IanR

Actually, thinking about it, line weight (thickness) on a vector print to PDF can be set either way, ie a certain thickness at the scale printed, so that it gets thicker as you zoom in, or fixed thickness no matter what zoom percentage you are at, so that wasn't a good indicator I picked. But the fact it does't go blurry, is a strong indicator it's a vector format. An even stronger indicator if it is a curved/circular "line" that doesn't get blurry/stepped. Unless you are familiar with the CAD system the architect is using, I'd leave it to them. They may have a PDF2CAD plugin that allows the PDF to be opened directly and auto-translated in to their system format. Or they may use a 3rd party system to export the PDF into a format that can be Imported in to their CAD system. Once imported to their CAD system, yes they would be able to edit it, although not as easily as if they had the native CAD files from your original architect.

Depends. PDFs can be Vector based, rather than raster. CAD systems can be set up to print to PDF in Vector format. If that's been done then you can convert that into a neutral file format that can be Imported into some CAD systems. "cgm" is a vector plotting format that is good for this type of transfer. To tell if your PDFs are vector based, zoom in and in. Do the lines get thicker and turn fuzzy, or do they stay the same thickness and remain sharp? If the latter, then they are vector based.

I used a pre-insulated twin pipe: Rehau RVT DUO 32 + 32/150 If you need to bring it up vertically through a slab, it needs quite a deep trench due to the minimum bend radii.

I've got an AirFlow unit, and am very happy with it. AirFlow can design your system for you, at least they could in 2016. They have a very competent design office. I'm pretty sure that the system design was free, I can find no record of paying for it, accept they charged me £50 + VAT for iteration number 4. But that was after we'd agreed everything, and they'd issued me 45 page design report etc., so I thought that was quite reasonable. AirFlow then provide a full BoM and a target price, and you take that around to all their distributors to get the best price you can. I found that different distributors get different terms with AirFlow, depending on their sales volumes, and it turned out for me that no one could beat Travis Perkins. My local TP didn't have a clue what I was ordering, but they ordered it and delivered it for substantially less than the target price from AirFlow. AirFlow then provided very good telephone support for my self-install and later for getting the communication running between Loxone and the AirFlow unit.

As per Temp's link, the Martin Goodall planning blog is a great reference, and is probably where I've picked up the allowable break in breech, if for good reason, and not abandonment. In a quick look just now, I can't find the exact blog. As a reference for how an planning inspectorate puts the argument together for an Appeal that has been allowed when the LPA refused a CLEUD due to a break in continuity of Breach: https://planningjungle.com/wp-content/uploads/2196915-Appeal-Decision-Notice.pdf

The deemed consent relates to a continuing breach of planning that has lasted continuously for 4 years (or for 10 years if it is a breach of a planning condition - there are other caveats) I believe the Enforcement Officer has taken the position that once the deck was removed, the breach was no longer on going, so the 4 year clock restarts, and deemed planning no longer applies. I've no idea if case law exists in this particular situation, but for others there is a consensus that a 3 month break in the continuity of the breach does not effect the breach, ie. the breach can stop for 3 months, if there is a genuine reason, such as renovation, and it not effect the deemed consent. If the terrace was unusable for less than 3 months, or for not much more, then I would test the Enforcement Officer's position by applying for a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use and Development (CLEUD) You can check with the LPA how much they charge for a CLEUD application. Retrospective Planning makes a subjective decision on whether a planning application would be granted today for the structure that has been there for some time, but without considering deemed consent. A CLEUD is less subjective, if you can prove a continuous and ongoing breach (in the balance of probability), they have to provide a Certificate that makes it lawful for that breach to continue. You can do the CLEUD yourself, but if it's important to you I'd suggest using a Planning Consultant with relevant experience, to put the CLEUD application together. It is easy to share info with the LPA that they can then use as a reason to not grant the CLEUD, if you don't know all the rules. An application of a CLEUD would stop the current Enforcement action, until the CLEUD was decided.

I'm with Symbio, prices have just gone up to: Elec is 11.725p excl / unit (12.31p incl.) and 19.048p excl / day standing charge (20p incl.) Tarrif - Low Fair and Green Variable SE02 v18 Downside of Symbio - I seem to be unable to stop them over estimating usage and pushing up the DD, to then pay the money back later.

I don't recognise the first picture, but the second is exactly what I expect of a coms cabinet!

