saveasteading

It smells of the pee of hundreds of tomcats. It is the glue apparently. Had some damp stuff in the car once and it was foul. Also had some got wet on a site, had to spread it on the floor for several days to dry it. Fortunately we had a huge floor.

Good on you for wanting to do the sensible and logical, but harder work, thing. 1. When wet it smells awful, and takes a very long time to dry. It soaks up water like a wick, especially from a puddle. Yes you can still use it after fluffing up. 2. Keep it off the ground, using pallets or battens. Try rolling it and squeezing into rubble bags. You can cut the lengths to get the size .Even if you don't use all of it this will make it smaller in skip. Cover with tarpaulins or similar.

I don't like, and have never specified syphonic. It is clever and works in principle, but risky, and I have always found a safer solution. Weighing up an irritating noise against risk of leaks and flooding is easy. Have observed the use of syphonic in a commercial building and seen it go wrong due to occupier lack of maintenance. It works on the principle that the downpipes are deliberately downsized, not running freely, become completely full of water and then suction kicks in. There is no plan B if there is a problem, unless you can build in a substantial overflow somewhere safe. my checklist: 1. Get the gutter and pipes outside the building wherever possible or asap in the run. 2. Have a secondary outlet of pipe or weir, and a substantial gutter. 3. Ensure the flow is smooth (no sharp bends), fit an effective leaf guard, and a means of rodding. 3. Sound insulation inside, as above, then box round for some solid barrier too, and stuff the box with fg. 4. think of any sounds as connection with nature, and evidence that the pipe is running freely. 5. check and clean gutter frequently. All that, or find a way of having conventional external drainage.

Easi-fil is one of my favourite products. Specially because it is sticky on a trowel and easy to handle, by amateur me. Then spreads and penetrates nicely when worked. Diall is own brand b&q /screwfix, and the qualities vary enormously. Could be fine. But Easi-fil is £20 for 10kg so that is where I would go. That fills a lot of cracks, and gaps, and hollows, and joints....

poss. 2 different discussions here. 1. As we will own the building we do want it insured. As there will be contractors of varying size, we need to be covered in case of accident. 2. Scottish so I think, and hope, that we will not have any levy. Planning permission was many years ago, by others, and there is no condition of a 106 or similar. I am sure that there will be advice available on this. Likewise rates/council charge : in England there are favourable rates for conversions: not confident re Scotland, but i don't know.. I live in a house which was change of use/conversion 25 years ago, and it sits in band C until sold.

It had never occurred to me that wall tie conduction was significant. Now seeing the extra cost it would take a lot of lost energy to recover that cost. So I wouldn't change from the norm. If it makes a huge difference, I would expect Ancon to have done tests and made the case. I remember once working out the heat loss through screws in an industrial roof. They are going from the hex head outside in the weather, right through to the roof rails, via other metal bits. It was surprisingly little heat loss, and complex to find a sensible alternative. The standard wall U values as calculated, presumably included wall ties, so the loss is already accounted for.

Close to completion of ownership, and to getting started. As soon as we own this, we should insure it. We still have to submit the warrant application, and wait for approval before we can convert. But we have some essential maintenance to do to clean out the cow mess, keep the rain out etc. and will get started on pointing the stone where it is important to do so. Plus caravan will be on site. With owning, and doing some work, we must take insurance cover right away. From reading previous correspondence I see recommendations for Zurich, Self-build Zone (part of Build-zone) and Protek. All more expensive than I had hoped. Any other recommendations? And advice always welcome. This will be conversion of stone agricultural to home, for occupation not selling, and currently allowing 18 months (thinking that is not enough) Self-managed. The building is 300m2 on ground and 100m2 upper floor.

As Carrerahill suggests, look at some other examples for complete peace of mind. I suggest go to a newish B& Q , Dunelm or similar and look at the concrete floor. This will have been done to high spec and finish, but I bet will have lots of cracks, worse than yours. Nobody looks though. On the subject of drying out. presumably this was quite a dry mix, so nearly all the water goes into chemical bond with the cement, and it will dry quite quickly. The weather isn't helping, but generally floors dry much more quickly than the rules of thumb say. (Unless the material was much too wet when laid) A month per inch is stated but this is very cautious in my experience of concrete floors up to 200mm thick, and a thinner, damp-mix screed will be quicker. If we get drier, warmer days then letting air through will dry it quickly. As Mr Punter says: Flooring contractors often like to sell an extra of a seal coat. It seals the damp in, and costs you. There is a nice mark-up on it. I have even seen them fiddle the moisture reading, , and their annoyance has been clear when they lost the extras. Instead, check the moisture content (yourself) until it is ok.

