Bramco

Our M+E chap said just say you are putting pressure limiters on the showers etc. Obvs don't fit them ? Simon

Congratulations!!! It's pretty galling that these planning officers don't really know the rules and cause a huge amount of stress for applicants. Even though there's the NPPF and supposedly planning laws, we heard time and again that every application is decided on it's own merits, in other words it's completely up to the planning officers discretion, knowledge or bloody mindedness. Our bloody minded pre-app officer deemed the 'gap' to be too big for infill at 32m - exactly half the plot with a wide bungalow on the other side. She then approved another application with a 100m frontage!!! Difference - one application was from an individual, the other from a local architect. As my wife said about the pre-app advice, it's like those kids I used to teach when they answered an exam question they didn't really know the answer to - they wrote down everything they knew about the subject but failed because they hadn't a clue. That pre-app advice meant the application was refused (at committee by the casting vote of the chairman - twice!!) but we won at appeal. 3 years later we're about to start the build. If she'd done her job properly, we'd have been in the house for a couple of years without the prospective hassle of shortages of materials, additional costs because of Brexit etc. etc. Grrrrrrrrrrr Simon

There is case law that states that for any exception to the green belt inappropriateness rule, openness is not a consideration in terms of assessing a planning application. Sadly for you your exception PDL has a rider on it that openness should be considered. It's the only exception that still has that openness rider. The case law for the other exceptions is Lee Valley Regional Park Authority, R (on the application of) v Epping Forest District Council & Anor (Rev1) [2016] EWCA Civ 404 (Appendix 2) that clarifies that exceptions for development in the Green Belt are not deemed to harm the Green Belt or openness. It's obvious really - anything meeting one of the exception criteria is not inappropriate development - therefore it can't be harmful. So if there's any way to have it deemed infill then that would help. I found some good examples of backfill that had been allowed at appeal. One which might help you which you can find on the Planning Appeal site was prepared by a planning consultancy firm - I tried to attach the document but it's too big. They had quite a bit of success in that area, they won this case but the NPPF has changed subtly since then. The appeals website -> https://www.gov.uk/appeal-planning-inspectorate. lets you search but then you have to check the files on the local authority website. Takes time to find them but gives lots of ammunition. The one above was appeal APP/P0240/W/17/3185864 (Land adjacent Timber Ridge, Woburn Lane, Aspley Guise). Which was for planning application CB/17/02661/FULL which is in Central Bedfordshire. Their website is truly crap... But here's the link to all the documents -> http://cbstor.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/publicportalviewer/publicViewer.html?caseID=CB/17/02661/FULL. The appeal statement I tried to upload here is at -> https://app.box.com/embed/preview/53orjeqh0k8vwulg35ri68gnz1p83r0o?direction=ASC&theme=dark which might or might not work, if it doesn't, you should be able to get to it by following the previous link. We used this one which is infill -> Appeal Decision at Snitterfield (APP/J3720/W/16/3167715) Simon

You could just use the string to ring a bell near the house - might need a hefty yank to take up the slack! Simon

Agree that £30k seems way over the top. The planning consultants we used for our appeal did it for just under a grand - that was mates rates though, so cost rather than commercial prices. We'd done a lot of legwork though like finding successful appeals for similar projects and had written a draft appeal statement. If you are interested in reading our appeal statement it's here -> http://bit.ly/2DN1YxX. Ours was for infill in the Green Belt and the plot is just outside the village inset line - there are 6 or 7 houses on a lane to the farm that were left out of the Inset line round the village. And I can IM the consultants name and company if you want to talk to someone, I think they've now a few successful GB appeals. Simon

We looked at installing the ASHP away from the plant room but after some thought decided not to do it. If you intend to use the heat pump in reverse for cooling in the summer, then you'd have a bit of a problem. Assuming it's a monobloc ASHP that is. If you are cooling then the pipes from the heat pump to the UFH manifold will be full of cool water. When you switch to wanting to heat the DHW, all that cool water will circulate through the heat exchanger in your DHW tank before any hot water comes through to heat the tank. At least AFAIK! If you have 20M of 50mm pipe that's a LOT of cooling of the DHW tank that's going to happen before it starts heating. I know from experience that using fatter pipe seems like a great idea in pressure terms but can cause issues. When we built our extension, I put a 22mm pipe from the new boiler room to the kitchen sink - it takes twice as long as it should to get the hot water in the sink and of course there's quite a lot of wasted heat after you've turned the tap off. Simon

We decided on the timber frame route and selected the company we wanted to go with which gave us the U vals for the slab, walls and roofs. We're now selecting the window supplier and have a target U value based on making sure that we can achieve an SAP 'A' rating. Turns out to be 1.2. Now the issue is what type of window, Alu-cald, alu, etc. combined with which glazing. I guess this is what the OP is done but the other way round, select the windows and then work out what U value you need for the walls. Simon

I didn't say Rasp Pi - I said emonPi. It has a Pi in it with everything set up. Simon

An emonPi would give you more granularity and the possibility of tailoring it to your requirements, but hey, it's horses for courses. There are many ways to do this - was just suggesting one we've found very useful. For example Simon

