Adsibob

V2 of ground floor looks good. You might not need a pantry if you install a couple of full height pullout units or several under counter pull out units. These are more efficient on space than a pantry and with really well if not too wide. 300 or 400 wide work well. saving on the pantry will give you a bit more space. This might enable you to redesign things and give you more space for the study, fit example, which looks a little small.

I agree. I also don’t understand why all four bedrooms need an en-suite. Getting rid of one of them makes space for a larger en-suite off the master bedroom. You could then have a jack and Jill bathroom or a family bathroom instead of the two others.

Sure, but natural light in a space makes a real difference to it. Without bigger windows it will feel dark and gloomy at times. Think of resale value as well. Bigger windows make a room feel airier and bigger.

Some of these windows look a little small. And you don’t have any windows in the bathrooms, although I see now you have rooflights. Will this be openable? Will they be large? Even with MVHR you would want openable ones there, for ventilation in summer when you might switch MVHR off?

If you are sprightly, I would keep the stairs steep as that will help you keep active as you age. If you don’t use it, you lose it.

Not sure that’s an option, for other reasons. It’s a conversion not a new build so we are limited by certain factors and also are really happy with every other aspect of the layout.

This is the floorplan of my intended loft conversion, as currently designed. Not converted yet so still time to reconfigure the layout. There is no scale shown, but to give you an idea of dimensions, that bathtub is 1700 by 750 and the water cylinder shown in the eaves storage to the right of the bathroom is 1590 by 710 (it's a horizontal 400l Telford Tempest unvented cylinder). And ignore the UFH zones, as we might do without these. I had intended to use the eaves storage to house not just the water cylinder but also the MVHR unit and, if there is space possibly also the boiler, but it's not absolutely necessary to house the boiler there. The reason for this post is that looking over my plans for the umpteenth time, I realised that the access door to the eaves storage off the stairwell is pretty inaccessible. In case it is not clear from the diagram, the eaves storage is on the same floor as the bathroom and the rest of the floor, and so the only way to access it would be by placing a ladder on the stairs - it would have to be a fairly tall ladder because the height from the second step to the floor of the eaves storage is equal to 13 steps which comes to just over 2.7m. I've never had an MVHR system before, but I'm guessing one needs to pay it a visit every so often. I've also never had an unvented water cylinder before, but presumably that also needs some company every so often. Whilst we will control the gas boiler remotely, that would need an annual service and I'm sure after the warranty period it might need the occasional repair as well, so all in all the idea of balancing a 12 foot ladder on that step every time I need access to that space and then crawling through a small hatch just doesn't really appeal. I am therefore thinking of losing the bath tub (we don't really need a bath tub there) and replacing it with a shower, either a walk in shower and making it into a wet room, or just a shower cubicle. But I would prefer a wet room. This would then allow for a narrow, but full-height doorway to get into the eaves storage from the bathroom. But because its under the eaves and the roof slope is 45 degrees, the ceiling height falls very quickly. I think the ceiling height is about 2750 at the boundary of the room and then will fall by 100mm every 100mm one travels from that wall, so by the time one clears the 710 diameter of the cylinder, the height is about 2000 and by the time one reaches the opposite wall 2400 from the bathroom wall, there is only 350 head height there. This is all assuming that eaves storage will be insulated in the same way as the rest of the loft. I would then have the cylinder vertical instead of horizontal, so that there is space to walk past it as one enters from the bathroom. The reason for citing the water cylinder and the MVHR in this corner of the house is that: all three bathrooms are on this side of the house (the other two are directly underneath the eaves storage and the bathroom shown on this plan) as is the utility room and the kitchen. So would keep the runs to the water outlets as short as possible; this also represents a relatively good position for MVHR (assuming there is room to fit it) in terms of ducting runs and being in the loft. I could use the eaves storage on the other side of the floor, but this is much further away from all the hot water outlets and slightly further away from most MVHR vents. The MVHR unit I'm currently considering is Brink Flair 300 which is 650 high x750 wide x560 deep My questions: In general, is my idea of making this eaves storage area the room for the MVHR and water cylinder a good idea? Assuming there is room for my boiler (a Veissman Vitodens 200 which is 700 high x 450 x 360) what are the pros and cons of having the boiler there vs: (A) on the ground floor in a utility room; or (B) in the other eaves storage area shown in this floor plan (ie top right hand corner)? Is it madness for the access door that links the bathroom to the eaves storage to come from the shower area? i.e. I was thinking in replacing the whole area that is currently occupied by the bathtub with a large wet room walk in shower area, with a 900mm shower screen leaving 800 to walk into the shower or to carry on into the eaves storage area. I would probably end up waterproofing part of the eaves storage area as well in case the cylinder ever leaks and have to think of a way to conceal the access door behind tiles that clad the showering area. If the MVHR and the boiler were both cited in this room, would there be enough distance between the MVHR intake and the boiler exhaust? Any views positive or negative gratefully received.

