flanagaj

Here is the topo survey that was done, lots of elevation points, but I cannot see the datum point which the ridge height / FFL is based off.

Sorry. That wasn't my post.

The ridge height in the previously granted PP on our site and our revised planning application both have a ridge height of 6.4m, but not a single drawing states what the 6.4m height is taken from. Is it taken as 6.4m from the road frontage, eg where your driveway starts from the highway?

Where did I say I recorded the time for 300mm to drain? The image I posted above has three pieces of tape and arrows. I filled up to the top arrow and waited for it to reach the second arrow (75mm drop) then I started my stopwatch and recorded until it reached the second piece of tape (150mm) then stopped my stopwatch.

That's not quite true, as it dictates what m2 your leach field needs to be. Having wildly varying values does make it tricky calculating it.

That's the part that was missing from a lot of the 'How to ..." articles. I assume you have to perform the fill and test at the same time each day, otherwise, you will get different readings. So how long do you leave between the overnight fill and the test (in hours) as that too will influence the results. It all seems rather hit and miss. A core sample sent away for analysis would be a far better option.

Ruling out the chalk hole as that was still draining far too quickly even today after 5 fills, the soil / flint hole readings are as follows. These are as follows. 2nd May 1800hrs - Filled hole and let drain overnight 3rd May 2 tests 1530 hrs : 13 minutes 1800 hrs : 19 minutes 4th May 2 tests 1200 hrs : 23m 35s 1529 hrs : 30m 48s As you can see. The readings differ wildly and it's left me somewhat confused. I am going to go up tomorrow and do another 3 readings of the hole. The hole now appears to have a layer of silt at the bottom. This is going to skew the readings as by it's very nature a silted hole will not be as porous. Should the silt layer be removed before each test?

Sorry for my confusion on terminology. We are installing a Graf package treatment plant. I have read that document so am fully aware of the rules. My question simply to do with a fast percolation reading.

I did fill the holes with water and let them drain away. I am going back this morning to repeat the tests. The very dry spell has not helped matters though. We are using a Graf tank which is the primary treatment not secondary. I thought the drainage field was the secondary treatment?

Can I ask what the solution was? One option I have read is to slow the permeability by used a layer of compacted builders sand. Keen to understand, as without a DF, our only other option is a septic tank and that is not going to fly.

I was going to speak with a local company that installs the treatment plants, but I suspect they won't be interested as they are not getting the commission.

Here is the method I used. Was all done correctly.

Admittedly it has been very dry, but I dug to holes 1m down and then a 300 * 300mm square. One of the pits was into chalk bedrock and the other was soil and very heavy flint. I saturated both holes last night and then returned this afternoon to carry out a first test as 3pm and then another at 6pm. The results are below Chalk hole : Reading 1 (342 sec) Vp = 2,3 Reading 2 (462 sec) Vp = 3.08 Flint / Soil Reading 1 (780 sec) Vp = 5.2 Reading 2 (1140 sec) Vp = 7.6 So these readings are bad news, but I am struggling to understand how neighbours on both sides have treatment plants and leech fields. Anyone have any advice here. I obviously need to raise the height of the field so that the invert is not near the chalk bedrock. It states that it cannot be < 15 for it to be suitable.

I don't think you can. Given 2 of the letters were basically templated from the main objector it doesn't make sense to go to the committee. Just hoping it's not a ruse and they know a number of the counsellors.

Clever neighbour managed to get 3 other NIMBYS to object, and reach the committee threshold of 4 objections.

The objections were only from locals. Comments such as "It's an eyesore", "it's too close to the road" The later is interesting, as it's the same footprint as the previous grant that they were all ok with 😂 All other consultees had no objections.

Aside from being told "No objection in principle" We haven't had any information from the Case Officer in relation to our planning application. Given that we are off to committee mid May, I am crossing my fingers that it's recommended for approval and that we wouldn't be going to committee if the planners were refusing it? Our relationship with the architects has soured slightly and they seem to have gone completely off the boil, so not sure about attending the committee hearing. The objections from the neighbours were very much personal and not planning policy related, so unsure whether we need to spend money getting a planning consultant to attend. Thoughts?

😂

I am somewhat confused regarding what has been proposed for the tree that is to remain on site. The diagram is below and the shaded purple area is where there used to be a concrete slab. I used an excavator last November to break all of that up. The tree survived and is in full bloom. The RPA has been calculated as 4.68 metres (see dotted circle on below diagram). But the Arboriculturalist has then stated the following CONSTRUCTION 13.7. All barrier fence and ground protection is to remain serviceable and in position for the duration of the development. No adjustments are to be made unless with the written agreement of the planning/arboricultural officer. 13.8. Temporary ground protection to be installed following removal of the building over the root area of tree 5 13.9. The project arboriculturalist will be on hand to provide arboricultural advice if it is needed. I assume that I only need to provide ground protection to the area within the 4.68m RPA zone? The reason I ask, is that I need to install a waste pipe down the side to the new drainage field.

The majority of them. One of them cannot even bare to look at us and turns his back to us, when he sees us driving down the lane 🤣

What about the GPS tracking devices, that alert you when the excavator is moved. You pay a monthly fee, but that is something I would do if I could leave it onsite before we have moved on it.

So SSEN have finally come back and quoted us £3500 to move the pole. This is obviously better than the original 25k quote, but it does stink a little as the pole really does look old and need replacing, plus once we have built the house they won't be able to get to the pole through our land to maintain it. Moving it to the boundary means that it's next to a paddock which will mean they can always access it. Suck it up or push back and argue that it's for their benefit?

As our site is not occupied and will not be until we have installed the treatment plant / drainage field / static caravan, I am struggling with how I could keep an excavator safe on site when nobody is there. The site is down a no through lane and away from prying eyes, but it is my main issue with buying one. For starters, I am not sure whether any self build policies will cover the excavator whilst on an unoccupied site? I was looking at the anti theft devices that clamp around the hydraulic shaft of the RAM. This stops the excavator from being moved. Yes, it could of course be lifted by a Hiab, but it becomes a bigger job then.

Thanks. That explains why I was told by the hire company that I could not use red diesel. Another reason to buy my own machine!

I’m thinking of getting counselling. The reach of a 1.9T Hitachi just isn’t quite enough for a 7 person Graf tank install. A 2.7T is quite a bit more and and also too big for the other tasks.