saveasteading

Carribean? edit. drat, i withdraw my comment as being too late.

Thanks. One of those things when you are the designer and the contractor. Also the fun of it, as well as saving money. But there's a risk with anything new and untested. I'm sure plenty of people would have declined to approve it, but it was all my risk. I'm sure I'd have heard if there was a problem. I seem to recall that the price was great too, once the merchant recovered from being asked for a price for 100+ m of these. I think hitfix nails is all we used, just to pin them in place, because uplift wasn't an issue.

They are generally very precise people who go by the written policy. Objections tend to be very personal and not well explained or linked to policy and so be completely ignored. Parish Councillors should study applications and consider them in detail, but tend not to take the trouble, but then spout forth about their own opinion (I know I was one of the few who did homework). Hence they are not generally taken much notice of either. Bu they are if well structured and with reference to policy, as their local knowledge then has some weight. Treat the planning officers with respect. It can be tough job, especially with the big developers and their lawyers trying to catch them out. meanwhile their councilors are on their backs too. Try to make your application relevant to policy. Yes refer to precedent. Pictures, especially artist's impressions, help. Planners, and especially councilors, are not necessarily skilled at visualising.

I read it this way. 1. get and submit a proposal for the study. await approval. 2. council receives and approves the report following the study.

We've much the same detail, partially occupied now. Despite attention to insulation at the perimeter, the tiles at this inset area are noticeably cold: partly because there is no ufh at this small area, but also just creeping through the cold bridges. so for the rest of the project I'm proposing putting the thinnest insulated underlay down before the tiling. Prowarm 6mm I think, stuck down with tile adhesive. If you have more depth available, use thicker prowarm. It will also provide some bridging of joints.

A good point. you wouldn't want to be fixing through the foam, which will simply crush. Why not though, fix a solid platform, then infill with foam and additional battens as necessary, then another board on top. It is a diy SIP. Uplift would be interesting with these brackets. A couple of tek screws, as shown, may well suffice, but I would want to check Quite so. But I think even the dimmest builder knows a bit about footings*, but zero about screw piles. Do the building regulations advise on screw piles? *I am reconsidering that, thinking of some previous situations.. A bit isn't necessarily enough. So: your situation: what is the ground condition?

beware the Archaeology report. you will get 2 quotes if lucky, both for about the same cost. what chance they say that the site isn't worth investigating? none. i challenged one once, showing there was nothing to find. That's unusual though. The cost may be open ended though' as they don't know what they'll find. There are ways to limit it, sometimes.

A sheet of stainless steel would be the tidiest and consistent with hoods etc. as it is completely invisible behind the pelmet, cement board even. or a sacrificial laminate. Or nothing at all. The heat goes into the toast, or should. i suspect they are being cautious. We have a pelmet too., just 200mm above the toaster and keeping the heat in. i think it is mdf with foil covering , and it is fine after 6/7 years

Apologies. Neither have I , I was only guessing that they will be there. I used to go to Ecobuild though, now named something else, and one year there were several ground screw exhibitors. I took it seriously, but further research showed they were all exaggerating the strength and value many-fold. I think they are used a lot for radio masts etc, as a jcb can drag them up the hill and screw them into the ground. Why don't I like screws? The reps told me untruths and wasted my time. So I'm suspicious of all the information. It has to be just the right ground. Weak enough that normal foundations aren't suitable. Strong enough that the screws will hold. Is it right and proper that I could buy these online without proper knowledge? I expect that traditional footings will normally be better value and durability. I did once build a building on stilts. Concrete pads, then concrete legs up to level, then beam and block floor. Why don't I like Sips? Overpriced. Specified as the 'latest thing' by consultants who don't understand costs. It is just ply and foam at a high cost. They all work and are ok in the right place. Just check the alternatives.

I'm guessing yours is not a cheap kitchen. The foil covering type of unit may well suffer from that level of heat. I think wood and laminate will not. Looking now at our toaster which is 250mm below a wall cupboard. No problems. Microwave, air fryer ditto.

Sips panels and ground screws....sounds like the advice from exhibitors at a self-build exhibition.

Delete rabid, never a good thing, and I'd say promoting engineering efficiency is being an environmentalist. Back to the original post: is the energy saving justified by the cost? I still say no. However there are other ways to spend £200 and it's simply gone. Meals out, watching sport. If the toaster gives pleasure then that is justification.

Have you a picture of the intended screws? In my mind, and I think those answering before me, you simply build a deck using timber or perhaps galvanised steel. Onto that you can build what you like. Fixings would be from above, screwing down through the top plates of the screws. Big screws or maybe bolts. I'm not a fan of ground screws although I can see they have their place. Temporary structures with difficult access comes to mind. What is it that appeals to you?

Not financially. Not sustainably.

on a non-woven membrane. So you must make this very clear. show it on a plan, with arrows pointing downhill. BUT if the area is to be permanently permeable it won't matter, but still state both. Especially look at the crossover itself. Presumably this has to be of hard material such as concrete or tarmac, and must also shed water away from the highway.

agreed. 4, 5 and 6 before anything at all. I found 10 to be confusing, so i would read it as it suits you. 13, you could do whenever you want. if there is a fee with each submission then it saves to use a single submission. 11 and 12 I don't read as requiring information.

And all wall lights should be set at least 100mm off the wall to avoid casting shadows of wobbles in the plaster or, especially, jointing.

Define most. Try this? The heat loss from an uninsulated floor will be proportionally greater close to the external perimeter.

I'd think that this style allows any heat to flow upwards, so ideal for avoiding heat buildup.

Yes. There will be one who specialises in rural matters. I've always been impressed by planning consultants, despite being reasonably experienced myself. Planners also welcome their involvement, perhaps surprisingly. I asked one once, and they explained that it makes their job easy: the consultant is a specialist, deals with all the arguments, and knows the specifics and precedents.

Bottom line is the low strength of pir. It's plenty but obviously anything below it doesn't have to be stronger. Sharp sand with 5% ement mixed in as a bed?

Floors can be overspecified. There is probably a practical limit as to depth without udercutting the walls. Nobody has fallen fhrough this floor, in 200 years. The issue is simply cold and damp. So you could just spread sharp sand on the earth, then pir, then a dpm and screed. After that you lay your slabs down again on sand or on mortar. Instead of just sand as a base, it could be a sand and cement screed, the main purpose being level control. Most heat loss is at the perimeter, the very place you don't want to excavate too far. Perhaps we can look at detail later.

I agree that this would be excessive for a garden tool shed, but its a good idea for something more substantial. On a big timber frame once, the supplier wanted a concrete upstand to the perimeter. quite a fiddly and costly thing to do. I proposed precast concrete lintels , bolted down, which also allowed us to pack them to dead level and to adjust the line if necessary. The supplier was really happy with it, as of course it fitted perfectly. So was I as it was very much cheaper than in-situ and a bit cheaper, but a lot stronger, than brickwork. about £10/m

What do you mean, temporarily or for pouring. If temporarily then do whatever you feel needs doing. Same for the pour really, I over braced everything, but didn’t have a single issue apart from one reveal that I had actually forgotten to put screws in some timber. Half a dozen screws later it was all fixed. too much bracing??? probably I'd say no. The power of the wind is amazing, and it especially likes to damage partly built structures.

A shed could simply go on a 100mm slab, on dpm on hardcore. With or without reinforcement, which is to limit cracking. For an occasionally inhabited building I would be adding a downturn (footing) to the perimeter. Definitely mesh in it, maybe insulation, but there isn't much point in insulating the slab without the walls and roof too.