One step back, err... no steps forward

Message left on the answerphone from the Council that our pre-application has now been allocated and the officer will try to 'get around to it' in the next couple of weeks and see the site.  This is despite the fact that two other planning officers are already slightly familiar with our site.  Frustrating.

Also cancelled next month's service isolations for the time being and have a man in from a letting agency later in the week to see its letting potential versus how much we'd need to throw at it to make it habitable.  

All quiet on the self-building front

Hmm...

Things getting somewhat bogged down as summer moves into autumn.  Legal advice, for a variety of reasons outside the scope of these posts, is to mothball the project for the foreseeable future, although our inclination is to at least get plans drawn up if not demolish.

Ofgem have confirmed that, whilst we can put solar PVs on the current bungalow, we cannot refit them to any replacement dwelling on still qualify for the FITs.  So that the 'making money whilst mothballing' plan sunk.

And the Council have gone over their 28-day deadline for responding to our pre-application and failed to give me an indication of when they might respond.

Off later to try to turn the apple harvest into cider.  Could have a lot of vinegar come Christmas...

Turn your back for a moment and... nothing happens

Back from a fortnight's holiday having set a number of plates spinning in the hope of finding some answers on our return.

Firstly, the pre-application to the Council designed to identify the sticking points in our desired outline design.  Still in a pile of post apparently, not even allocated a number on the system.  I was told that the Council has to respond within 28 days of receipt, but it may be later than that.  When I asked what happens if the service standard of 28 days isn't met, what sanction is there to guarantee service levels as promised, I may as well have tried to discuss absolute versus relative systems of morality...

Nothing's appeared from Ty-afal as regards seeing one of their airtight, heating-free houses.  Thought given we'd dragged the managing director over from Wales (slight exaggeration - he was in Oxford anyway) he may have followed up with an e-mail.  But no...

And the Energy Savings Trust's promise to clarify the issue over solar PV panels and whether they can be commissioned, de-commissioned, and then re-commissioned on a new house at the same address hasn't happened (they're bombarding me with e-mail surveys for me to tell them how well they did, though, like some rampant floppy-eared puppy, eager to please despite having pee'd on your carpet), so I've written direct to Ofgem, even though Ofgem state up front they don't deal with consumer queries.

Back to usual, then.

Optimistic or merely hopeful?

Two good meetings yesterday, firstly with Ty-afal, then with Knott the architect.  Ty-afal's build technique sounded convincing with timber frame made airtight and layers of insulation applied, underfloor heating set directly into the slab and no heating upstairs because its not needed (!), but I hope when we were talking a ballpark figure of £1k per square metre that was a total build price.  The goalposts got shifted by counsel against SIPs (which I was getting, and still am, quite keen on) on the grounds that nobody knows how they're going to perform over time.  We've asked for a visit to a Ty-afal-built house which should be a future date for the diary.

Knott has his own views on SIPs and timber frame, whilst not being particularly pro- or anti- (apart from sound travelling too easily around timber frame houses) he couldn't see why we wouldn't want to lay a great big slab of concrete down and build out of block with insulation applied to the outside. 

We went through our briefing pack whilst the Girl drew and coloured and the Boy fidgeted.  We discussed some of the key requirements, issues over massing, and the fact that the budget we quoted wouldn't stretch to what we're proposing.  I'm not sure whether we got the message across that we don't just want to be able to call the house 'architect designed', but that it should be obvious when you drive up to it and walk into it.  We want something that's better and different from the norm.  So when Knott at one stage tested how we felt if we had a design with four bedrooms, one at each corner, on the top floor rather than the double height space and galleried games area that I'd sketched I felt like saying that I didn't really need an architect to deliver that.

Next step is for me to put my plans into the Council as a pre-application to inform Knott's thinking.  At the moment I'm yet to see the difference between seven years professional training and a £30 software package, but I'm keeping an open mind.  The good lady wife remains optimistic, whereas I merely remain hopeful - I think there's a subtle difference.

That doesn't sound very sustainable...

For reasons that I won't go into, but revolve around tax and the early encashment of investments, it may be prudent to put the build on ice for the foreseeable future.  With that scenario in mind I called the Energy Savings Trust as I have a plan B of putting solar PV on the roof of the existing house, gaining the existing high rate of feed in tariff (FIT), removing and storing them panels when it's demolished, then putting them on the new house when it's eventually built.

