flanagaj

I'll mention this. Thanks

Sorry, but that made me 😂

I'm not disputing, but can you explain your reasoning? My only reservation (I am a Luddite), is that a cavity is meant to breath and a cavity that is fully filled cannot?

I am glad that the point regarding batts vs PIR insulation has been raised. I have just calculated that I need 252m2 of insulation. If I cost this up for 90mm T&G PIR, it's an eye watering ? 5.7k (£22.50 / m2) which is about 3k more than cavity batts. The architect has done the drawings with a 150mm cavity which will means that we could in theory go 140mm cavity batts? Our property is not sitting high on a hill and is not very exposed to the elements. The top part of the house is also timber clad. Unless there is any real benefit to having PIR, I am considering changing to 140mm with a 10mm gap, or would people just suggest go full fill?

Given the cost of adding a UFH loop into the slab is going to minimal in the grand scheme of things, I think that is what I am going to do. Will be a perfect man cave for tinkering away during the dark and dreary 5 months of the year.

That's a fair point.

Sorry. TA (technical architect)

One of the requirements for our build is that I want a garage that is not cold and damp. As a result the TA has specified cavity walls as per the main house, 150mm celotex floor insulation and 150mm Kingspan TR27 roof insulation. This obviously comes at a cost and I am wondering whether it is overkill and I could reduce the floor insulation and also the roof insulation a bit. There is no door connecting the garage to the house. The garage will be my workshop and gym so having something that is not Baltic during the winter months is the main criteria. I am also thinking of putting a radiator in too.

Thanks all. I am planning on working with a local steel fabricator for the steel aspects and will manufacture the treads myself. Fortunately, I can manufacture the treads as I baulk at the £200 / tread that people on eBay are charging. One option would be to have steel rods for the balustrade, which are threaded and connect each end of the treads to a steel beam in the ceiling.

We are planning on having a floating staircase and the TA has not made any mention in the drawings to BC. I assume it will require a SE to see what make up the wall which the treads will be mounted to, needs to be. Just not sure whether a single skin 7N block wall would suffice or even a single skin brick wall. I want the stairs cantilevered from the wall as opposed to having a single central spine below the treads. Has anyone installed such a staircase and if so, how was the mounting wall constructed?

That is a joke. If I am correct, does that mean you have to reapply for the permit. If not that, I think it causes existing permit holders a headache?

There is no problem. The rules state 'within' and ancient woodland. My drainage field is 43m away from the woodland. I just misread and thought the rules meant that you could not have a drainage field within 50m of an ancient woodland. Another EA document, words the statement with better clarity.

I need to learn to read!! I have just given myself a great deal of stress and time completing the EA permit form. The Rules state Rule 18: make sure the discharge point is not in or near protected sites You cannot meet the general binding rules if the discharge will be in an ancient woodland or in or within 50 metres of any: special areas of conservation special protection areas Ramsar wetland sites biological sites of special scientific interest (SSSI) It states in an ancient woodland, not within 50 metres of an ancient woodland.

Can I ask what the associated charge is. ChatGpt is telling me it is the region of 2-3k for the permit?

We are unfortunately 42m downhill for an ancient woodland, GBR state it has to be 50m. Unfortunately, I cannot move the field so not sure what the alternative is.

So having decided that I should apply for a **** EA discharge permit, they have asked where is the nearest sewage connection point to the property and also want a reference. Southern Water use digdat and I purchased a utility search from them before I purchased the land. But as expected, there is no foul water services. From what I can see digdat only provide a search within a given vicinity of your search location and they don't provide a search for something that is probably 2 miles away. Southern Water won't provide the info, but say I can travel to their office in Worthing (2 hour drive) are the clowns for real? Anyone else know how I can obtain "National grid reference (NGR) for the nearest sewer system." Why don't they just allow me to put "> 30 metres, see attached digdat asset map." We haven't even started and I have had enough. At leas the build will be more in my control.

Thanks. I was unaware of this and thought it just tricked out as new effluent entered the tank.

Our tech architect has specified a single downpipe for the 17m long roof. I am just worried that over a 17m run it will be too low and the water will come off the roof and miss the guttering. I did search online for recommended fall, but my confidence in the internet was dashed when I read the below recommendation 🤣 " The ‘fall’ is the measurement by which the gutter drops to allow water to drain towards the outlet downpipes. Many plumbers guidelines recommend a ratio of around 1:500 (which is roughly 20mm for every 5m of guttering). But it does depend upon the pitch and size of the roof above your guttering. "

I wanted to ask whether there are any merits in having a collection chamber after the sewage treatment plant, which collects and then periodically pumps the contents into the drainage field pipes quickly so that the waste water in dispersed around all of the perforated pipe. Our initial plan was to simply allow the waste water from the STP to drain as and when it is required. I know some STP systems do exactly this and others Graf do not. The logic apparently, is that by pumping a large volume you will utilise all of the perforated pipe, where as, allowing it to trickle out, means that only the early section of the field is used. Obviously, as time moves on the early section of the field will probably slowly start to silt up and the water will naturally travel further into the field. So my reasoning on this one, is that overtime the net result is the same and the field would have the same lifespan. Logic correct or flawed?

Sorry to keep labouring the point on whether to go ASHP (heating / cooling mode) with UFH downstairs and fan coil units upstairs or to just go ASHP (heating only mode) with UFH downstairs and separate ducted AC system for heating / cooling bedrooms upstairs. We have a 4 bedroom 200m2 house and I just want to know what the extra cost is going to be. Heat loss calcs are coming in at < 3kw with -5c outside and 20c inside. Has anyone got any costings as to what the difference in cost is likely to be, between the two systems?

Our mortgage offer and Protek warranty both state that the house build has to be completed in two years. Our initial plan before we do anything else, is to get out of our rented accommodation and into a static caravan on site. But to do this, we need to install the drainage field and approved sewage treatment plant. This I assume will mean that we have commenced development and the 2 year clock will start ticking. We do have the funds sets aside to enable us to do this without us needing to draw on the funds. I am just not sure whether Protek need to be involved regarding the drainage field. We are basically trying to hold off from using the mortgage and starting the clock ticking until we are actually ready to really get going. Basically, once we are living on site, I don't care if we don't actually start building until next Spring. We also would prefer not to have a timescale to get completed, as we want to use our monthly wages and do a huge amount ourselves. If it takes 3 years and we have not had to borrow much money, then that is much better than completing in 2 years, but being mortgaged up to the eyeballs.

@Gus Potter I'm not sure of the relevance of your post. I am not interested in whether these providers make money or not. All of the policies will have been derived via an actuary and if they get the model wrong, well, that's just business. I am more interested which option is going to be the less painful. LABC inspection or a private one associated with Protek. The last thing I want, is to build according to building regs and then discover Protek have their own set of additional regs which I am unaware of. I assume that when you submit your drawings to Protek (I assume you do), they will tell you upfront whether they want things done differently to standard building regs?

Does that mean that there are a whole additional set of regulations on top of those mandated by building control?

Can anyone provide advice here. I've been told that even if I use LABC for sign off, I still have to pay the technical audit fee and have an independent inspector perform said audit. So I am now thinking why you'd go down that route. I am concerned about the private route as some of the stories on here seem to suggest they can be real sticklers. Appreciate any pointers. Before anyone tells me to not bother with the SW, unfortunately, it's a condition of our self build mortgage and they only have a handful of suppliers on their preferred list.

Brilliant. I am beginning to think that this is the best approach.