Ferdinand

I'm being slightly lazy, as we have been round this one about once a year sometimes for taps not showers, and I did not want to go digging. One of the lessons is to use plastic pipe for the outside bit. Another is to run the pipe so that that the outside pipe will tend to drain if you switch off the supply and leave the outside turned on. For a shower I guess that a handheld shower and a hook on the wall may be a good option, combined with a locker it can be coiled back into. You'll also want to think about all your outside water and services including rainwater collection for the garden. IIRC Jeremy Harris being Jeremy Harris has about 3 taps and electric sockets distributed around his plot like the Bristol Botanical Gardens. I think he also has an appropriate ornamental well above his borehole too, and I didn't manage to persuade him to put a Jeremy-lookalike garden gnome with a fishing rod sitting on the wall; I'd have bought him one, too. F Here are a couple of threads:

Or you could have one of those taps with the valve on the inside, and the handle on the outside. Tend to be an American thing, but I think they are on ebay. There are lots of possibilities out there.

Freezing there are lots of ways to do it, but you could have a master tap on the inside and remove the shower head fro Nov - Jan for example.

But dogs love shower tarys of water to play in - just has to be a very deep shower tray. Or a pond. I got rid of such to a T and the small terrier went beserk.

An architect with a personal supply of curved books. Cool ?.

Does anybody have a Butter Wouldn't Melt emoticon? I find myself in desperate need of one.

I did not comment on Internal or External. Shower? This is not a shed. I'll give you "Garden Building" or "Cabin" or "Tiny House" or "Garden Retreat". Shed? - no. This is a shed like Rod Hull's Emu is a Pedigree Albatross.

If it has a door like that it isn't a shed.

Yes - my parents did that, but I think they just *did* it. It was during the 3 decades of absence of Conservation Officers ?.

Welcome.

Listed Building Consent. It's the Listed version of Planning Permission, that you are not charged for. Sorry for not being clear.

I can't particularly help with specifics. Try about 20% of episodes of Grand Designs ? . And the rear elevations of things in National Parks, where they have the potemkin heritage facade at the front. So country walking "round the houses" required. Here is a piece from Build-it with examples and links to suppliers, which may be more useful. https://www.self-build.co.uk/design-details-glazed-gables/

As a first cut that looks to me to be *extremely* competent. I make it about 300 sqm including garage, based on a 16ft garage length - is that about right? My main thoughts would be: 1 - Overheating in those south facade rooms especially the "Reading" Room - quite shallow and will overheat if not thought through. Think about a sitting / eating veranda across the bottom of the "U". (Why has the reading room got what looks like a very very very large curved Samsung Television at one end ? One might think it was a disguised cinema room. Does SWMBO know? ????) If you want a projection / cinema room then I would make that end without big windows - it should be fine without lightwise. 2 - Storage space and maybe workshop type area downstairs. 3 - Adequate cooking faciities in the Annexe. 4 - Not entirely sure what the "link" is for. Can that space be used more effectively? 5 - Why not give bed three a tall narrow window to the "void", just for fun. Need to think through how to clean the other side. 6 - I think two things you need to consider are integration garden / house, and heat management. 7 - I wonder about a separate door where the cpd is (what's cpd?), which gives the annexe a separate entrance should you ever need it, and lets the interior being essentially divided. eg to rent out 8 - The aesthetic reminds me of the way my dad used to design some years ago, which some people may not like, but it may be the drawing style of your architect which feels old school. Dad used to work on graphed tracing paper then use big felt tips to block in. When he was at Uni he used to actually use watercolours, and I posted some a couple of years ago here. I like the style; others may not. So far so good imo. Ferdinand

Strange values ... Aiui the current owners are responsible for correcting past problems, unless the dodgy stuff was there at the time of listing when it is also listed and corrections are a criminal offence without LBC.

If you have a statement from a professional stating that (ideally) repair is impossible, or (Plan B) that it is impractical and that replacement is best, that will give weiht to yur application.

That's rather a disingenuous comparison. Characterising "traditional build" by building regs minimum is a little naughty. But yes they have shown that it can meet the values.

I think a post of the original drawings would be useful. And welcome. Ferdinand

Welcome.

My suggestion for a removable floor system is to use adjustable support pads of some sort to raise it high enough for all services, including drainage, to go underneath without a problem. A cassette system as described by @PeterW here could be put directly on such pads, or a beam system as used under timber decks could be used. These can include insulation, soundproofing etc. I might be inclined to superinsulate to take a bit of pressure of other insulating elements such as walls and the 15C roof (insulating that is a far trickier problem). Then whatever is needed can be done with the levels. There area adjustable support pads available (eg Eterno) which allow height adjustment from above afterwards, which would allow compensation for anything which moves in the existing floor. Any maintenance can be done by lifting the cassettes. There are other items to be resolved - service access, airtightness, support for any walls etc. Ferdinand

Following up on this thread, I paid a visit and lunch. I want to start a few threads to engage the hive mind. I will do further threads about the roof etc. The challenge on this is that it is a very special building. We were trying to find ways to do a conversion which would provide a suitable lifestyle for 2020, but allowing the building - and especially all the parts of the building mentioned in the listing - to be preserved intact and undamaged. The concept being thrown around is a conversion which could be entirely removed in the future, leaving no or minimal traces. Almost as if the owner can "camp" in the church building for 10 or 50 years. Minimising archaeology is important, as that can get horribly expensive. The "interior" part of the Listing says: The floor is not especially special - Chancel is stone and (Minton or Minton-style) tiled floor; nave is parquet floor. The Conservation officer wishes to retain the whole main interior as an undivided open space. Personally I am not sure if this is entirely necessary as in a private space it delivers little amenity to the public, and if the whole thing can be reversed to restore the single interior (ie the entire conversion is basically 'furniture') I am not sure that it is a relevant Planning concern - that could be controlled via a condition anyway, and I think that is aimed at permanent new divisions. One for a different thread. All comments, including off the wall, are welcome. Ferdinand

I do not know what celotex could be used for ... short of grinding it up and using it to fill walls like cellulose. My mum used to use EPS in plant pots instead or crocks, and to save some on the depth of compost and weight - 'cos she was a tiddler by the time she was 70.

Made to make your eyes water ...

Just the first time...

You can grow the straw on the plot before you build ? . * F (* - large plot)

That's an interesting one. The original 1967 plan did not have a conservatory and there are alternative circulation routes (perhaps I mischaracterised it as circulation), and that is basically a courtyard with a lightweight roof, with house on three sides and a tree on the 4th, so the only sunlight really comes through the roof. If you look at the Google piccie I think it will be OK. Virtually all the rooms have large sliding doors. It's a superb plan - would be good now 50 years later. And demonstrates what can be done on a tight (built to both side boundaries) site by not being square. The entire interior is a response to the plot orientation and limitations, and it is only 150 sqm. There is hardly any single purpose circulation space, and he has achieved an FLW style modest approach route which damps down, then tantalises, then surprises. Have attached the modern-house.net brochure with more detail. F peter-aldington-besacarr-plan-modern-house-net.pdf