My queries were simple, 'yes' or 'no' ones:

• can you get FITs by fitting solar PV to a vacant residential property?
• can I still get the original rate of FIT if I refit the panels to a property at the same address having demolished and rebuilt

Carly (let's name her) was one of those people who find it hard to deal with questions in the abstract, but when I gave her some modicum of background she cried 'Oh, I can't give you any tax advice!'.  No, I'm not asking you to, you asked me for context.  Please just answer the questions, yes or no...

Not sure I got any kind of answer to either question.  To the first one she just went off on a tangent, firstly wanting to send me general information about FITs (read it, please don't send more); then talking through the sense of putting panels on a vacant property given the energy sold back is deemed (yes, but if its vacant for two years out of twenty-five the return is still worth it if I can get the original rate).  I suppose by implication that meant that it was allowed.

As regards the second, trickier question, all she could tell me was that would be fine with an extension or renovation.  But it's not.  Oh, yes, Carly said, but if it were an extension or renovation...  Trust me, it won't be.  The assumption is, she said, that any new build would have a new solar PV array.  So, I said, I'm expected to throw away the two- or three-year old array and buy a new one - that doesn't sound very sustainable.

She's passing the query up the line where I'll get an email response within five days.  Given this may turn out to be a crucial answer in a few years time if I do have a fight about the FIT rate I asked for a proper written response and said I was happy to write in, setting out the exact question to ensure there are no misunderstandings.  Oh no, she said, we don't even send out brochures. 

So, given I can't write in with the exact query, I fear a slightly misdirected response to a slightly misunderstood query reliant on Carly's communication of it, probably from a do-not-reply email address.  At which point I'll have to repeat the query and they'll have to repeat the work.  All together now: that doesn't sound very sustainable.

Signed, (un)sealed, delivered

The briefing pack was delivered to Knott, the architect, on Thursday by hand, partly because we were passing, and partly because the example pictures cut out from magazines (general themes: white render, glazed gable ends) was too big for any envelope we had easily to hand.  (Check back in a year and see how much we've compromised, folks!):

Statement of Requirements

Planning considerations

We have already had pre-application discussions with the Council.  Part of those discussions was the exploration of whether putting more than one property on the site would be possible.  Following those discussions we have decided to restrict ourselves to replacing the current bungalow with a single replacement dwelling.

The Council have indicated that:

·         A two-storey replacement dwelling may be acceptable, although consideration will need to be taken of the ridge heights of neighbouring properties;

·         It may be possible to bring the building line forward slightly given the differing building lines of neighbouring properties;

·         They would not welcome an integral garage forward of the face of the house;

·         One of their key considerations would be whether neighbouring bungalows are overlooked at the rear.  Clearly, this is negated if the house only extends as far back as its neighbours; the further the house projects at the rear the more of an issue this could be.

In other words, any design should more-or-less use the current length of the footprint, with the possibility of about a further metre or so front and back.

Overall

We require a 5-bed, preferably two-, but possibly one-and-a-half-storey (if required by planning) house.  Our working budget, including fees and demolition costs, is £240k.

For planning purposes it would help if the plans showed only 4 bedrooms with an additional room that could be used as a bedroom.   The following rooms are essential except where marked as desirable:

Downstairs

·         Garage - single

·         Large open-plan kitchen/diner/family area at rear with full-width bi-fold doors to garden.  The space should also make best use of the available light.  There should be enough space for a six-seat dining table and a three seater sofa, as well as in the kitchen:

o   at least 10m of worktop, including 1 and ½ bowl sink, with storage below and above, part of which should be a breakfast bar/island unit with seating for 3-4 on stools

o   space for a 1000mm range cooker with extractor hood plus a dishwasher

·        Either a (preferably) separate living room, or an area of the open-plan space that could be closed off from noise and cooking smells.  There should be wood burner in both the living room and the open plan area, preferably the same wood burner accessible from both rooms (not sure if such a thing exists?!) 

·         Study (does not need to be large, at least 2m x 2m, but a separate room would be preferable to a dedicated space)

·         Cloakroom with toilet and basin, not necessarily bigger than this though if  possible space for hanging coats would be desirable

·         Utility room.  There should be enough ‘utility space’ for food storage/larder, laundry, and plant associated with the house – heat pump (see below), rainwater harvesting pump, underfloor heating controls, etc.  Whether that is delivered in a single space, or in separate spaces is an open question.  A laundry chute from upstairs to downstairs is also desirable, but we imagine that this would cause more problems (e.g. sound travelling from below) than it would solve.

Upstairs

·         Master bedroom with en suite or wet room (1700mm bath, shower, WC, basin), and a decent amount of storage.  Double, but does not necessarily need to unusually large.  We do not require a separate dressing area.  Also a balcony would be desirable so we envisage this at the rear of the property.

