saveasteading

I used them as door stops in the office or placed on shelves to look suitably techy for the industry.

Only if there are thirsty trees nearby or your clay is very soft.. Most founds on clay are 1 to 1.2m. Otherwise it makes sense. So the planners haven't asked for a basement. Could subservience be provided by low profile extensions. Catslide roof? That makes it bow down before the other buildings.

It would help to know why you want a basement.

For context, Why do you need or want a basement? Is this an extension or all new? They're risky, and expensive, and the remaining clay may react to the change in loading. @OwenF and @Gus Potter will be more up to speed on the geotechnics, but I've had these tests done and also designed and built one basement hence my question.

It's all in BH already. If it seems boggling, it is. Research a thing at a time. Beam and block is a problem solver, and I'm not against it. What you're asking is all ultrasensible. 1,2, 3,5 leave til later. In simplistic terms: 4 is what to look into first. Slab if it's good ground, and level B and b perhaps, if it's poor ground or has to be elevated, or on a big slope OR if you can't get lorries near.

To use stones, the principle is to minimise the volume of mortar. Have a collection of stone sizes to hand. Infill a void at the back with rammed-in mortar, then press in the biggest stone, or stones, that will fit. Repeat until at the surface. This provides more strength and reduces porosity. Granite uses harder lime than sandstone. Stipple the finished lime surface with a brush, to give it more surface area for evaporation. I knew none of this 2 years ago: it's findable with a lot of searching. @Gus Potter is right about the landowner's intention. However this has been built with skill and the 3 skin construction has advantages too: it's still there after 150 years or so. NB the foundations will be 400mm deep probably....leave them alone.

Never heard of it, so I've looked them up and it seems to be a big company taken over by an even bigger one, and only recently on the UK market so it should be ok. My only doubt on insulation was because one product (I won't give the manufacturer here) turned out to be ultra loose, and I never bought it again. Choose any that is stated to be for the purpose, you'll never know if another might have been better or worse. But mostly, build it well.

The machine doesn't hit the pipe You can see that the joints are sound. Machine doesn't twist the connection hose. It's even more important long term....I had a machine that went in with mm spare on the sides, but the gap closed over time. It wouldn't come out again for scrapping. I know, most of that is covered by ' easy to work on'.

The best thing I have learnt on BH is to build a service void inside the walls. Benefits in airtightness and happy service contractors. But it also adds insulation in itself from the basic air gap and surface benefit, to any amount of additional insulation you wish.

It's an easy thing to test. Officially you dig 1m deep but for a quick check, do it at ground level. Dig a 300 x 300 x300 hole below the topsoil. Pour water in. Does it go away and how quickly? Then we can discuss doing it more formally, but it's just a bigger hole and a watch to hand. Sand and loam is good. You are going to be in luck.

Keep compressing the rockwool and you'll get a board. The manufacturers have all the figures and they are genuine. What you are proposing will work for air-borne sound but not for impact sound. Have you considered resilient bar? Pay attention at the perimeter too.

So horizontal is easiest, but slightly ugly externally. There's every chance you can go down before turning out, without reaching the footing. Big hole outside will prove where the footing is before committing to the fiddly work inside.

The amount of water coming out of the digester isn't huge. You flush a 5 litre toilet and that dribbles out simultaneously. How is the ground for porosity?

There is real benefit. Especially as some loft roll is very loose and sparse. That doesn't sound like much of a bm. They will either get it in for you or you must try elsewhere. Wickes will have it too.

I'm not so sure. An over optimistic figure could lead people into over-committing.

In case of any temporary problem I think I would have a soakaway before a pond., even if the ground technically can't take it. Or a 'pre-pond' extra pond with reeds and lilies. 10 years ago they were saying you could, but shouldn’t, drink the outfall. That was silly but indicates that it's almost clean. But if somebody left a bath running, the same amount would go into the pond, perhaps not very clean Yes. Use a recognised digester system, using air turbulence rather than the mechanical ones. Then to a soakaway or recognised watercourse. In Scotland the outfall rules are stricter. There's lots of previous on the subject. Use Google "buildhub sewage digester"

There is no way of knowing. 3 estimating services will probably provide 3 fairly similar estimates. But 4 builders will provide 4 quite different quotations. Big contractors employ full time professional estimators who know exactly how efficient their employer is in certain areas, and what the on-costs are. Yet 3 contractors will submit 3 different prices. I know all this because i was an estimator for 3 companies. Each one was very different. and it took a long time properly to reflect their way of working. Plus, the estimating services don't include for external works or ground conditions, or any site peculiarities, and will only apply to standard house construction. I could put together a generic house costing spreadsheet and it would have a certain amount of accuracy, better than just guessing £2,000/m2 or whatever. It would allow for major differences such as lots of windows. Windows 26m2 @ £310/m2 sort of thing. I would still add 5 or 10% risk. Maybe they do too. A friend showed me one recently and it was thorough and all on the right lines and I think was good value for his purposes. How accurate were the figures that they calculated? You might of course end up getting it done for the estimated price....but perhaps it could have been less. So if you are not in the industry I would say that yes, you should commit the surprisingly small sum for a costing (which reflects how little thought is required to the specific project.) BUT don't assume it will be accurate. What is accurate anyway? +/-10%? Then remember that you have to allow for site access, drainage, external works, site specifics, inflation and weather. And a contingency sum for what we don't know to allow for until it happens. If it was all simple and certain then there would be no Buildhub. Oh dear that sounds negative. I'm just saying be careful.

I think it is half the price and half the insulation in rough terms. But i could be persuaded to 100eps on the bottom and 50pir on top. Staggered laps are a very good thing anyway.

I'm assuming underfloor heating! Hence slab insulation is more effective than the other locations.

There are diminishing returns with insulation thickness. The building regulations and manufacturers don't acknowledge it though. But it is the case, especially with varying heating patterns. So I'd maybe put 50mm of eps on the bottom as it's half the price of PIR. Half as good in theory too but i think it is the pragmatic solution, especially as the outside is never far away with your layout. But air-tightness is crucial, and just needs attention to detail. so I'd take up that offer of tuition.

Plus, when you have positioned it, gently place and shove a golf ball at the top of the run (not dropped in) and see if it goes all the way.

There is vast hectarage in NW Spain of this, grown for paper. the whole area is dead to most nature, because of the toxicity of the trees, and being alien of course. plus it spreads as a weed and increases forest fires. I'm not a fan. Is that worse than larch and spruce here? I will have to think about that.

Yes, we had to do a fair bit of negotiation. I'm pretty sure we were lucky,( or skilful?) getting an exceptional price. But who knows? It's a real person though, and the MD. To me it was worth it for the control in gently supporting the fragile structure. They're also more suited to self builders than contractors. As a contractor I would see these getting trashed pretty quickly, as the average worker would still throw them about and be impatient with the jack; 7lb hammers being the preferred tool. Hence they deserve to succeed but probably won't ever be mainstream.

Depends on what is proposed. The brick can replace a block, or be used as the concrete shutter if designed for early enough. What was the original intention, and how far advanced are you @flanagaj

No problem. The plasterboard lifter is a necessity really. I've done a few ceilings without and it was horrible. Keep an eye out on Facebook marketplace for a bargain when you need it. A scabby, abused , and lower height one might be all you need.