At the rate we're burning through our contingency, this might be a necessity - I already have the fridge magnets on our fridge, so it would just be the cost of the steel!

Sort of. It's official for our kids, but not (yet*) for us. * might never happen if I'm honest.

I know this is an old thread, but thought I'd revive it as I'm also looking for a through the wall letter chute. Thanks to @lizzie and @Bitpipe and others for the recommendations in this thread. All look like good options, but what I'm looking for is a bit more particular. My requirements (in order of importance) are: Large through-the-cavity-wall mail chute in matt black alumnium or steel poweder coated in Ral 9005 I actually don't need a box to catch the mail, as I'd prefer the mail to fall on the floor. Additional flap on the inside to mitigate drafts when in use Outer plate surrounding the full size slot to be big enough so that it can be engraved with our door number in a prominent font size so that the door number is visible from 10m away. Enough space to add our family name to the surrounding plate (although actually that would never work, my wife and I have double barrelled our names because neither of us was willing to give up their surname and my surname has 11 letters and hers has 8, which would require space for 20 characters!) Basically, I'm looking for a combination of this black through the wall letter box from the website @Bitpipe recommended: https://www.letterbox24.de/D-041-through-wall-letterbox-variable-depth (which comes in the exact finish I want) but with a wider external plate surrounding the actual mail slot so that I can have our door number in a funky engraving like this. I can probably engineer requirement (3) myself, but (4) seems trickier to find. I will give up on (5). Any suggestions?

All good advice. Thanks everyone. I will leave it as and give up 5cm that I'm probably entitled to for the sake of peace of mind that not even a lunatic like my neighbour will think to challenge it.

Not sure if it's relevant to my question about the position of the wall relative to the footings, but in case it is, the footings are 1.8m deep. Structural engineer had originally specified 1m but BCO required 1.8m due to one of my neighbour's trees being quite close.

Why would I need to do that? Structural engineer seems happy for the outer leaf of the wall to be built up from the edge of the footing. Is he wrong about that? In practical terms I could quite easily widen the trench as we currently have temporarily annexed a strip of the neighbour's garden (in accordance with the permission afforded to us under the party wall agreement), but that's not what the builder has dug.

The planning permission i have for my rear extension gives me permission to build it out along the full width of my property. It's a semi detached property and I have a party wall agreement with my attached neighbour. Builder due to pour footings TOMORROW. Architect calls me today to say that he thinks builder has set out the footings in such a way that extension would be 5cm to 8cm narrower than it should be. I went to the property to meet the builder to see what's going on. Builder shows me he has taken the boundary line from the centrepoint of where the old fence post used to be. This would account for 3cm of the 8cm, as looking carefully at his line there are places where he has deviated from that line by 3cm. However, under the deeds, it's my fence - and I have always been responsible for maintaining it. Via google, i found this: It is normal practice when using a fence to mark a boundary to place the outer face of the fence along the boundary, so that the posts stand on the land of the of the fence's owner. This rule would suggest that the builder is wrong to take the boundary line from the centre of the fence post, and as my fence post was 8cm or 10cm wide, that would suggest a discrepancy of 4cm to 5cm. Having said that, the same article notes that this won't always be conclusive. I looked at my party wall agreement and note that it says I am to reinstate the fence after the building works have finished. If by the word "reinstate" there is an implication that it should be reinstated in exactly the same place, then that ignores the above rule. In any case: the party wall surveyors never asked me who owned that fence or where the exact limit of my boundary is - they've generally been quite sloppy so this is par for the course; and my neighbour and I both agree that reinstating the fence would look silly as it would be right up against the wall - I won't see it, so i care little about what it would look like, but it will inhibit the walls from breathing and will also cost me an extra £400 to £500 in fencing material and labour which I rather avoid. My builder has agreed to shave a bit off the trench wall to give me the additional 3cm so it is more accurately under the centreline of the fence post. But even doing that I would lose the 4cm to 5cm. I know that doesn't sound like a lot, but it will make a slight difference to the internal space. My fear is that even though legally I am probably entitled to use that additional 4cm to 5cm, relations with my neighbour are difficult at the best of times and if he believes I am taking his space he will probably kick up a fuss. What would you do?

