occupancy conditions only really started to appear in the 70's, from what I understand, so older farmhouses and farm workers' cottages that haven't undergone significant changes since then won't have the conditions attached, but some do.

I use Loxone to run it for a few minutes when someone enters a bathroom (and then again after 10 mins if they are still in there). That doesn't include the Kitchen, otherwise it would be on most of the time, but we don't seem to notice when the Kitchen takes a little longer to warm up.

Yep, but depends on exact wording of condition as to who in agricultural (or forestry) can live in the house.

I think that's quite normal, I'm always noticing concave distortions on 2/3g glazing. It's more noticeable on thicker units, I've assumed it's just the vacuum pulling the centre of the panes in.

Not for horses though (unless agricultural working horses). Equestrian doesn't fall within Agricultural. I'd say they've probably got planning for the Change of Use and conversion, there's no Change of Use PD (yet) on stables. There's also a max of 465 sqr m (or if you game the rules to push it up to 865 sqr m) allowable for the Change of Use, and if you do so you then loose Agricultural PD for 10 years, so unfortunately it can't be done again and again.

The Change of Use to resi can only happen after the "barn" has been there 10 years, and the Barn could only be built if there is Agricultural Permitted development to do so, which requires a viable agricultural business. I doubt he planned it, but he's been helped by the the Council making an error in their enforcement. ie. claiming the building was a caravan.

I think he now stands half a chance of keeping it. The Appeal Inspector has found that the enforcement against the building can no longer be taken as it's been there for more than 4 years and no claim of concealment has been made by the Council. The question left is whether its Residential Use can be enforced against. To test that the Council will have to start its enforcement all over again.

There would be no issue in resubmitting a Class Q, as long as work had not started. If a Class Q was already approved, I'd assume you'd only have to resubmit Class Q (b), as long as you were intending a Change of Use to the same building, or part building, with the same Curtilage, and were only planning on changing the building operations. I can't imagine you'd find much documentation regarding a re-submission, simply because there is nothing to stop it being done.

Good Luck!

The solar gain you don't want in Summer, can help you in the Winter and shoulder months. Do you know you have a solar gain issue? (is it built yet). If still in the planning stage, could you swap to an insulation with longer decrement delay?

I just googled "Planning Consultant lawful existing use + my local city/town" and about 10 local planning consultants came up, it's then a case of phoning and getting a feel if they are familiar with CLEUD applications. Most should be. However, nothing seems to move very quickly with submitting planning applications, so I feel you may have missed the opportunity to get support from a professional. You have nothing to loose then to submit it yourself. On the same google search above, also came up the page to submit the application yourself. My LPA gives a brief description of what is required: I would expect yours to be similar. You can download a copy of the OS at the correct scale for the Block Plan, and Site plan, and then just manually sketch over the top the detail of the balcony. Then just write a short, precise explanation with evidence to support the time-frame the balcony/terrace has been in place and in use. Mention the recent maintenance and how short a time it was unusable and state that its use was not abandoned, evidenced by you doing maintenance on it.

This remains your option: My guess is that the enforcement officer has no more to gain from discussing it further with you. They don't see themselves as an advice service, and they've communicated what they needed to have done so can claim to have engaged with you. You now need to submit an application for a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use and Development, providing evidence of how long the structure has been in place and in Use and stating that it recently underwent maintenance, for a very short period that could not be considered as abandonment. The enforcement officer is expecting to run the clock down, so that you then have to remove the structure. It's now for you to take action to stop the clock.

I'd check the prices on both, anecdotally ground loops are far cheaper. You need to be quick if you are expecting to benefit from RHI, it stops in April 2022 I believe... (Checked and scheme closes to new applicants 31.03.2022) I thought cooling was allowed now on RHI, at least on ASHPs it is. MVHR does not shift enough volume of air to effectively cool, it can trim temperatures at best. Shading works, but less effective on the inside of the window, external shading is much more effective. Definitely not an expert, but you'll see this is all a much talked about subject here, with a lot of people that have put it into practice. Edited to add: Practical advice - Highly Insulate, highly airtight (sub 1 ACH), if you want a lot of south facing glazing then integrate a way of externally blocking it out with external blinds, overhangs or bris soleil, pay for detailed thermal modelling. I'd recommend PHPP even if not considering Passivhaus certification. Consider all of this before settling on the final appearance.

It's a good plan, assuming you have the land for ground loops. Assuming good insulation and air tightness, heating shouldn't be a problem via GSHP, but are you working on the heat & cooling requirements yet? If you don't mitigate the solar gain through those south facing windows it's unlikely GSHP alone will provide sufficient cooling. The mitigation required may need changes to the rear elevation to incorporate them. I really like the curved windows in the sun room / family kitchen, but they may prove difficult to screen externally.

Nicely balanced for its size. If I was going to be critical, I feel the eaves are too wide on the central/main roof area. I would have it larger than on the two smaller, lower roofs either side, but just a little smaller than shown. The risk is the 2nd floor front dormers would look a little squeezed, and I don't think they should be pushed together any closer (rear dormers could come in a little). It's the sort of thing you need a few iterations of to get the combination that works - but perhaps your architect has done this already. The stone surrounds on the windows also look a little too "heavy" to me, although they look better in the photo-realistic image you posted rather than the PDFs. This maybe a lack of detail in the CAD model and the shadowing used for the renderings, but maybe they protrude too far. Is that a public road directly in front? Could the property be pushed a little further into the plot? The high grey stone walls of the lower ground floor look imposing on the rear. Could the ground be brought up to reduce their height, raised planters perhaps to soften it with some foliage. What's your plans for heating & cooling?

They will be "Main Stream" from 2025 - read up about the Future Homes Standard Not true, just like a gas boiler the heating system needs to be correctly sized for its use Where is your reference that says a 7 year life is typical. They're not £10K now and will only go down once the RHI/MCS scheme is removed. I think you are burying your head in the sand.

+2 We installed a perimeter drain all the way around our build, going to below the foundation level. There were numerous seams in the clay with water constantly running through them.

As we are talking "facts". At "close to freezing", my HP is still pushing a COP of over 3. The drop in COP from a warmer outside temp accounts for the completely normal defrost cycle:

You've lost the argument, now it's time to move on... The Government is targeting 600,000 heat pump installs a year by 2028 and is putting the legislation in place to make it happen, whether you feel they are noisy or not.

Its Use is therefore "Incidental to Residential", so adding a mezzanine that makes no change to the exterior of the building, would not fall within the definition of development, so would not require planning permission. Edited to add: Ref: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-required Scroll down to "The categories of work that do not amount to ‘development’ " under the heading "What is development?"