Appeal allowed!

[Daniel H]

In case anyone is interested, we had some good news today.

 

To recap: the plot is a disused commercial building, in a village centre, in a Conservation Area, and in a National Park. It's directly overlooked by the neighbours who are on higher ground.

 

There were two reasons for refusal - the impact on the Conservation Area and the impact on the neighbours.

 

We'd offered a detailed study of the local area and showed how our design responded to it. The Inspector agreed with us.

 

But the Inspector agreed with the neighbours that there would be a negative impact on them.

 

He weighed it on the opportunity to redevelop a derelict site, the need for housing and the environmental credentials (EPC B in this case).

 

So that's the end of that chapter. Start = 11 July, site visit = 9 October, decision = 5 February.

 

Thanks for the moral and technical support from this group, and I'm happy to share more details if anyone needs them.

 

Now the actual work begins!

[ProDave]

Well done.  But why only aim for an EPC B.  Aim higher, not hard to get an A.

[Daniel H]

We might do - it's just based on our current SAP. We're at 86. Apparently, according to our consultant, it'll be £4,000 - £6,000 (saving £75/yr) to get one more point to get to 87 or to to get to A (102) it'll cost £15,000 - £25,000 (saving £652/yr). So taking the lower numbers break even conservatively in 53 years for one extra point, or 23 years to get to 102 (without factoring in the cast of the debt). I care a lot about the environment (I work tackling climate change), but I'm not sure why I'd bother doing that...! But we'll see where we get to now we can move to Stage 4.

[ProDave]

Don't believe those figures.  Just what is he suggesting that costs £4000 to get just 1 SAP point.

 

I suspect your best bang for your buck improvement would be solar PV, very cheap now, and if you can't have it on your roof due to conservation area, ground mount it.

 

The as built result will largely depend on details, like your actual air tightness test.  That is mostly down to detail, not cost.  How much will you be doing yourself?  If you are doing a lot, you can take the time to get it right at little cost.

[SteamyTea]

5 minutes ago, Daniel H said:

consultant

There is you problem, it will cost you nothing on here to ask questions.

[Daniel H]

Just now, SteamyTea said:

There is you problem, it will cost you nothing on here to ask questions.

 

Well, incoming in that case! Thanks - looking forward, and challenge accepted!

[SteamyTea]

2 minutes ago, Daniel H said:

challenge accepted

First thing to make sure is correct is your CIL entitlement.

[Daniel H]

3 minutes ago, ProDave said:

The as built result will largely depend on details, like your actual air tightness test.  That is mostly down to detail, not cost.  How much will you be doing yourself?  If you are doing a lot, you can take the time to get it right at little cost.

 

You're absolutely right - the air tightness is surely a major opportunity here (there's a limit to the solar we can install) and attention to that and building it into the tender process will be important. We haven't quite decided how much to do ourselves, but focusing on a few critical points is likely to get the best payoff, I suspect. I will start a thread in due course on the environmental aspects and read up on the rest of the forum for some of expertise from the community.

[Daniel H]

2 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

First thing to make sure is correct is your CIL entitlement.

 

I have an email from the planning department saying they don't operate CIL. But I will double check - that was a year ago. 

 

Any other 'must dos' welcome!

[Big Jimbo]

20 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

First thing to make sure is correct is your CIL entitlement.

No. Thats the second thing to do. The first is to get wrecked drinking Champagne.

[saveasteading]

2 hours ago, Daniel H said:

to get one more point

What is the work or spec change suggested?

Does it make sense that this is an improvement, or is it a quirk of the program?

 

I'm out of touch now, but we used to have the epc assessment program and we played with it, finding all sots of inconsistencies. Also, having met the people who put it together it was clear that they followed fashions rather than reality, and didn't know much about construction.

 

The cheapest way to get a better result is quality control throughout, and a very thorough sealing of vents before the air test.  The tester may say that they do smoke tests and then pressurise gain, but more likely they want in and out asap.

The best way to get genuine results as performance  is quality control and common sense over theory. 

[Nickfromwales]

22 hours ago, Daniel H said:

 

You're absolutely right - the air tightness is surely a major opportunity here (there's a limit to the solar we can install) and attention to that and building it into the tender process will be important. We haven't quite decided how much to do ourselves, but focusing on a few critical points is likely to get the best payoff, I suspect. I will start a thread in due course on the environmental aspects and read up on the rest of the forum for some of expertise from the community.

Look closely at AeroBarrier for getting the airtightness dialled in. If this is a refurb of an existing structure then this can offset a lot of time, labour, and expensive products in one swoop.

 

Just had them on site on a masonry refurb and got a high 0.1 ACH, so deemed a rock solid 0.2. Damn them for not having two decimal places on their software!?! 😤

 

Oh, and congrats. 🥳 

[Daniel H]

On 05/02/2026 at 16:39, saveasteading said:

Does it make sense that this is an improvement, or is it a quirk of the program?

I reckon likely to be a quirk - getting points for various things and the program spits out the score. I reckon we'll make A with some sensible investments, and even if it's not A, it'll be super efficient.

[ADLIan]

On 05/02/2026 at 13:46, Daniel H said:

We might do - it's just based on our current SAP. We're at 86. Apparently, according to our consultant, it'll be £4,000 - £6,000 (saving £75/yr) to get one more point to get to 87 or to to get to A (102) it'll cost £15,000 - £25,000 (saving £652/yr). So taking the lower numbers break even conservatively in 53 years for one extra point, or 23 years to get to 102 (without factoring in the cast of the debt). I care a lot about the environment (I work tackling climate change), but I'm not sure why I'd bother doing that...! But we'll see where we get to now we can move to Stage 4.

Those numbers look to be the standard recommendations the SAP software generates and they are absolute rubbish - do you have a copy of the SAP report you could post? A good consultant should have the knowledge of construction technology,  sensitivities of the SAP calculation and suitable cost effective upgrades.