saveasteading

Members
  • Content Count

    339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

98 Good

1 Follower

About saveasteading

  • Rank
    Regular Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Highland

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The batts don't (in my experience) but are more expensive. Also the cough ratio of wool varies by manufacturer too. I think it corresponds to cost pretty well. Itchiness likewise. Cough and itchiness to cost ratio: CICR, as we need even more acronyms (EMA). We should include U values as that is what it is all about. Cost and Itchiness Ratio Compared to U values CIRCUs
  2. Actually some things are silly. But not as silly suggestions, only if we then do the silly thing having been warned, hence we can help each other. The suggestions here are really practical, and we might never know otherwise until too late. I did used to always say to clients that there were no silly questions, meaning don't be embarrassed to ask. Silly is the wrong word perhaps....non-optimal. Not using PIR in the roof now seems like a good plan. Replacing PIR with rockwool batt changes my U value from 0.12 to 0.15. I think that is acceptable when the practicalities (and real life performance) are factored in. cheaper too. I favour batt because it pushes in tight, the outer layer can be waterproof , just in case. Glasswool blanket must be just as horrible to fit as pir surely?
  3. When we contacted insurance companies, one expressed surprise that we had not started the works yet. 'Correct but unusual'. The implication was that most people either don't think about it for a while, or only apply when there is an issue. The latter is what would concern them of course, so they will ask questions. As insurers like to collect the premium but not pay out, they would likely research earnestly if you made any claim. So be sure to tell them of any issue, perhaps trivial, that they might see as an excuse in the future.
  4. I find myself confused by the Scottish rules for escape skylights. I have read them several times, along with similar summaries and it is not clear. Have asked others to read it and get different interpretations. Also surprised that the manufacturers don't say more about it. This is for a conversion to dwelling with 2 bedrooms upstairs and a stair midway between the rooms and down into an open plan room. What I think is required is this, but this is more interpretation of the intent, than what the words say. If there is a protected stair, then an upper room leading directly to it does not need a fire escape window. If there is a secondary room off that first room, then that extra room does need an escape window. If the stair is not fire protected, ie open plan either at first or ground floor, then a fire escape window/skylight is required in each room. ie the upstairs rooms need an escape window each. I am also assuming that a 'protected stair' is fireproof with self closing fire doors, ie not suitable for domestic.
  5. Lots of good info above. 1. Service space between inner board and rafters is something I had not thought of. Definitely got to think this through. 2. In another discussion we sort of decided that 50mm ventilation gap above the insulation was for full-sized OSB boards, and that 150mm sarking boards with gaps shouldn't need that, and 25mm should be plenty. 3. For our conversion project, the rafters are 18" centres (460mm), so waste in inner boarding matters, ie worse cost with insulated board. Also waste may be significant between rafters, which are 2". (50mm). 410 mm slices of insulation seems messy and wasteful with mineral wool, esp batts (400 or 445 or 600) and less wasteful with the bigger sheets of PIR OR will 400mm batts happen to stretch to 410mm in real life....or 445 squeeze tight to 410. an experiment is called for. 4. My idea of 10mm foam board on inner faces of rafters has been ignored. Obv with the inner insulated solution it is unnecessary. otherwise is it unproven, unnecessary or silly? 5. Will have to check numbers, but my recollection is that the manufacturers' U values are conservative. That sells more insulation. I have made a spread sheet, based on previous iterations of building regulations, for the sake of special constructions, an trade-offs. It usually gets a better number than the spec sheets. 6. How horrible out of 10, is it to fit PIR into rafter gaps? I did it into stud walls, maybe 20 years ago, so have forgotten. More a quality than comfort situation I think. (ie tight/slack/gaps.) 7. I don't really believe that insulation works pro-rata whatever the thickness. The further it is from the heat source, the less heat there is to escape...I speculate. Not one to argue with the BCO, just for my own decisions if exceeding regs. eg perhaps mineral wool or polystyrene on the cold side, and PIR at the heated side, esp with floors.
  6. Short of headroom, got plenty of insulation as have deep rafters. Don't want to pay silly money for bonded plasterboard. Tell me if this is silly. The issue is the cold bridge through rafter to plasterboard. So how about a thermal break only on the rafter underside? 10mm of marmox or similar would make a huge difference I feel. Can be tacked or stapled on (over airtight membrane) and save a lot of money. That then leaves 10mm gap from plasterboard to insulation but that is another minor insulation gain.
  7. Fixing anything through profiled metal, to be weatherproof and attractive is very difficult. A roofer who thinks it is not would worry me. Even if worked out precisely it can be different in reality as cladding widths vary +/- about 10mm, and lines wobble. For a skylight in a house I think I would create a box-out first (timber and lead) to get a foolproof and tidy transition. This is only theory, as I know lots about metal roofs and not so much about houses. These good examples above are very impressive, but still grounds for a little concern in storm conditions. For anyone who does not know, every metal profile has foam fillers available. Tidy closures, but seagulls peck them.
