saveasteading

Well done. End of story.

I know but it satisfied the floor people. I know it's dry enough. My post was kind of to demonstrate your point. The latest is that the floorers have caused unease in our team. So caution prevailed and they were asked to grind the surface.... to which they respond that it will be too hard after so long and needs heavy industrial grinders. Qed as far as I'm concerned. If it is so hard then it doesn't need grinding at all. In order: Too wet, needs 80/ 60 days , we need to tank it. Needs to be under 45% Alright 55% Needs weak laitence ground off. Needs industrial grinder as is too hard. Ignorance or chancers I can't tell. Unfortunately the BS says it 'should be ground', hence our team's caution. BS tends to be cautious. Not "must" I note. So for now we return to the blue treatment with full family agreement.

It depends how much you risk a row with the neighbour. Have they got permissions? If so, you could ask SW why theirs is allowed and yours not. If not.... there may be flak.

Yes. But wet clay will expand back into the spaces and the amount of wood in roots is surprisingly small. as you say, it is the effect of the tree drinking the water from the clay that causes it to shrink. Then in winter or when it becomes a former tree, the clay will expand again when wet and stay that way. Not a lot. Obv you wouldn't build on top of right next to a dead tree trunk, and would do something about big surface roots for stability. Houses are built assuming that no inappropriate tree planting will ever occur, and you can't stop a neighbour doing it, but that is just one of life's risks.

Yes. The average house with cross-walls is sufficiently braced. In big open spaces this changes. You can see in warehouses that the wind bracing is provided by diagonal bars or angles on the outside walls which take the wind load out in simple tension, plus some compression struts at the top. In a gale it is sometimes possible to see the bars tensing up. In an extreme wind I've seen them 'snap' tight and make a noise. There will be similar crossed rods in the roof to transfer loads to the walls then down to ground. But if there is no space for these bars because of movement paths or glazing etc (eg car showroom), then a post is used. Also in an enormous shed with intermediate columns and no walls. It can be a post on its own, or more usually adapted on the sides of an existing column, making it into a Maltese cross shape. The forces at the ground can be enormous so it nearly always needs a very big concrete footing (I think we once put about 6m3 of concrete in the one base.) They are expensive so sometimes worth 'designing out' with client approval. So a house with very big rooms or large areas of glazing might need individual posts or 'goalposts. But these are seldom considered at preliminary stage where space and appearance come first.

Yes that's way ott for a house. That's a commercial floor spec. Having reread I agree in principle you work to SE1. But why did you engage a different one?

Me too, but language should be clearer and I was being flippant. But how does anyone know there was tree there last year or whether 2 or 10 years ago matters. In my opinion a normal year's weather cycle will likely allow the clay ground to come to stability.

I don't think we are in any position to say that. More likely is that it is a result of switching Engineers. The continuity of logic may be broken and the reasonable assumptions of one, not picked up by the other. Going back to the first one could now be awkward... what if it becomes a dispute? I might be uncomfortable and be "too busy".

I'm intrigued by the term " former tree". Presumably intending that there may once have been a tree there, not a fence or bench seat. Also the phrase " highly susceptible to degradation in water". I think that means it might get muddy if wet and disturbed. I prefer plain English, which would have concerned you much less. Are there any "current" trees within 25m? Is there a slope? Why are they so concerned about seepage? Is it a very wet area?

Or single sheet and you can insulate underneath when funds allow. Lighter panels by a long way.

That's good ground. No piling required.

I have an aversion to spray foam. It has ruined many a house. The people who do it used to be opportunists without knowledge of thd harm it can cause.. maybe that has changed. Think of it as a temporary fix at best. A Proper Job will cost more than you are wishing for. But in perspective, Stripping the roof will only take 2 days, recladding in 40mm composite about 4 days.

Explain please? Btw our gauge has now risen to 55%. It increased when the rains came, demonstrating that it is registering the atmosphere and presumably the immediate effect on the screed surface. Still below the magic 65%.

Wind posts have large overturning forces so there is a big footing too. So it's too late for that. Alternatives are racking panels as @ProDave suggests, and the cost and inconvenience are low. Or a structural goalpost utilising the existing structure. Can't comment on why one SE thinks it necessary and another doesn't.

I've done many an over-clad. The cement roof stays on, fix omega shape brackets over, then rails. Then you overclad with or without insulation. The downside is that the old cladding is still there, affecting value. Is it asbestos or innocuous fibre cement? The risk of asbestos(2% of the toatal) is overstated unless the material is crushed and sniffed. Against under-cladding is that the roof may leak onto it.