Bramco

I'm assuming it means a drain down if you want to swap at a later date? Simon

So presumably, those of us building with slab and TF from say MBC would need this type of manifold? Simon

Looks great but..... Ours will be corrugated steel - think cow shed. Also, the roof build up is essentially roof felt above and airtightness membrane below filled with blown cellulose - so maybe less structurally 'firm' than yours? Simon

Nick, my mistake. There's a long email trail on this one and I remembered the mention of durgo valves but that was in connection with internal terminations. As you say, would be pointless if the termination wasn't 2 way. Ours isn't really close to the other properties connected to the main sewer. There's a row of semis with the sewer along the back, then it strikes diagonally across a 2 acre field with the original bungalow and our new build. The manhole we'll be connecting to is about 30m away. Not sure if all that makes any difference. Russel, great idea, I'll mention this to the builders. And there won't be any roof vents as it's all vaulted ceilings and we'll easily be able to get it well away from (and above) the nearest opening window.

Thanks all - great info. Simon

Quick question hopefully. We're keen to avoid penetrations of an SVP through our roof. Seems crazy to put a big hole in a roof if you don't need to. Currently, we have 4 service pipes through our slab that all meet at a point where there will be a manhole and then there'll be a single run to a manhole on the sewer that runs across the property. On eof these was destined to penetrate the roof. BC have said that if we don't want a penetration in the roof, then we could run another pipe from the manifold back to the house and then run a pipe up the back of the house with a durgo valve at the top. We'd disguise this as a drainpipe, so small bore, not a nasty orange thingy. The service pipes that come through the slab of bathrooms and loos etc. would then have air inlet valves. Our M+E consultant is doing the traditional sucking teeth pose 'ooohhh I don't think that would be appropriate' Tbh we're not interested whether it would be 'appropriate', would it work and has anyone done this? Simon

But what's their connection? How did it work for them? Golf club? ..... Simon

Tell them in view of their response, you're thinking of selling the plot for an executive ghetto - bet they'll whoop with joy as it will make their numbers easier to achieve. More seriously, don't let them get you down, make sure of all your facts, try to get the local councillor on board etc. and appeal if nothing else works. Plenty on here have and have won - we did in the Green Belt... Simon PS Also talk to the neighbours and find out how much their back hander was, or who they know in the planning department.....

Agree wholeheartedly - we had the same in our appeal which was for infill in the green belt. All the 5 exceptions for permission in the GB are understood not to affect openness as they are allowed, so openness is not an issue. However ....... Extensions are limited to about 50% of the 'original' structure. The 50% isn't written down anywhere and I think might be something based on case law but it seems to be the rule of thumb. Your extension to the back isn't part of the original (iiuc?), so that takes up some of your 50%. They seem to have also taken into account the garage which brings you up over 100% and therefore not permissible. You ask an interesting question about giving up the garage. This might be the way to do it. Our neighbours were recently refused a full planning application to build a freestanding 3 bay car porty thing at the back of their bungalow. While the planner said 'no' due to the same rule your planners are referencing they did point out that what the neighbour wanted to build could be built under PD. They didn't explicitly say that but the letter pointed the neighbours to the PD legislation. PD legislation allows you to build outbuildings for the amenity of the property, so a garage, swimming pool etc. where the footprint of the built up area doesn't exceed 50% of the curtilage. So while the NPPF says one thing, PD legislation says another. Green Belt is the only 'special' type of area which doesn't require a full application, all the others do, e.g. Norfolk Broads, AONB etc. So I would tell the planners that you are going to knock down the garage, make the plans for the extension fit in the 50% rule. A parish councillor in our village had something like 75% extension approved and I bet you can find more examples like that. Hopefully this will then be accepted within the NPPF rule on extensions in the GB. Then, when they have passed the application, rebuild the garage under PD legislation. Of course, once the application is passed, who will know if you actually knocked the garage down and rebuilt it, or if the new one just happens to be a perfect replica of the old one ;-D As with all these things don't tell them anything they don't need to know - they use it against you... So when you talk about the garage and knocking it down use the outside measurements - make it sound bigger than it is. When talking about the extension use the internal measurements - you want it to appear smaller than it is. And build it a bit bigger, no-one will ever check. 10% tolerance due to materials etc. Good luck and let us know what happens Simon

Wouldn't it be possible to have the buffer tank working like a heat bank (albeit small). So while the slab is soaking up the heat, the ASHP will stay on. As soon as the 35' threshold is reached it would turn off the ASHP. Then, when a lower limit is reached, it would turn on again. Simon

So if you were about to install this system again with 20:20 hindsight, you'd leave out the TRV and simply route the lower rail connection to the buffer tank return? Would this be advisable for anyone starting an installation, or is the problem you're seeing only due to the length of the pipes to the buffer tank? Simon

How? I'm genuinely curious - how does the positioning of the isolators impact ease of maintenance? Simon

Great idea - why make a wall wart that you have to plug your table lamp into when you could just have a smart plug. Surely there's some on the market. Simon

