K78

That is something I hadn't considered. Their vertigo tile is the only tile specifically for vertical installation and not roof installation. Some of their cheaper tiles can be used for both. I wonder if the Vertigo tiles have a coating to prevent this, similar to the fibre cement "wood" cladding? There seems to be a different finish on the roof and wall tiles in the last pic of my previous post. Ive just sent a email to ask as I'm really interested in this product.

I think so too. The fixing brackets for the battens are a good idea. The tiles are pre drilled for easy fixing and work out at £13m2. I've not priced the brackets. I was looking at cladding rather than insulation when I stumbled across them. I love the finish. I think it looks really good. Obviously doesn't need treating either. Im hoping I won't be a issue with planning. There are many new schools and apartment blocks locally with some really garish cladding.

I'm not a fan of rendered ewi for a number of reasons. Price, ages badly (green, "leopard spots") etc. I looked at using battens and cladding but was but off due to the depth of battens that are required. Ive been looking at cheaper cladding options and stumbled across this. The brackets that the battens attach to are a simple, smart solution.

I looked at sips in detail and contributed to the ebuild thread. That thread well and truly put me off at the time. They do have some benefits though and I've been thinking about them again recently. Timberframe quotes seem to have increased significantly in the last few years, so the price gap has narrowed. My house will also have a open roof space and open plan layout on the upper floor. Which makes sips and attractive option.

I'm thinking that if the owner has no interest in it (which I suspect). And has not got free funds to erect a fence to secure it. They might actually want rid of the headache? it really does need the rubbish clearing out and securing.

I'm not sure it's worth £5k in its current state. You really would need a machete and a decent pair of boots to even attempt walking through it. It gets steeper the deeper you walk into it. There is not a single clearing. It's very dense. I was was thinking of offering to pay for a fence to secure their garden, a fence to secure the land from the road (est £2-3k) and pay the legal fees? The surveyor I spoke to said he thought that was too much. But I'd be happier with the area secure. Id hate to make an offer and offend them. Id rather just ask permission to cut across and tiny piece of their land with my drain. But it I know once I move in I won't be putting up with rubbish being tipped next to my house and kids drinking beer. Which could lead to disputes.

I can see your point. But I would be happy too if it meant I could purchase at a fair price for what it is. Its really isn't economically viable to even consider building on. Maybe a small log cabin.

I'm guessing they would struggle as much as me to come up with a value. I was thinking if I get a idea of a fair value, then I could make a proposal. It would cost a fair amount just to fence off the land from the road and garden. Its currently not safe or secure. Im sure it's a concern to the owners.

I can see how it might look that way but it's completely different. Its a steep gradient and you can't even walk through it due to the trees. My site was a well maintained, split level garden when i purchased it. Ive basically excavated a garage base and 3 drystone terraces. That has cost a small fortune is muck away. A cost I massively underestimated. To excavate the area would involve 1000's of tons of muck away and a 5m retaining wall. Not to mention all the trees and roots. It really isn't viable in the opinion of anyone who's looked at it. It wouldn't be safe for kids or dogs to play in the rear garden, as it is just a steep slope towards a busy road. Id be happy if they develop it, as it would be better than it is in its current state. Or even just fenced it off with chain link fencing. It's a mess of various rubbish and beer cans. I also bought my site 7 years ago. If they had that idea I think they would have explored it already. They have recently applied to build a small house in place of their garage. I'd be happy to have it signed into a contract that I never plan to build on it. I'm sure the owner wouldn't be concerned as it wouldn't make financial sense.

My neighbours have a unused (for many years),overgrown, heavily littered strip of land at the back of their garden. Their house and garden are elevated 5-6m from the main road. And the overgrown area steeply slopes down to a small dry stone wall next to the road. I was going to ask their permission to cut across a small area of this land to make my sewer connection easier (see below pic). As I have a 2m reinforced concrete, stone faced wall separating me from the main road. Then I started thinking about making an offer for the unused land (or part of it). It has always bothered me that it is open and used for tipping. It's also a security risk. I'm aware they have been broken into more than once. My problem is arriving at a value. I've asked the opinion of a surveyor, BCO, my ground workers and a SE (he was on site so I thought I might as well ask his opinion). And they all said the same thing. It would cost more to fence off and landscape than it is actually worth. The surveyor said something along the lines of "if they could have feasibly done anything with it they would of. It would cost more to develop as a site than it would be worth. You can't value it as garden or grazing land because it isn't" I know it would cost well into 5 figures to make it into a garden but I have no intention of doing so. I like the wooded area next to my plot. I just want it to be more secure, litter free, generally tidied up and like I said. It would make my sewer connection easier. The land presently has no use other than to fly tippers and local kids. It can not be used for access hence their unusual driveway access between two houses (yellow arrows). My proposed highlighted in grey and the strip of land is highlighted in green. Here are a few poor phone pics. The last one is the most recent. The others are over a year old. I would appreciate any advice or opinions on the land value and how to approach my neighbours. The last thing I want to do is offend them. Thanks

A lot of passive aggression on this site as well as passive houses. Sensus is making some valid points and obviously has more experience than most on here. Its good to look at positive and negative aspects of passive houses. They're not perfect.