If you want more detail and some history get an emonPi from the open energy crew in Wales - great kit. You can set up as many dashboards as you want and also measure temperatures. https://shop.openenergymonitor.com/emonpi/ I should add I'm nothing to do with them, except from being a member of the forum there. It's all open source, so we set up our own system on a spare Rasp Pi and also built a Solar PV diverter following guides. There's a huge amount of info on the forum. Simon

If it is, he should be home and dry. Simon

Just a further thought - if it is a garden plot, why isn't it being considered under the infill in a village clause - this, as I said earlier has case law that says that 'openness' does not need to be considered. Simon

The only thing the Local Plan might do is to add some restrictive conditions over and above the NPPF - for example development should be concentrated in a specific list of villages, or there may be restrictive clauses about preserving the 'countryside'. You have to jump the NPPF hurdle first and then jump the Local Plan hurdle. Simon

Interesting one that. It's a catch all to deny permission. But there are ways round it. The NPPF states there are 5 purposes of a Green Belt, including things like preventing towns merging etc. para 134. If your land was previously developed then it can't be said to be contrary to the 'purpose' of your local Green Belt. Always a good starting position. Para 145 gives 6 exceptions, including limited infill in villages and replacement of a building so long as the replacement isn't larger than the original and also extending existing dwellings (up to 50% is allowable). If you qualify as an exception then there is case law which sets out that being an exception means that the question of openness need not be considered by the planning authority - I can dig out the actual case if you need it. The issue for you is that the exception you might qualify under (g) has a restrictive clause about the openness. To quote '....not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt, where the development would re-use previously developed land and contribute to meeting an identified affordable housing need within the area of the local planning authority'. So the key word is 'substantial' and you should search for any housing needs survey the Parish Council may have conducted or even the Borough Council. That would help to identify the contribution to the need. In addition, if the Council doesn't have a 5 year housing plan then all bets are off for them because according to an earlier para in the NPPF they should grant permission. Another way round this is to show 'exceptional circumstances' but this is v hard to do and has to rely on an architecturally special design. I bought a book on all the case law on the NPPF - I'll find it later and edit this with the title and author - it's expensive but well worth it if you find something to support your case. Also a LOT of googling of planning appeals should turn up some cases that support you. Simon EDIT - the book on NPPF case law is 'Interpreting the NPPF' by Alistair Mills QC. Bath Publishing. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Interpreting-NPPF-National-Planning-Framework/dp/1916431526 But be careful, as this was published in 2018 and the NPPF has been revised since then. You might need to check back on the NPPF to see if the specific clause on redevelopment in the Green Belt has changed.

I know @joe90 has worked out how to set the hysteresis on his stat to 1' but ..... What simple stats are out there without all the programmable stuff which have 1' or lower hysteresis. Just simple old fashioned stats. Simon

I suppose it does give an outlet for the pent up anger and indignation a lot of people seem to carry around - therapy for some? Simon

The really hilarious thing is they don't approve anything - they can only comment on planning applications - and their collective misinformed idiotic comment carries as much weight as any other comment from a parishioner or whomever. Our PC hasn't got anyone with any idea about planning - so their comments are ridiculous - and of course the Council can only take into account comments that raise planning issues, i.e. points of planning law. So basically they ignore everything the PC says.... Simon

IKEA Then if you want to throw money away take that to someone with a flash showroom... Simon

In the old house (current) we have no BT and dropped the Virgin phone line and now only have mobile numbers - but then you're in Derbyshire, so probably need either BT or Virgin for a land line and maybe the other as backup!! On the new build, we're also only lekky and water. The Virgin line can come in via the conduit already laid by the brother in law next door. Simon

But as my son the architect pointed out - you could build a transparent house. Wouldn't the planners have a field day with that. Son #1 - a scientist - mentioned the appalling ecological consequences of the production process. Simon

I phoned today and they promised a quote by the end of the day - we'll see... Simon

How long did it take to get a response - I sent our window schedule the other day but haven't even had a 'thanks for your enquiry, we'll get back to you' email. Simon

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/transparent-wood-lighter-stronger-glass-090419778.html Given the DIY nature of the forum, I'm sure this could be perfected as a DIY glass in a month or two...... Few chemicals, a former, some plastic goop and a trowel - easy peasy ..... Simon

Or take a look at the emonPi which is a system from the open energy monitoring lot in Wales. Emonpi in their shop -> https://shop.openenergymonitor.com/emonpi-energy-monitor-solar-pv-bundle/ Very good kit - and if you don't want to buy a ready made system it's all open source so you can roll your own. They're also doing some good stuff with the Octopus tariffs and EV charging. Simon

Round our way going to committee isn't the answer - they end up following the planning recommendation - or at least the chairman does. And the cttee btw know nothing about planning law - it's just how they take on what planning are telling them. We had 2 goes at ctte (local councillor owns adjacent land so it had to go there) both times it was a draw and the chairman voted with the planning advice - which was obviously wrong and we'd pointed it out to them. Maybe that's what did it.... Anyway, at appeal the inspector essentially said - no idea what the council are doing in this case it's obvious it's OK - permission granted. So I'd go with stick to your guns but all the rest of the crap beforehand, I'd fast fail - we wasted a LOT of time trying to do the right thing. We started over 3 years ago and we're only planning to break ground in a few months time. Years you can't get back. Simon