If there is, please let me know. That’s exactly the kind of thing I would like.

You would want the titles merged because when you come to sell it will be administratively easier (and cheaper).

You will need a conveyancer then, as the title to your property is being changed your mortgage company needs to consent to the change. Even if that wasn't the case, I would use a conveyancer. Land is a valuable investment and the law in this area is riddled with idiosyncracies. Not worth risking getting it wrong imo.

I think you are right @Dave Jones. Though it may be possible to find shorter lead times if rather than the usual big names, I go small. To that end, can anyone think of small, preferably but not necessarily British, manufacturers that might not be on the radar of most roofers and builders. Alternatively, would it be crazy to import 140 sq metres of clay tiles from somewhere like asia? Surely the answer is: yes that would be crazy!

I've tried them. Anyone else?

I think I have answered my own question: the thing to look for in a roof tile is short lead times! Crazy situation in the UK right now. Everyone seems out of stock. If anybody knows of a supplier than can supply a clay interlocking roof tile in Sandtoft's Antique Grey or Slate Engobe (or another manufacturer's equivalent colour) in less than 12 weeks, please let me know. I never anticipated it would take 12-20 weeks, which is what all suppliers are telling me, to get roof tiles.

I am more concerned about the first and second floor windows. Obviously second floor is so high up that not sure I will be able to do anything about this, so main concern is first floor. Re putting trees on the boundary instead of the leylandii, the neighbours won’t object - when we were going to cut the leylandii down they objected!

No, both we and our neighbours are on the same level. We have an old shed at the back of the garden at the moment which we are getting rid of. It is 2.5m high (so higher than the shed we would build) and provides no screening at all. I need something that will grow to about 5 - 6m in height, maximum 7m. Carpinus Betulus Fastigiata sounds like an option, though will take time to fully mature. Though i could spend a bit more to get a semi mature one. But that might cost a fortune actually, as I will need about 4.

Yeah, maybe you are right @Russell griffiths but what sort of foundations would you lay for the shed and how close to the leyandiis would you go with the foundations?

My garden is about 9m wide. At the very end of the garden is a row of 6 or 7 leylandii trees. I don't particularly like them and shortly after we moved in we lopped off the top third of the trees so instead of 10m tall they are now about 6.5m tall. We would get rid of them completely, but they provide good screening between our garden and our neighbour's garden, so we've left them. I am now considering how to build a shed/storage box/wood store. The dimensions of this would be 7m wide (so set in by 1m from either of my side boundaries) and 1.2m deep and about 2m high with a sloping roof sloping towards the leylandii. I was going to site it about 1m from the row of leylandii. But the ground there is a little raised and uneven, presumably because the leylandii roots are pushing the ground up. I'm hoping that by lopping off the tops 2 years ago, the roots will not grow any further than they have already. These are mature trees and although they would have carried on growing had we not lopped them, lopping them has stunted their growth - at least I hope it has. If that is right, can I build the shed in the area I'm suggesting by laying a 15cm deep concrete foundation 1m away from the trees, or is this not deep enough? Presumably going deeper I will hit roots. Alternatively, are these trees and their roots so problematic that I should just get rid of them completely and think of another way to get the desired screening? The only plant I can think of that might possibly grow to the 6.5m height that I want and also do so fairly quickly is bamboo. I haven't yet worked out which variety is best for London clay soil, but Dendrocalamus giganteus (also known as Dragon Bamboo,or Giant Bamboo) might work. It can grow 20cm per day in mild climates (although presumably not all year round!) and is much more attractive than the horrible leylandii. Any thoughts?

There is no hard and fast rule on what this means. We took advice from an expensive planning consultant about a similar issue and she advised it will vary council to council because it's a grey area. In our case we have planning permission for an extension and want to also build a loft under PD. We were advised that we shouldn't build the loft until the extension is complete because that might invalidate our planning permission (which was granted on the basis of there being no loft). We originally applied for a loft and an extension at the same time, all under one planning application and it got rejected due to concerns about "overdevelopment". We amended the application to remove the loft and applied and got approval. Our loft will just be set back by 20cm to what we would have got had the first application been approved so that it does not touch the roof of the extension we are having - and this can be done under PD. As to what is complete, the consultant said that as long as our walls, roof and windows are in and we have photos of the outside showing this, before we start the loft there isn't much they will be able to do. The whole planning system is a shambles though. That difference of 20cm makes no difference to anybody and it would have been much easier to do it all in one application and built top down, instead of in reverse. Oh well.