Agree with LA3222. All concrete and screed cracks. This has no contraction joints , but does have fibres so will crack at almost random. Are the cracks very, very narrow? Good Are they random, and fizzle out rather than go a distance? Good. My concern would be hardness. You say it is sandy, and coming away. That may just be the very surface, try a little deeper, and I expect you will find it is harder. A loose sandy surface will not accept the adhesive so may simply need to be rubbed back and given a coating. Not saying this is Ok but first impression is that it is. Your builder must see it and comment.

Welcome to this helpful group. Can I suggest, get reading previous discussions? Most of the info we need is there, somewhere. Some is very specialist and helpful knowledge from study or experience, and some is opinion. Both are very helpful. You will find that it becomes less daunting, and then is a good time for specific questions. I am in the same boat re experience: barn conversions are different in regard to planning and building reg's, and I have learnt a lot in just a few weeks on this site. No details required, but roughly where are you (region) , and what is the barn construction and condition?

Why would the planners insist on grids? Stone is permeable, and can be more so if you select the stone accordingly. In any case, grass grids will need stone under them first, although the planners may not know that. Grids are not cheap unless compared to tarmac or concrete surfacing. If you do go for grid, be sure to choose one that will take the weight of the biggest vehicle you expect, , and to put enough structure under the grass grids or they will just sink too. There is a middle way, using grass mesh. probably the thicker one, like this, but I don't know your circumstances. I am reluctant to suggest costs, so it is best you check out the technical options first.

Very helpful thanks all. I will set this aside until I have seen and considered the spring (on someone else's land but entitled to use) the existing pipeline and all else. In order of current intentions: revised. 1. Spring water, subject to infrastructure. It will need a pump and treatment. Risk of freezing, although we are told it doesn't. 2. Rainwater, using proprietary tank and pump, and added treatment. 3. Own collection system as Gus idea. The most fun perhaps. (the site maps and plans shows a 'well' which apparently means spring, but is nowhere to be seen.) 4. Borehole because of cost and risk of problems.

Have done buildings on sleeper walls a few times, for reasons other than flood. Steep hillsides basically so some faces are high in the air. If the authorities are happy that the flood flows around your house, then you can infill, but promise not to use it as a handy storage area. In case it really does flood it would be prudent to let it dry quickly, so let lots of air through. Yorkshire boarding? hit and miss. The risk might be of animal life enjoying the sheltered area. Door/gate in it for maintenance? If the council wants you to allow water under the building then perhaps they will still allow hit and miss boarding. For a more rugged effect you can use scaffold boards vertically, and stained.

Depends how nice and how permanent you want the repair. The fibre and bitumen patching will work but look ugly. You have another hole nearby too. If you had a small piece of the same profile lying around, you could simply place it over and stick it down, and best self-tap screw too. Alternatively make a metal flashing to bridge over the damaged area, but that would have to go all the way to the ridge. OR I would expect that to be a standard profile. Try the nearest agricultural cladding supplier. You would not have to change the sheet, just tuck the new one under. You will need to have the profile info. Height of the profile and how far between crowns.

So that is about £400/m2 + vat, and you can apply that to all the windows for a first estimate. Seems a decent price if the quality is good.

Agree with much of the previous discussion. My opinion and experience is: Architects and planners seldom consider gutters and downpipes. Rainwater must be got away from the building with the easiest and safest method: Use external gutters, nice and big. Plenty of downpipes. Avoid, internal gutters, syphonic systems, chains, oversail and free drip. These are all gimmicks or solutions to problems that should not exist if the building is designed with rain considered. They bring risk and maintenance issues to the building. So we are left with aesthetics. I agree your sketch with no gutters past windows, multiple dp is the way to go. As Ferdinand says, there are many ideas. Mine are simple, and a formula based on experience. 1. Minimise the effect by matching to the wall and roof colours. 2. Or make it look designed and integrated by matching the glazing bar colour. 3. Or make it look designed by using a completely different colour that is not builders' merchant grey or black 4. Three colours is plenty, so wall, roof, glazing are probably enough. Match or contrast using these colours. I also endorse Lindab: strong, classy and work well, with many colours to choose. The copper effect needs a sticker saying, 'not really copper, please do not steal'. It is expensive but is the finish to your project. If the house is to look old, use cast iron instead, but coloured on the same principle. Get it right and the Architect will take the praise, I bet you. 'Always had that in mind...obvious etc.'