This was what I thought too. I looked at a King post wall using RSJ's and concrete panels and was told the same. 2 thirds underground. The SE said that wouldn't be the case with my ground. He described it as "glacial mud rock". The geotechnical engineer who visited the site a few weeks ago said it was a "glacial river bed". He suggested a geotech mesh rather than a wall. I excavated the bank nearly 3 years ago and it hasn't moved.

Really? Am I describing them wrong? Ive seem them used numerous times? http://ivorking.co.uk/services-view/permanent-retaining-walls/

Wouldn't even give a price over the phone. Never a good sign in my experience. Asked me to send my plans over. Im on a tight budget. I'd end up with an expensive pile of ashes

I wish I could afford the scorched/charred cladding from here http://www.shousugiban.co.uk/burnt_larch_cladding.php

I met a SE on site this morning to discuss the foundations for my house and retaining wall. While we were discussing the wall, he asked me if I'd considered sheet piling. This was the one option I haven't looked at because I was under the impression it was very expensive. He said this was not the case and if anything they are a quick cheap solution. Has anyone ever used sheet piles? Thanks

I love black timber cladding. Ive been looking into different options and there are a lot to choose from. Products seem very similar and are difficult to compare.

I think sensus has made some excellent points and is obviously very experienced in this matter. The points he makes around MVHR have always been a concern for me. I always wondered how they could adequately serve a house without multiple vents and a high flow rate. A quick google of "passive house problems" and "passive house health risks" brings up a lot. Summer over heating seems to be a big issue with many passive developments in the uk. Apparently heat builds up faster than ventilation can remove it leading to 25C+ temperatures for days, even weeks at a time.

I remember the thread. It sounds like a typical surveyors excuse to a home owner. And a bad one at that. It's crazy to say that the "Eco" angle puts anyone off these days. If anything "Eco" carries a huge premium. What puts many brits off is the thought of a timber frame with timber cladding. I'm considering it and my parents and many friends think it's odd at best. Even though its the buyer or builder who usually pays for the survey, the valuation is usually to satisfy the mortgage lender.

@jack I'm pretty sure the reason for Jeremys property being downvalued by a surveyor, would have been because it's timberframe with timber cladding. I managed a Halifax agency for 10 years. I was constantly dealing with survey retentions and problems. Many surveyors want to pass responsibility of any risk to another party. Hence the reason 99% of surveys recommend damp and timber inspections in houses with no evidence of damp. If they come across a house without a block skin many of the "old school" surveyors just don't like them. They can be quite derogatory with their opinions in my experience. They also base their valuations on comparable evidence (recently sold local houses). So "non standard" builds cause them a headache. Their lives are easier if everyone just sticks to building cavity walled houses, hence they don't encourage anything else

Many surveyors will down value a property if it isn't conventional uk construction. Such as timber frame with timber cladding. If if a passive house is built with from brick and block with a cavity, I doubt it would be a issue. I was was talking to a developer who has just built and sold 4 detached timberframe houses clad with render board. He said every surveyor made a initial negative comment about the render board finish, but weren't concerned once he mentioned they had NHBC guarantees. I personally hate NHBC. But for people who think they might have to sell in the near future, they are probably worth it.

The more I think about it. The more I think a passive house wouldn't suit me. I like wood burning stoves, have dogs and plan and to have aquariums again. My house design also has 2 large window/doors opening onto a balcony, so solar gain is also an issue. My house will still be well insulated. Just not to the extent of most on this forum.

I've read a lot about the benefits of passive house design over the past few years on ebuild and other forums, but not much on any negatives. My biggest concerns with passive house design have always been around air quality and internal temperature. I really struggle in stuffy environments. I even open windows in winter. I was researching the above and stumbled across this. http://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:88fd72b2-f7ab-45ea-a403-ce367801cf3f/datastream/OBJ/download

I priced concrete block with ewi and cavity. Cavity is by far and away the cheapest. You will also have less problems if you sell. EWI is ridiculously expensive in the uk and the render systems have a lot of issues IMO.

Has anyone ever used a reclamation yard/company to source insulation? I was discussing timberframe with a friend who is a joiner last night. I told him I liked timberframe as I could do a lot more work myself. Such as installing insulation. He mentioned kingspan insulation boards, which I wasn't planning on using due to cost. He told me of a local reclamation company who sell kingspan "at a fraction" of what it costs new. My main concern is what condition it arrives in and how much is actually usable.