saveasteading

Let the planners ask for any additional information. But do show cherry tree ( wild, for fruit, ornamental) and the height. Simply say 'grass area to be retained, or whatever. They should not need any more. If you have or plan any wildlife areas then say so.

A new thread will be best I think. Chalk is my second favourite bed material so it's a good start. It works as rock for foundation strength, digs neatly and safely and drains reasonably. Turns to toothpaste when driven on, is the downside. With the chalk there, my instinct is for conventional footings. 600mm soil. That isn't topsoil presumably. What is it?

Was that before the frames had to be supported on a raised brick? What other poor details were there that have been sorted? Guessing the solutions are from: Raise on blocks Tanalised sole plate Controlled drip Drain to perimeter Vapour control has improved. Ventilation gap.

Except that the hot flue is also giving off heat to the room. Box it in and it flies very efficiently up the flue. Plus if you box it you risk condensation. Leave it alone, with the added benefit of heeding @ProDave's excellent advice.

A good way of thinking about it. However it doesn't apply to some conifers or to permanently small varieties.

TPOs and the technical reason for distance are not quite the same thing. An oak will grow to 23m and that is the height assumed. then the roots affect the ground, more or less according to type.

No. In simplistic terms, the implication of changing length is the square of the span, so any change is significant. Then when a section of steel doesn't quite have the capacity, there is a jump up to the next weight. Not all the steel sections listed are readily available. The steel is going to be £/t.

As can any material, even metal cladding, if it is out of direct sunlight and also shaded from wind and rain. Lashing rain washes it off, wind dries it out. The Forestry Commission buildings tend to be in woodland, and also to have overhangs and fancy features, which encourage algae. I have some projects with timber cladding that looks great after 10 years. The downside is fading in sunlight whereas the shade side is fine. Vertical alignment of the timbers is essential, to get the water off asap, and no ledges. Also I always have it stained in high quality product which resists algae and keeps the timber colour. (for natural look, use a light stain which barely shows up apart from the gloss). Of course many designers relish the fading to grey of timber along with any plant growth. 'even metal cladding' Look at modern buildings with overhanging eaves, as favoured in municipal offices , hospitals, and flash retail estates, and you will often see the wall is clean at lower levels and dirty where sheltered by the overhang.

Another possibility is to fit a beam at mid height, a hollow section probably, inside the building. The window sections fix to that and so the sections are spanning half the distance and can very much smaller. From outside the glazing is more elegant. Inside you have a steel, which can look great or not, acc to context.

The manufacturer has it all worked out and the fitters will work to the spec provided. I'm thinking back to a warehouse where there were sliding industrial doors, hanging from the beam overhead. It's a sort of bellows effect, and made of steel so heavy. If I remember correctly, the manufacturer stated quite clearly what load there would be, changing in complex manner as it is pulled about, and they specify a maximum deflection, otherwise it will jam in the bottom guide runners. The SE designs for that, it gets built and along come the fitters. They fix the top, loadbearing, runner with spacers, in the knowledge that the beam will deflect by the amount specified, or less, and the bottom runner to suit. Thus, the runner may rise slightly in the direction of opening, and the weight cause some deflection that won't be a problem. ie it looked like an uphill runner, but the weight brings it down to horizontal and then a little lower still. I only did a few of these because they are a pain and I generally convinced clients to go to an overhead door. But it was a routine thing and they all worked nicely. If you have proper experts it will be fine.

Ahh yes. That. And that. So like my morning in the cold rain, squidging through mud and trying to divert runoff.

People vary. Architects are taught self confidence and boldness. Some courses include very practical design while others are all about vision and concept. Some are pure artists. Some are interested in construction methods, Some are interested in construction detail and even cost. Make sure to get the right type, and also interrogate on their attitude and experience. I interviewed a recent graduate once and expected to see some working drawings in the cv, but they were all abstract paintings denoting....something or other.

No it's not. Says company selling it. No, it's for a different scale of building, and had plenty of cons.

Yes.

We all make mistakes. some sympathy required. But we are liable for them. Would it have changed the final cost if it had been designed properly in the first place? If so, then there should be some recompense.

It isn't his job to do all the detail, including assessing tree type, ground type and the distance. He does spot checks. and you are the client and aren't expected to know any of it, so it is the builder or designer. Just in case it helps still....the tree affects foundations according to distance. eg if it is 15m from the building and the found's have to be deeper, then it will be further than that to any other areas of foundation, and they are shallower.

ASHP being noisy is a myth spread by the oil industry and climate change deniers. There used to be some noisy ones. My oil boiler here makes a horrible whoomph when starting, and is noisier than any old ashp, plus sends a stink out...which your neighbours won't get with your heat pump.

Don't worry. Cracked blocks occur in beam and block floors a lot. It doesn't matter because any crack is a very ragged interface and it is all still touching and jammed in place. if you try to take out a cracked block to replace it , then it is nigh impossible. So don't worry, and summarise the very good advice above....then do it. One last thing. This floor/ceiling already exists and is floored over I am assuming. Next time (for you or anyone) , there are proprietary hooks that can be hung down between the blocks.

For a self tapping concrete screw, all the advice is good. I would just emphasise the importance of the hole being perfect, ie exactly the right diameter and cut cleanly. The instructions will say. Also is an SDS going to roughen the side too much? And, it is normal to discount the first 20mm of concrete in calculating fixing length. this is because it can be all of fine stuff. AND because the pullout failure mode is conical, so strength increases dramatically with depth. Hence the screws are a bit long. I don't know what the sharp point is for either. Maybe that is just how screws are made to get the tapering effect when the cutting starts. OR because people complain that there is no point.

Perhaps not as much as mine. I find using even a normal nail gun into timber to be unpleasant and scary. I remember using a hilti gun into concrete with equal displeasure and somd failures. It's a skill. So I also would drill, plug and screw.

Simply the work involved. Commercially they are made with osb as a Web, in a very fancy production line: see John James video. Diy would need an SE spec and precision work, so it's easier and cheaper to have excess wood in the central area. OR make a box beam with timbers top and bottom and ply sides....again it needs calculation and isn't worth it for a small job.

None. Otherwise what is it doing to your hand and arm, which are talking the exact same force?

Profiled metal with screw fixings. If you choose one with the crowns at 330 ish centres and in slate grey, then it looks quite similar.

Sorted. If outdoors is 85% today, airing won't help much today.

Aaah! It is admirable to go for the sheep's wool and the lime. However, if you were to use modern materials you wouldn't have all that weight and nobody would be questioning the structure. If you have to rebuild or severely reinforce the roof then that counteracts the sustainability intent of the design. Sorry to put a downer on the green ideas, but I think my suggestion could be argued ( shown in numbers even) as more sustainable, if that helps. Pragmatic sustainability. Try multiple methods, test the design, decide if it is appropriate.