saveasteading

Unfortunately it is a bit inexact on levels. it is rounded to 1m and the sampling appears to be very far apart. Some areas are clearly interpolations, or just wrong. depending on where you live, you can get a full survey done (yours sounds very easy) for £300, or can be £2,000 from someone who is slower without the kit. The £300 can be for a half day with very sophisticated kit (which they own) which transfers to computer and plan. OR old fashioned level on an existing plan. The top costs come when there is no competition, or where someone has to hire the kit for £300 and then draw it up. So ask around. The planners will want a plan, but it probably doesn't have to be very detailed. For a 3 acre site I suggest you get an OS map to satisfy the general layout and topography. You or your architect can get that direct from OS for a reasonable fee, and then it is legit to use for location too. Perhaps a more detailed survey is needed at the house position, or perhaps not. You paying for a topo certainly helps the architect.

Sandtex works, and will look as you describe. Many paints will lift the leaves of wood apart, and it not only looks horrible but will make it even less waterproof. I know this from having to fireproof a big area of osb, and the intumescent paint stuck but caused the flaking. After experimentation, and in agreement with the BCO we used sandtex instead because it 1. didn't raise the grain, 2. doesn't burn. That was for internal use. For external, make sure that the product you choose is totally waterproof, not just resistant. I recall that brushing worked better than rolling, because it was more slopped on than 'worked in'.

Tongue and groove looks smart, and can be stained to retain or jazz up the appearance, or left to go grey as you choose. Gap behind between your fixing battens for ventilation, and vapour barrier on the osb. Planning?

It depends on the site, and if the building is simple or complex. If it a standard area with buildings already around, then it is likely that a local SE will be 90% sure of what to expect in the ground. They may only want to witness a hole being dug to a metre or so, to confirm their expectations. For no cost you can chat to a local Engineer and see if they agree, and what the cost would be. For an unknown or known problematic location, then deeper boreholes might be required. this is usually a primitive process with a tripod and dropping weight. once there, they can do several for the same sum. These can go quite deep if necessary and again the Engineer will advise what is wanted. Tests on the samples can be carried out in a lab, but that is often unnecessary.

Yes, but obviously you need contacts or references, and some contractors are taking advantage of the shortage of skills/ or suffering from it and pulling back until they can guarantee. performance again. Meanwhile there appears to be an abundance of architects and their like.

As Patel might say it. zero point half thousand five thousand kilowatts

There is no reason why you should not invite one or more designers and contractors to pitch for the project. You don't need to decide the way ahead until you have tested for someone you trust and can work with. In principle though. If you don't know what you want, then d and b is not usually the best way....the contractor does not want change any more than you do. If you don't think you have the skills to check quality then you need a consultant to supervise. D and B will more likely provide a better price, and a fixed one if you handle it correctly from the start. Make sure that they will have the design done by a consultant, not made up as they go along. The good ones will include all that. You will never, ever get a consultant to guarantee the finished price. The issues in Buildhub have probably as many issues with consultants as contractors. It is your choice. Without knowing you, or your project we cannot decide for you, only suggest. As a designer and contractor I can only say that either way can succeed or fail: choose someone good , not someone rubbish

I was a Design and Build specialist for many years, but not housing. There was no question that coming to us was the best solution, especially as we would decline anything that was not in our mainstream of knowledge. Engineer and Architect in-house). BUT other companies offered something similar, but weren't so good (a couple were close, but out of hundreds) So how do you know if they are any good? Go to an Architect or surveyor and they hate d and b as it is competition. So they will always say that corners will be cut, and expertise lacking....and to use them to design and engage contractors. Some Architects and arch'l technicians (who should not use the A) will do a good job. You should use them for fancy designs. Some will only do the planning and then the builder has to make it work. The costs should be 30% lower with d and b, all to the same standards. Therefore my answer is that d and b is best IF you can check them out on results. That means references, and not necessarily the ones they suggest. How to find the problem jobs? Perhaps check out Planning website and ask about the jobs they have not mentioned as references. Also needs you to monitor and question anything that doesn't seem right in the design and construction processes. They should not mind. On costs ..beware. Architects have a habit of underestimating the cost, and excluding their and other fees that will occur. Contractor more likely to include it all, but you need certainty.

Well, you know how on bridges the army are told to 'break step' to avoid a pulse building. Could you simply give an instruction to guests to vary rhythms. Could be called the rhythm method.

I'm back already. Forgot that it would be sensible to include a vehicle charger. Their form to fill in asks for manufacturers and models. For the ashp I can pick a Daikin 15kW and find a reference, unless you who know better want to advise. No idea re vehicle charger, and in any case it will be different in a year. They want not only the model, but a datasheet!!! But can you give me any tips to move this forward, just to get an estimate for 3 phase supply. btw, this is an old farm building, and I expected to see redundant 3phase switch gear, but no, there has only been single phase.

Yes that is simpler and better. Otherwise your water bar will have to be cast into base and wall. Easy enough but weakens the wall and seems unnecessary. Water goes the easy way. A nicely rough surface at the joint will help a lot too. Doesn't even need to be stuck. If it is held between the gravel and the concrete it will do..Not polyethene as it will react to light and fall apart. Assuming that this is all an external construction, not the wall of a building.

depends how often you have them.

oops? what new measurement of power is that?