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions. I contacted the IDB with some info from the SE that had done the original drainage plan with gazillions of m3 of crates. He'd come back to us with a revised plan with a water brake and a pipe through a headwall into the dyke. He'd estimated the flow from the newly impermeable area on the site would be about 5l/s/h. The IDB said that the maximum flow they are OK with is 1.4l/s/h which is the greenfield flow rate. I'd worked out that on our 0.4 hectare plot, the increase due to the newly impermeable area would push the overall flow about 6% over this. When I asked if this was OK, they came back saying they were OK with it and as we were about 1.5km from a managed watercourse, they couldn't imagine how they might charge us for the excess. Weirdly, the IDB boundary runs along the eastern edge of our land, which means that the dyke in front of our land is not within their area but the house just down the dyke is. when I questioned why they'd put in a comment on our planning application, they said they tried to comment on most applications, even if they were out of their area - which strikes me as an utterly ridiculous waste of time. Anyway, back now to the SE for re-revised plans and to the LLFA asking for formal permission to put in a head wall in. Simon

We need an student to take on a final year project to trawl through all the really good advice on the forum to come up with some good design patterns or rules of thumb for this. Given a house with x m2, y m3, z heat loss and the price of electricity, cost of a ASHP (parts and installation separately) vs resistive heating (Willis heaters) etc. then a rating for each design pattern in terms of simplicity of implementation, upfront costs against lifetime costs etc. Anyone here a lecturer at a college (sorry university these days..) with some students up for a challenge? Simon

I hesitate to ask this - but is it a virgin router? Cos they do get their MACs confused occasionally. Also what on earth possesses anyone to use fixed IP addresses - just use dynamic IP addresses and get on with the building work - you're just creating diversionary IT management work which ain't gonna get the place finished.... although reading between lines it may never be.... ? Simon

That's a small shower recess at the back! Nice view though. Simon

I've been in touch before about the culvert - so will check with them today. Thanks for the tip. Simon

The lane the other side of the dyke has no owner - it's an access lane for people owning land along the lane. 7 houses and a farm and on the opposite side fields. I'm taking the email from the flood authority that I mentioned above as permission. The internal drainage board don't manage the dyke, it's too small. And while we might have a 'yes' from the flood team, there's the Env Agency rules and building regs. Do we have to comply with them all, or is there one that trumps the others? Simon

I'm told the alternative would be to make the soakaway 3 times larger and use gravel - due to the voids in the crates being nearly 100% and gravel about 30%. I'm assuming you mean gravel above and below?

Hi, We have a dyke at the front of our property which used to run all the time when the gypsum mine at the end of the village was still working. Now it's dry, except for exceptional rainfall. The ground is clay with poor but permeability rates are nearly acceptable at the front of the property. Our SE has designed the drainage system as 2 massive soakaways. 26m3 each. So you can imagine the price we're being quoted by our contractors. Also, it seems ridiculous that we're contemplating burying a massive amount of plastic in the ground. It's environmentally crazy! The dyke btw now only runs when we get a biblical rainstorm overhead for a few hours. If you took the rainfall catchment area that contributes to this, then our development would be tiny. We're talking several sq kms against a normal house and patios. I contacted the flood team at the County Council and asked if 'we can simply run a pipe from a manhole at the front of the property straight into the dyke?' Their response was 'Providing there is no increase in flood risk as if problems were to arise from any additional flows, from a civil point of view you would be responsible as you made changes to the flow of water. Or the asset is not a highways asset. Yes you can connect.' It's not a highways asset btw. I should add that further downstream on the dyke, are a bungalow and 3 houses that all discharge into the dyke. The dyke eventually discharges into a brook which normally has water in it but that's a mile or so away. I think I need to convince BC that discharge to the dyke is OK but who do I have to persuade (BC or EA) to take a pragmatic view on this and what evidence do I need? Are there consultants who can help? Simon

It does beg the question though whether anyone would ever check that things hadn't been done according to the planning conditions, given they take 4 months to answer and NMA. We amended window locations and cladding layout and some other minor points like security lighting has to be agreed - 'there will be no security lighting'. We didn't mention a reasonable height increase on the highest section of the build.... ? and things were done in 28 days. What were you trying to amend? I guess if these were really minor things, then would they ever try to enforce the submitted plan, or simply shrug their shoulders and say, 'actually we'd have passed that if you'd submitted the plans with those changes.' Simon

er yes..... In the current house we installed a heat bank with solar thermal (long time ago, wouldn't dream of it now) and I had to draw a very simple diagram for the plumber to follow - which he did perfectly. Electric install I did myself. It's been great especially since we installed PV and a diverter. All the trades working on the extension basically looked at the heat bank as if it was a starship. Having said that, the house is now up for sale and I can see a lot of viewers building in the cost of ripping everything out and putting a 'nice big' combi in.... And they'd be missing out on free hot water for 4 or 5 months a year... Simon

@IanR Thanks Ian - we may not make it under the old scheme anyway but gaming the system sounds like a great way to avoid doing what I should be doing by building an expert system..... Your experience with Eco East Anglia sounds like you found the right installer. Simon

But if your build is highly insulated, airtight etc, then the RHI ain't going to be worth having as against the extra costs of the MCS install. But it's almost impossible to find installers who will do a non RHI install, Everyone adds on this chunk regardless - and some who behave like the old double glazing salesmen taking money from gullible people. So I guess, where I'm going is - which are the installers out there who will give a proper quote based on supply and install with no frills? Simon