To clarify I've used solid core for all structured cabling to patch panels, but have used stranded patch leads for everything, including to PoE devices, contrary to the comment from @Scoobyrex, so was asking the question "why solid core patch leads for PoE devices?"

Agree. It would need to be metered as it goes into each property, otherwise taps would be left running and windows open. For retrofitting tower blocks, when the hydrogen revolution doesn't happen for domestic heating, there is a plausible option of filling the roof space up with ASHPs and running the hot water down to each apartment externally. But that's going off topic...

For new build Terrace houses and Apartments, how about District Heating? Seems to work in Sweden.

That's the boiler industry lobbying the government, which the the Government appear to have ignored for the 2025 Future Homes Standard, where the response to the consultation has said new homes are to be fitted with low carbon heating, not low carbon ready heating.

Oopps, I didn't know this. What's the impact of not doing so? I'm using stranded cable from integral PoE Switch on NVR to patch panel for all cameras and from patch panel to PoE switch for APs. Very glad I used patch panels, much tidier, and easier to reconfigure.

It seems clear there will be no fossil fuel boilers in New Builds from 2025, and the briefing and lobbying is starting for what carrot and/or stick is required to get existing fossil fuel boilers swapped out in the years that follow.

Why don't you ask the Kingspan to provide you a condensation risk analysis of your sole plate detail? Without any external insulation much of the sole plate will be at the outside temperature. If the soleplate is below the dewpoint for the internal house air and that air comes in contact with it there is a risk of condensation. 20°C air with 65% RH has a dewpoint of 13.2°C (https://www.calculator.net/dew-point-calculator.html?airtemperature=20&airtemperatureunit=celsius&humidity=65&dewpoint=&dewpointunit=celsius&x=54&y=16) At anything below around 13.2°C, should air from inside the property contact the soleplate there is a risk of condensation (that doesn't mean a risk of rot). To stop interstitial condensation on the solepate from the internal air, you need a vapour control layer on the inside face of the SIP to block/reduce the amount of moisture that can get to the soleplate. Overlapping and sealing the VCL to the DPC I would think is important, as is general detailing of the VCL. I'm not sure what you could do about surface condensation though on the internal face of the wall at the sole plate. My feeling is that when it is cold outside, I can't see how the inner part of the soleplate could be above 13°C, as it has no insulation. In high moisture rooms, where the RH can easily be 70% - 80%, I would think there is a high risk of condensation for prolonged periods. But whether that is long enough without the ability to dry out, to cause mould growth, I don't know. It would certainly be improved with EWI over the block upstand and sole plate, but whether there is a risk without them you need a CRA. The higher you could take the EWI the better, but this would also need to be checked with the SIP Supplier since with the internal VCL you need anything outside that to be vapour open so that any moisture that does get in to the SIP can get back out. Edited to add: This is not a weakness of SIP, it's an issue of a cold bridge at the soleplate.

The LPA were pretty clear on their direction. This was your chance to have amended your drawings prior to the decision. They don't come back to you with proposals, they just give reasons why what you are asking for does not fit the policies they follow, you have to go back to them with new proposals that find the compromise. The Council's comment, "The Council acted pro-actively through positive engagement with the applicant in an attempt to narrow down the reasons for refusal but fundamental objections could not be overcome" in their reason for refusal now makes sense. I'd resubmit the plans with the existing entrance, and tackle the new position for the entrance later. When you do, address all other issues they have with your proposed entrance, except its position, and work up from there. ie. you don't need planning for the fencing, so don't include it, show a timber 5 bar gate at 6m from the road. Even offer them a reinforced grass driveway. The name of the game is to get the new position agreed in principle, and then you are only arguing over style and scale. It you were to then take them to appeal over whether it was a grass drive way or shingle they're unlikely to proceed as they'd probably loose.

If the furthest internal point of the house is more than 45m from the road you need to provide access for a 12t pumping appliance, and if they have to come on to the property by more than 20m, you have to provide a turning space. You don't need to provide space for a pull off at the entrance, the fire tenders will just block the road when they are needed. I don't think it's actually stated in Part B, but building control wanted to see 3.7m kerb-to-kerb for the access at mine. This is needed at something like a hammer-head turning point, but not really needed along a straight length of drive.

I keep the Nibe controller in Manual mode and use the MODBUS add-on to allow Loxone to send an "allow cooling" and "allow heating" instruction. It could be done directly on the Nibe SMO 40 controller in Auto mode and setting a "Cool/Heat set point" to change the mode and a "Cool at room over" temp for when to start cooling.

