saveasteading

One more thing on the rubber boot. They are made in various sizes, and each has a range of diameters, and you cut the sleeve to suit. Getting the smallest one that just fits will only work on a flat roof. For a steep (any tiled) roof it needs a lot of flexibility so get the biggest that accepts your diameter.

so homework done, It simply needs this? 50/63mm Class 3 Electric Cable Black Ducting Coil (50m) I have seen cables stuck (not pulling through) inside officially supplied duct, using a winch, due to very slight wobbles in the line that caused it to stick. Hence my caution. I think the cable was rather heavy though.

Thanks, I will check on that. Perhaps 9m2 in the open and more on the garage. Or get the PP. By gantry I meant steel fames to tilt the panels at the sun. like this Anyone know why the electric companies insist on very expensive ducting?

When we are laying drainage in about 6 weeks, it would be sensible to do any other ducting and cabling to avoid digging it all up again. Whether we do solar panels sooner or later , it is likely that we will, and these will be on gantries about 25m from the building. Is it better simply to lay a cable that is big enough (or even a bit over-specified), or to lay a duct, at more expense but reducing risk? I am guessing that the technical stuff could go in the nearby (also future) garage instead of in the house. I always thought of ducting as expensive, especially when the electric company specifies it, but was recently told it was cheap if our own private cable. It was something to do with heat build-up in the duct I think. Haven't chosen an electrician yet.

It is possibly a vent pipe from a storm water storage chamber nearby or beneath. When water goes in it has to displace air, so this might be it.

The top is probably compacted by builders vehicles and containing bricks and junk. After about 300 the effect of wheels is usually much reduced. on the other hand the original ground may be dense , but at least should not have stuff in it. Whether the ground level is similar to the existing, or has been cut or filled, perhaps you know or can establish. Soakaways and french drains work better with depth because there is an increase in surface area, and the 'head' of water pushes water downwards a bit more. That is all theory though. If you can dig 1m down you may see all the layers of new and original ground. you could also do one or more percolation tests for your own interest .(see earlier discussions)

If searching for ways to reduce the flow to the pond, then perforated pipes all the way increases soakaway area. Or just a bit of perforated and the water will escape into the gravel, and only heavy rain reach he pond.

OK I understand now, and obviously you don't mind that gravel area being under water. I would be more inclined to make a catchment up on the higher level, so a big pit, that would be a pond. Then it holds the water, allows half into the ground and half to evaporate with wind or plant respiration, and meanwhile be attractive. Shrubs would help too, in drinking the water and breaking up the soil over time. Failing that, build the french drains with additional pipes to create more void space, tto hold the water. Gravel is one two thirds or more stone, and doesn't hold much water.

And this is your land too?

The tools made of silicon are a different class from the old plastic ones. Nice pack of sizes from SF 'non-nonsense)

Drain off to where? Typically a metre of rains falls on your whole garden in a year. 50m2 of garden becomes 50m3 of water, so it has to go somewhere. Currently it is soaking slowly through the ground or eventually evaporating. Sending it all to the bottom of the garden could become interesting.

A landowner is unlikely to sell land without permission in principle, because they can charge much more with permission. Agricultural land is £10k and acre. With PP it can be an awful lot, (esp in the S/SE £1M or more) Therefore it follows that a field bought on spec is unlikely to get permission, because the farmer will have thought of it already. Nod's way is safe and sensible.

I would say, after the trusses are up. Heavy structural work done and any fixings to the original building are not going to damage your new insulation. Then all the insulation can be done in one operation, and cut in to suit. The corner from pin to yellow will need some attention. Very helpful drawing btw.

Yes, but as the heating water from ASHP is only 30 C at best efficiency , you will need large areas of radiator. Some study required, and look into what sort of space you have available. I think there are cleverly designed rads which will disperse the heat more quickly, but that they are quite expensive. Others on here will know better than I.

The BCO will tell you if there are any specific concerns, in which case you must address them. If it is a standard question the 'always a bungalow' should suffice. Anyway you would tell them that in the phone call and find out what was required, if anything. BCO needs closure in the file.

The water will be cold long after the winter too. BUT is it not simpler to circulate a closed loop into the burn, and to use antifreeze in the loop? Then instruct it to think in K not C and it will get energy out of the burn which will become just a tiny bit colder. How much energy though I leave to the experts on here.

OK so the question really is whether you can use the existing french drain or need additional drainage/filtering for the quantity. How much land do you have? Fancy a pond which might resolve everything and be 'a good thing'

And no project mid-way through at the time? I would show you my workshop if I could turn round in it to take a picture. Have a dismantled, very big, sound-bar filling the bench. Just needs a capacitor changed, but it is a bit scary and a tomorrow job...this last year.

That may be all you have to say, and you can do that yourself. Ahhh, the BCO not planning. So it seems to be a routine question, and a routine answer should suffice. If you have proof to hand it would be helpful to attach it.

There is usually a reason for asking about potential contamination. For example nearby landfill, mucky factories, the history of the site or area. Very often it needs a simple answer such as it has had a house on this plot for 100 years. ie it wasn't previously a garage/gasworks/slaughterhouse/chemical works. do you know the history of the site? what is nearby?

Great idea. A problem with GSHP is that the ground gets cold, unless there is a new source of heat, eg water flowing through gravel. Zoothorn, You have a constant supply of new water. Any idea what temperature?

With floods being such a serious risk in some areas, it is incredible to me that planners allow new housing to tip rainwater into the river systems. Even when controlled, they allow about 5 litres/second/hectare out. That is a lot of water. In my opinion: the planners don't understand it plus it is not their responsibility developers accept the constraint as it allows development where other means wont work. Environment Agency have very little clout Government: don't understand and want to please the developers.

You can't , or shouldn't, connect directly to a stream without permission. This is water that currently soaks into the ground, but would instead be flushed immediately into the stream, then down to wherever floods might occur. It all adds up. So you might need permission. Even if you don't, this is usually down to planners non-understanding or caring. They allow a lot of drainage that could be much better. Going to soakaways is better if you can, and if they work in your ground. Big IFs. It is a planning issue, not building control, in the first instance.

I like French drains as they spread the water further, and have more ground surface area to dissipate into, which tends to work better and is also good environmentally. What is the existing drain for/doing ? Where were the gutters going to connect before this idea? If the french drain failed and water rose to the surface, where would it go next?

It is less than in a change of floor covering. However if that was added to an actual change in floor covering, and perhaps some construction tolerances, it could feasibly become a trip risk.