garrymartin

Maybe not both doors on either side wide open, but you'd be able to manoeuvre a car in that space and get the driver's door open for exit. If that's the plan, I'd stick with 4 bedrooms and a higher resale value. Also, there is nowhere near enough wardrobe space for the master bedroom. If you need the cupboard that opens onto the landing, then move it to the bathroom - you don't need 2.125 metres of space for a standard bath. Then you might even consider coming around the corner towards the door of the bedroom, creating an L-shaped wardrobe space. You could even move the door closer to the bay window to provide more space for further wardrobes or a dressing table. In the two bedrooms on the left (assuming you keep them) swap the wardrobes around so that the bedroom at the top left doesn't have its door opening onto a wardrobe but instead onto a wall. It's not clear from the plan, but what type of road do you exit the drive onto? Will the LPA want to see you exit in forward gear at all? I can't make my mind up about the best options for the space on the ground floor, but I'd respectfully say it needs work. Others have provided some good options. If East is to the back of the house, you're getting morning sun, so kitchen and dining room would not be too bad. I think I'd probably move the set of six doors to the left, losing the two doors on the left in the process, and replacing them with a window at the far right. This would allow more work surface in a U configuration to the rear wall (sink with window to garden?) and the potential re-alignment of the island as a peninsula. Or play with the dining room and utility location (with a bit of kitchen redesign) to give you a kitchen/dining/living space from the back to the front of the house, and your utility behind your garage. Then the garage door could be into the new utility space giving you space for cloaks where you currently have some wasted space to provide a door into the garage. Think that's probably enough to confuse you for now! 😉

You need to clarify this with them. I would suggest it is best to get your current connection upgraded, but only you can decide the best course of action. If it is a second connection, then I'm not sure how you would be charged and whether you are allowed two residential connections for a single dwelling. Not at that stage. Still at the planning appeal stage. But my expectation based on the new OFGEM rules is that the transformer replacement should not be at my cost - it is network reinforcement and a shared asset. Furthermore, it is likely more properties served by the current transformer will want to move to having heat pumps and EV charging; it's not just me that will make use of it. Are you the only dwelling served by this transformer? That may change things...

Possibly before the latest OFGEM changes to clarify cost apportionment between network reinforcement versus connection. However, at least for National Grid (ex. Western Power), single-phase is 80A standard now (they will only provide 100A in very exceptional circumstances), and three-phase is 3x60A.

Rubbish. A conductor is the overhead or underground cable. Also not true. Doesn't matter whether it is single-phase or three-phase. What matters is that it is a residential connection. Standing charges are the same for single-phase and for three-phase on residential connections. I think you may be confusing conversations about non-residential connections, i.e. three-phase for businesses.

If there is a 3-phase transformer and connection on the pole in your field, why do they need to add a third conductor for reinforcement? Surely there are already three? At the moment, your two quoted comments are contradictory. How many wires connect to the pole and transformer? Here's the one at my plot. You can see that three conductors are available (underground cable, up the pole), but only two are currently connected to a single-phase transformer. So in my case, the replacement of the single-phase transformer with a 3-phase transformer should be a network reinforcement that I am not charged for. The 3-phase cable is already available at the pole.

Excellent idea, but I think I'd also put it on wheels to understand turning circles and pivots. If you just carry the timberframe, you may not account for the full range of movement of the static without being able to lift that too...

https://www.proclima.com/products/connections/adhesive-tapes/glumex about £10

Isn't it A1F? "reinforced bitumen-bonded building paper laminate" It might be why people can't find it at builders' merchants if they are searching for AF1 in their systems. Loads of places have it in stock online. As to whether it should be used or not, sorry, can't help there.

Agree with all of the above. Planning Permission does not override the covenant. It's not uncommon for planning permission to be granted for something that cannot lawfully be implemented. If the Local Authority is the successor, then they need to formally release you from the covenant.

Congratulations!

Although the UK-Ultra can do a wireless backhaul on mesh, I'm pretty sure it is POE only for power, so you'll need a POE injector if you only have a power point. Ubiquiti kit is rock solid, and I've not had any problems over many years. It would be my first choice for any future installs or upgrades.

What were the reasons for it being referred to committee?

If I've read this correctly, that's a 175mm slab with two sets of mesh reinforcement. Can I ask what site conditions have led to that design choice?

Long shot, but could you possibly have argued that the "stereo" element, along with the lights and various sensors, forms part of an "alarm system" which is allowable? Can't help with the intercom though...

Openreach has a good guide for developers that has all the information you might need https://www.openreach.com/content/dam/openreach/openreach-dam-files/new-dam-(not-in-use-yet)/documents/help-support/New-Sites-Fibre-Handbook-August-2024-online.pdf

I don't know who the Inspector will be, but I doubt you'd get the same one twice.

Quick update. Outline Planning Application was refused for pretty much the same reasons again... 😞 Disappointingly, they once again pretty much ignored all the additional evidence and case law examples, and also mischaracterised my questions regarding the validity of asking for visibility splays and an affordable housing contribution as a refusal to provide them. So back at appeal again... However, some encouraging news regarding the initial timeline for the appeal. The appeal was determined to be valid, and we received a Start Letter yesterday. It has been 11 days since we submitted the appeal. When we submitted the previous appeal, it took 97 days to determine its validity and 81 more days to receive the Start Letter. That's a combined total of 178 days versus 11 days this time, so quite a difference! Fingers crossed that everything else moves forward quickly. If it does, we may even get a determination before the new Local Plan is adopted (which will not be in our favour as the "tilted balance" may no longer apply).

@BotusBuild is spot on - pull as much as you can to wherever you think you might need it. By all means use conduit now if you want to protect the cabling whilst you are still building, but don't expect to be able to easily pull anything through in the future, especially if there are already cables in it or you don't have a straight run. There's a reason data cabling professionals use cable trays... 😉 By all means, use conduits for things like vertical risers (but not 25mm), but you'll struggle to go around any corners unless you have wide swept bends, and the more corners you introduce into a run, the more changes in direction, the more difficult it becomes.

Thanks. Have added that information to my notes.

It was in the Geberit catalogue here https://catalog.geberit-global.com/en-GU/product/PRO_101639 Sadly we've not fitted anything yet as still fighting planning battles.

So you had an actual refusal, not just an email or similar saying they were minded to refuse it, and then they've reconsidered and now approved the application? Didn't even know they were allowed to do that once an application had been refused. Regardless, glad it's worked out for you of course.

They're not a replacement for the backbox or dry-lining box - they go over the top to make plastering easier and, when then cut out, the hole left much cleaner. See https://www.beadmaster.co.uk/ and you'll quickly get the idea. £1.50ish for a single gang and £2.20ish for a double with further discounts in bulk. They also do a downlight version now.

If the *internal* floor area is less than or equal to 15m2, even within 1m of the boundary, the "substantially non-combustible materials" element does not apply.

In my research notes, I have a comment that Nordan are not highly rated - @Kelvin and @saveasteading have them and may be able to provide their views. They are on my "B" list of companies, as are Nordvest but I have no notes or commentary on Nordvest. Rationel are on my "A" list but I would expect them to cost slightly more. Have you looked at Norrsken (also on my "A" list - made by Viking Windows)? @Thorfun @Russell griffiths @Tosh and @MikeSharp01 have them and might provide some opinions.

Amazing property. Recorded the programme whilst on holiday and watched it on our return. Well done. Can I ask, is it wet underfloor heating throughout using the ASHP? If so, what is your first-floor build-up?