The MVHR can not move a sufficient volume of air to cool the house, but it can assist the UFH a small amount (~ 1kW) To avoid condensation on the floors, you can't chill them below the dew point. The due point varies with air temp and relative humidity. You could set an overriding minimum temp for the buffer, say 13 or 14 degrees C, if you wanted to just rely on the ASHP controls, or if you had some other automation that could put some logic into the temperature and an RH sensor as well as temperature, you could let it calculate how low you could take the floor temperature to improve on the 13 or 14 degrees. The downside of UFH cooling, compared to an AC unit, is the time it takes to react. You can't let the temperature rise by 5 - 10 degrees above target and expect the UFH to bring that down in an hour. The cooling needs to start it's job as soon as the temp moves above target. I've no experience of the chiller units, but I'd expect them to provide a much more noticeable temp reduction in the room they are situated, as they are working directly on the air in the room, and air holds a lot less energy than the concrete slab. You could potentially also run the chiller with cooler water as the condensation is more manageable. However when you switch the chiller off I'd expect the air will warm back up quite quickly as the fabric of the house won't have been cooled by much.

If I've understood the "wiring up" question, the Controller (SMO40) comes all set to run Heating, Cooling and Hot water, so its just a comms line from controller to HP. I run mine either heating or cooling the buffer. The buffer then feeds the UFH and a heat exchanger on the MVHR supply duct.

If you haven't purchased an ASHP yet, and you want cooling, just purchase one that offers cooling out of the box The requirement to "hack" existing ASHPs to gain the cooling function stems back to the RHI scheme not allowing HPs that could be used in a cooling mode. Manufactures then had to disable the function for the UK market that was available in other territories. RHI changed in 2017/8 to allow HPs with cooling so more ASHPs with cooling should be available in the UK market. The Nibe F2040 series is the one I have, but I'm sure there must be others.

Is it aluminium, of galvanised steel? You really need to replace the whole sheet, or how about the whole roof, or is it only a short-term fix. You'll struggle to find a profile to patch it, that matches exactly, unless someone is still making that sheet. and you'll have an edge along the top that the water will be trying hard to enter get in to.

As @newhome states. This is how mine worked. The only caveat is that you can only claim back correctly charged VAT. So if a company that is supply and install insists on charging you 20%, you can't claim that back. You have to work with some companies to help them understand the reduced rate (5%) charge. Be aware also that if you contract a trade directly, that is not VAT registered, you will not be able to claim back the VAT on the goods they supply. Better for you to buy the goods directly, and for them to install and only charge you the labour.

"Open" countryside, just refers to your site not being within a developed settlement (hamlet/village), where the rules are more relaxed. A lot is made of Greenbelt, but the development rules are pretty similar in open countryside as they are in Greenbelt. You are requesting a change of use, so you need their buy-in. While you may feel you have a logical reason for the choices you have made you need to calibrate your view to their priorities. Brick piers and solid gates are not typical for an agricultural access, they are being reasonable rejecting them (unless they have allowed similar in neighbouring properties on similar sites)

Sounds a fantastic location, welcome. It also sounds like you are very rural, and while there are other permissions granted around you they must be pretty spread out so you are not within a built area and are firmly in open countryside. If the post and rail is truly agricultural/equestrian type, then they can't really argue, if you weren't changing the use of the patch of land the access crosses from agricultural/equestrian to residential, they could do nothing about it, however they've included this as it adds to the picture they are painting of what they are calling a "grandiose" scheme. If you are in open countryside, then it is fair for them to be minimising the impact of your development, and if the most visible part of that development is the entrance (due to house being 200m away from the public road and mature hedge rows etc.) it is quite reasonable for them to want that to be "in keeping" with its surroundings. Our LPA would only allow a 5 bar gate. Nothing solid, nothing over 1.2m, no fancy gate posts. 12m inset in the field also seems a little excessive, yes you need provision for a car/van to pull off the road before they are stopped by your gate, but they may be happier with 6m. I can also see their issue with it being through the middle of the field, but maybe if you reduced the visual impact they'd compromise on this. Again, if it was a field entrance, on to an uncategorised road, you wouldn't need planning permission, so they couldn't actually stop a 5 bar gate being in the middle of the hedge row, however as you want it for residential use you need to reach a compromise with them.