·         Bedroom 2; reasonable sized double with en suite (shower, WC, basin) and adequate storage

·         Bedroom 3, reasonable sized double with adequate storage

·         Bedroom 4, reasonable sized double with adequate storage

·         Family bathroom – 1700mm bath, walk-in shower, WC, basin

·        Playroom/games room and/or gym/exercise room – enough space to accommodate a Concept 2 indoor rower (length 3m) plus yoga/pilates comfortably.  (Assume this room could double as a fifth bedroom). This room would need to be enclosed because of the noise from the rowing machine. In which case there may be some difficulty calling it a fifth bedroom if for planning purposes we only wish to declare four bedrooms – if the room were off the master bedroom this would not be a problem

·         Sauna (desirable)

·         Airing cupboard, probably with hot water tank

·         Loft

Whilst hard to quantify or prescribe, we would also like the house to show some kind of ‘wow factor’ in the design to make the best use of light and space.

Build & materials

We envisage the house being of either timber frame, or SIPs construction, with blockwork & render walls, or part-brick, part-blockwork & render if required by the planners.

Other building materials we wish to incorporate:

·         TATA Colourcoat Urban roof & soffit details

·         aluminium clad timber double-glazed windows/doors to garden (Sunfold Systems doors or similar)

·         slate or tile flooring in kitchen

·         bamboo flooring elsewhere downstairs, in bathrooms, and possibly in other upstairs rooms as well

·         Lindab guttering & downpipes or similar

Heating & power; and environmental impact & green technologies

The environmental impact of the house is an important consideration for us, particularly regarding long-term running costs and we are prepared to invest in proven and reasonably established technologies to achieve this.  The house should aim to achieve an EPC rating of A, but we are not necessarily trying to achieve PassivHaus levels unless obviously affordable.

However, first and foremost, the house should be well insulated and air-tight.

Secondly, the house should have at least a 4kW solar PV array.  We are also considering solar water heating, but we are not wholly convinced by its return on investment.  However, given an unobstructed and almost perfectly south facing roof, solar water heating should be included in the design.

We have investigated the possibility of installing a ground source heat pump.  Although the advice we have been given is that installation of a ground source heat pump would not be unreasonable in our circumstances, given the proximity of a gas supply (and therefore probable exclusion from RHI payments) we remain unconvinced and the design should assume gas central heating.

We have also inherited a considerable amount of wood and therefore a wood burner is a requirement for both open plan space and living room.  If it is possible to use one wood burner for both rooms without negating the point of a closed-off living room, so much the better.  If possible, the wood burner should be integrated into the heating system of the house, e.g. by pre-heating water before it goes to the boiler, but the house should not be reliant on the wood burner for heat or domestic hot water.

The primary heating source for the house should be underfloor heating downstairs, with either underfloor heating or radiators upstairs.

Another requirement is a rainwater harvesting system, suggested tank size c.4000-6000 litres.

Bigging up the Indians

One of the myriad of barcodes I clicked on at the self-build centre at Swindon was for Tata Colorcoat Urban steel cladding.  All hail Tata for sending through samples of two large slivers of panel so that you can see how they fix together, plus samples of all the colours.  We're a little bit sold on it.  Not sure British Steel would have had customer service as good.  Not sure they would have had anything so innovative...

Meanwhile, our briefing for the architect is nearing finalisation.  I've had an email back from them saying that they expect to get a concept of a house together in a few weeks.  I really don't think it's that big a job - the site sets some of the constraints, the Council others, the budget more.  Work within that; plans within a few weeks, surely?

I said they're happy (or they say they're happy) for me to send them my plans.  It took me a while to spot, but having been using an American architectural software package I'd labeled the floors first and second - doh!  I've also sent the plans off to two manufacturers of structural insulated panels (SIPs) to see what kind of ballpark a SIPs house would be in, cost-wise.  A bit naughty, but I'm inclined to send them to the Council as a pre-application enquiry as well.

My thinking has moved on from timber frame to SIPs, although we've finally arranged a meeting with the Ty-Afal man.  Maybe I've been taken in by the numerous videos on Youtube of houses going up in a week.  I watched some with a family friend who builds mansions for footballers up north who wasn't convinced that they were as structural as the name suggests.  I know the theory - they work like I-beams, stronger than the equivalent in wood, etc., etc., but I'm slightly wary myself.  Be interesting to hear what the architects have to say about it all.