Thanks both. May be back with the next lot of questions.

Chalk is easy too. Rock for foundations but cheese for digging. But it is horrible across the site in winter as it turns to toothpaste. Sink holes is a big issue as you say. Using swales rather than soakaways, and any soakaways spread over large areas can help.

And what about water pump? I have looked up suppliers and they don't mention anything about power. I assumed it was not critical but SSEN think differently. I suppose the pump could potentially be huge, pumping far and high.

Do you mean that if you come back in from the edge, then you can raise the ground locally, between deck and bank, and get under the suddenly dangerous height? Yes, exactly what I did at a previous house. they measured and the ground was 590mm from the deck. everyone happy.

For what you are doing then any technology should be ok. However, I have experienced expansion bolts/ sleeve bolts coming loose from solid concrete. This was due to repeated movement which gradually wore away the concrete at the friction point. It was an extreme case and unlikely in everyday life. The cause was schoolchildren swinging and shoving at a safety rail, so several times a day for every school day for a year, and once they saw it was moving they went for total victory. Replaced with resin anchors in the same holes, and all good. This concern therefore only applies with repeated movement and stress on the fixing, and probably not to your stairs.

Have been asked questions by the Electric supplier and don't know what they mean let alone how to answer. we have a single phase supply, and see from the pylons that there is 3 phase available (transformer on the post). We are designing for an ASHP which I am estimating will be 15kW (based on info on build-hub, and a near neighbour's spec) Also a water pump as the water comes from a well above, but has negligible head. So have asked SSEN for a quote and they ask us: Please provide the following information for each piece of equipment: Starting Current (in amps) Starting Method (Soft Start/Direct on Line/ Star Delta. Rating kW. I can't ask the supplier as we are nowhere near that stage, but are planning ahead. Therefore any credible answers will do for now. If someone can explain why they need to know the start method, then that would be interesting.

To the guttering normally, although that is often ignored, and it does matter if very close. If you have room, then 2m is much easier to work with than any less, using proper scaffolding, and just about getting a ladder to the eaves. The fire rules can be affected too, and you are allowed more windows as the distance increases. For the finished house, a 1m passage is purely functional, whereas 2m allows some planting, Maintenance,.... as for building.

If only we could change the geology of our sites. It is a serious point though and the geology should affect the value of the site. If the ground is fill or otherwise loose then the cost will be high. At the other extreme is solid rock, and that too has a cost due to extensive breaking out. Clay is not too bad but is affected by trees, so is sometimes a deep dig and lots of concrete. The perfect site, which is what you asked, might be dense sand and gravel...digs easily but is strong and free draining. Agreed with nod, For a normal house, the choice of construction will make little difference. Masonry is heavy but that is not the main concern.

I don't think I have ever designed a soakaway in England, because the ground has not allowed it, so haven't done a comparison. It is all about attenuation storage and slow release that still causes flooding. Our Scottish project is on pure sand so is well suited. Scotland's rules on rainwater seem much more relaxed than England's which is perhaps why the standards seem a bit half-baked. I worried about this, but a little research shows that Scottish rainfall is much more predictable, and generally less than is thought. I have compared two towns that interest me. Rainfall in Inverness is low, totalling 723 mm in a typical year. Precipitation is distributed evenly, falling over about 143 days per year. Royal Tunbridge Wells. The rainfall here is around 737 mm | over about 99 days This is only part explanation for why TW has frequent flooding problems: the storms are just more intense very locally.

It says to adjust using screw 3. seems a lot of work for one screw, but the air bags will lift the whole assembly. Then you may have your Turflugel properly in passende Position.

Have you tried the four sprung door technique?

For the benefit of all. As stated above I think sedum is overrated. In case you ever want to get rid of it from a planner's request, or architect's whim I recall the following, after a summary. it is good for hiding roofs in the countryside, and for keeping roofs cool in summer, if watered. BUT the sedum and plastic crates have to be transported from somewhere. the roof has to be reinforced, and I once calculated that the material use was more carbon than the sedum would ever save. any rain stuck in the sedum doesn't reach a rainwater harvester. it needs maintenance, to remove dead stuff and replace...h and s needs weeding.... h and s the membrane issue as above I once had it specified on a job designed by a 'planning only' architect. whether the planners asked for it or it was for fun I don't know. client hadn't understood what it was and said they would rather not have it, for maintenance and for capital cost. I mentioned to the planner that it was worse than useless and dangerous , but i would have to resubmit planning. I briefly thought of writing 'sedum' on the flat roof, as the word on the plan was the only refence. Useful for the future though was a visit be HSE. the inspector was on a spot visit, which coincided with me being ion site. I explained the sedum, and the need to access it. dreadful idea he said. 'can you instruct us to delete it then? No, i haven't the authority. BUT I can ask you to leave a gap to the perimeter so that ladder access is safer, and there is a hard surface to step onto. so that saved 20% of it, and made it easier to build. And that is when we learnt about changing the material where under sedum or exposed. In future I can quote the safety issue and refuse to include it, and instead have something else. Any questions?