  8. The building looks relatively new and decent condition compared to most like this. The gutter sections simply butt together, so the joints fail with time. Maintenance is primitive and as decribed above. As the gutter is within the structure it can only drip inwards. As a simple start, do the cleaning as that will reduce ponding and empty the gutter more quickly, then dripping stops or at least reduces. Also check that the downpipes are clear. Then test the flow with bucket or hose. Unfortunately the gutters will be level at best, not falling to outlets. Although the cladding appears to be asbestos, any in the gutter should be wet and encased in filth so should be safe..but get back up on this or you may get complaints. Another solution is to insert a liner so that it is impervious as dave jones says. This is a standard solution and commercially available. I have thought of creating extra outlets forward from the joints, but never tried it.
  9. not everyone wants to go to London. Wikipedia say this, which I can't improve on. The constituency is set in a relatively isolated part of the southeast from the railways perspective and so does not enjoy some of the more general affluence of this part of the country. In the 2000 index of multiple deprivation a majority of wards fell within the bottom half of rankings so it can arguably be considered a deprived area.[3] Hastings has some light industry, while Rye has a small port, which includes hire and repair activities for leisure vessels and fishing. Hastings is mostly Labour-voting, whereas Rye and the rest of the areas from Rother council are Conservative. Back to the original point..... the drainage does look tricky. I hope the buyer comes on here, and maybe there is a solution other than taking a gallon away every time they go out.
  10. Mr Punter, Amber Rudd famously said much the same as you, not knowing she was being heard, 'but at least it isn't too far back to London'. There was an article in the press, and tv, this week about how towns on the coast were disadvantaged. It is largely, I think, due to only having half the opportunity to travel...one way is all sea. So they are literally dead ends. I have found that they can be like an island mentality. the druggies etc are not necessarily the produce of the town, but of course some are. No Eight fish restaurant rather posher than the other 20 chip shops, but in a good way. That survey that someone linked to this week....all the values per m2, shows coastal towns of the SE as half the cost of just 20 miles inland. I like Hastings, and Broadstairs.
  11. Mr Punter, you have not seen the real Hastings. Been along all Saints Street, or Rockanore to the net drying sheds? The most music festivals in the country. World champions for 'dress as a pirate day'. Of course there are less good areas. Developers have their eyes on destroying the best of the seafront, to allow Londoners a weekend pad in the 'next Brighton', but so far the locals prevail. re that squeezed in house. I can't say I like it, but the absence of parking matters less in old Hastings than most places, where there are masses of small old houses with no parking, and about 20 pubs an plus small shops, within walking distance, but the steep climb/stagger home. For that reason I feel the buyer will be a person who wants to live centrally, not a developer, but we will see.
  12. Everbody is correct. The only issue with 20mm sand is that, however well laid and compacted, it kicks up as soon as anyone stands on it. Then you get not only loose areas, but differences in thickness. IF they have a way of getting it level and keeping it that way, then all may be well. Next insulation you say? That is strong enough to take pedestrians and spread the weight . Then I suggest putting a board on it and jumping to even the sand under the insulation, or there may be hollows. On the other hand 10mm more screed is 0.4m3, so not a great cost. Or mix sand and cement as mentioned. 0.4m3, with free sand? That seems to be the answer.
  13. I was helping a near neighbour with an issue with their heating, (SE England £3,100/m2) and they showed me the manual provided by the certain very large house developer. Built 10 years ago, timber frame, brick clad, 'affordable'. It was a few sheets of paper in an oversized folder, almost entirely generic, and of no use at all. Basically it had the sbem certificate (for a sample house) and some tips on saving energy by turning things off. If tested the house would have been off the bottom of the scale....yes really. So if it is alright for that builder Then We don't have much to beat.
  14. This is simply price divided by m2, and for large, mixed areas, so will be very approximate. Also I would think it would be slightly too cheap, because bigger does not equate to better. To deal with your query of extensions and their value. I would say that a house extension has to be absolutely appropriate or it will be worth less than the cost. In a terrace of £200k houses, a small extension and loft conversion may just get the cost back when sold, but anything big or eccentric will cause a loss, because there is a 'right' value for that location. If you want bigger you look somewhere else. And extensions are expensive £/m2 People extend because they don't want to move, and they pay for the convenience (and saving) of not moving. An eccentric, overextended property may even be worth less than the standard ones around it. cheaper cost divided by bigger area The same will apply to quality. You won't get the money back on a very fancy kitchen. So a wreck in need of conversion will keep the cost/m2 down, and a 'tired' conservatory is worth nothing (or less) , while a fancy refit will not push the price up much. Or am I wrong? is there one for Scotland?