That explains it, then ie replacing another so no increased flooding risk. Sleeper walls is probably fine, and is nice and simple. Needs bracing in the other direction to avoid domino collapse. Can look ugly or weird though, so a bit of thought on appearance too. If using concrete planks or T beams, you will want to conceal the faces, but perhaps the house wall facing can do that. You will need an Engineer to design the sleepers, and perhaps the beams, but will be easy and inexpensive. Brief them that you prefer sleeper walls or you might end up with a fancy in-situ concrete structure.

Not exactly, but have designed other buildings to allow a river to overflow underneath. Build up to 1m in any material you fancy: brick/ concrete/ steel. Make a deck on it in concrete. Waterproof. Build timber house on top. Some areas will want to allow the flood under the building, others allow enclosure. Have you established that this is allowed? There is usually the 'exception' test to satisfy.

Not at that stage but don't foresee any problems. I am comfortable with the collection side of it all, but trying to get ahead with the treatment questions on which I know nothing.

Somebody mentioned extractors. I assumed fan from toilet.

You must first support the road with a membrane as this will stop the stone punching through and disappearing endlessly into the clay. I prefer the non-woven kind as it doesn't puncture so much. It will cost you close to £1/m2 but will pay itself many times over. There are other, fancy geomembranes but probably not necessary for you. Then you lay cheapish hardcore, or whatever is the local stuff, complete with whatever muck and junk they leave in it, working up to better stuff at the top, The sales people at the suppliers will generally be delighted to advise the best make-up based on what they have. tell them what you want to achieve. I have had very good advice in similar circumstances. Re recycled tarmac, this is usually good value if from carriageways, but not if it is from footpaths. Warning re price £/ton. This is not like £/m2 and varies. Ask for the conversion to £/m3. Loose rubble with voids might be 1.6 t/m3, whereas compacted can be like rock, and 2.2t/m3

This would be my first line of investigation mdpe pipe is not expensive - how far away - a small digger will dig an awful lot of trench in one day. I treat my own spring water with particle filters at 10 micron and then 5 micron and then UV it’s a very cheep install as my water quality is so good already it’s more belt and braces as I rent out accommodation and it’s a requirement from council. There are grants of about £800 per household from council. Excellent, thanks. 50m but through neighbours ground. Do you have to treat yours for ph ? We now have a report that says the water is acid (comes from a hillside so not surprising) and needs adjustment to suit health requirements for drinking water. That also limits corrosion of metal parts. There is very little pressure, having been to a holding tank where our connection is made, so will need either an inline pump, or taken to a new tank with pump. We will have the same principle re visitor health as you mention, as we will all get used to the water, and visitors might be sensitive.

If it makes you happier, it is very unlikely that it is costing you too much. Your Engineer has studied for at least 3 years at Uni then in real life. He has done the complex maths and is insured if it goes wrong. Any so-called overdesign is usually very slight, and cheaper than the Engineer spending many more hours on reducing the steel a little. Concrete without reinforcement is weak in bending. The steel is strong in tension, and it all acts compositely. Then more steel is added the other way to hold it together ad to control cracking. I'm sure it is all needed. The polystyrene is just holding the concrete in place and you still need steel. and re Eurocode: this is generally more economical than the previous UK design codes were.

All things being equal, holes in a wall cause fewer leaks than holes in a roof. If they fit proper soakers to the roof tiles it is ok. Then there is the risk of rain coming down the vent, into the fan.

Excuse me some repetition. The end vent pipe does 2 things. Allows gas to escape from the sewage system if there is a blowback from fermenting stuff. You can't rely on anybody else's system working, and you might get everybody's. It will smell and may force water out of your traps. Best that it shoots up in the air and away. 2. lets air in so that there is never a vacuum to prevent flow down your drains. Otherwise it will slow flow (causes blockage) and possibly empty your traps. A Durgo valve does the latter, with a valve to prevent the former, and can be in the house. But you need one of the former at the end of the line. that is why one end pipe might suffice for a group of houses on the same system., depending on layout. I expect every house has one or more Durgo valves. The same applies to a private treatment plant. So I think you do need to vent to air, at the end of the system, in case of blowback. Easiest in standard 4" unless the arrangements of the drains are very restrictive. But you could possibly plead for a vent in the ground close to the treatment plant, plus Durgo indoors.