Mulberry View

I've not watched it yet, but that video looks like it'll be super helpful. Every aspect of getting a caravan craned over worries me. I've had a local crane company do a site visit and they're pretty happy, but it's still a worry and will cost around £2500-3000 to lift in and out. I would plan to insulate it all round, which will help with the rain noise? This is early in the thought process, but I'm more seeing that the idea has potential.

Ian, we're up in Norfolk. As great as it sounds, I imagine that's worth a bit? Not really thought about budget, but I am tuned into residual value, so if spending a bit more early on raises the chances of resale then that helps.

That caravan of yours sounds like just what we need. If only we can find one. I hear you on the shed too. I just feel that I can build something more sturdy and efficient than any caravan we can afford, but I have doubts hence asking!! Hehe. I could make the corner posts much heftier if I was to build.

Of course we all live in hope that we'll get our home built as quickly as possible, but I am a pessimist so would prefer to prepare for the worst. SWMBO would prefer we build something that had an onward use, but I can't see it. I'm comfortable with losing 'a few grand' on our living accommodation as we would prefer to do what we can to make the process as easy to endure as possible. I'm thinking of a stilted structure, built off 100x100 posts (probably around 12 of them). A 150mm thick subfloor which can be insulated. 100mm thick walls, filled with PIR and clad/roofed with simple corrugated roof sheets. The timberwork doesn't bother me, it's nothing compared to what I envisage in the house. I can pick up doors and windows from Gumtree (or a mismeasured window dealer). The interior would be ply-lined and painted. Internal walls would be a simple affair, roughly 2/3 towards an open-plan living/kitchen area the other 1/3 a bedroom and bathroom. We had expected to put a kitchen and bathroom in whatever caravan we buy, so that's pretty equal and by doing this we can plan the space to allow us to use our existing bed, cooker and fridge freezer (which might not fit in a static).

I can't offer any help on this, but am very interested in it. We have only just become aware of the ability to use harvested rainwater for flushing toilets and washing machines. Any practical views on doing this? Presumably some sort of pre-filter will be needed? I had expected ours would be much bigger than this, but we also want ours to provide water for our large garden.

Thanks for your input. If I was to go down the route of something other than a caravan, what are the planning implications? Let's say, for example, I build a timber structure of the same size and proportions of a caravan and am prepared to commit to a planning condition enforcing its removal once done... Or am I going to have to detail it fully on the application? It's very tucked away, it's unlikely to affect anyone.

We have no choice but to accept that our plot doesn't have the most straight-forward access due to a shared drive with a tight corner. The most we can get up the drive is a 7.5 tonner, certainly not a 30+ft Static Caravan. We've conceded to craning some things in and we are (kinda) at peace with that. Though it isn't entirely straight-forward. Then there's the thing about us wanting somewhere to live that's a bit better than a ropey old caravan. I know many endure it and I know we could (we've put up with worse), but we want to be comfortable so that we don't rush the build in our desperation to get out of the 'van. So, we had already decided that if we buy a caravan, we'll 'do it up', although I accept some will see that as a waste of money. We only need a simple space as there are only 2 of us, so I expect we'll knock some walls about to make the space easy and as pleasant as possible to live in. The reality is that we're likely to pay around £3000 (if we're lucky), for a caravan that will cost us around £1000-1500 to crane into place. Once there, we'll want to 'Winterise' it and tart it up a bit. That's if we're lucky enough that it doesn't turn out to be an absolute snotter. I can't get out of my head that for what we'll pay for this caravan and the risk involved, I could build a fairly simple timber building, we have the space after all. I could insulate it well and clad it with corrugated panels. We'll then be at the same point, with a bare shell, but potentially a better one. I feel as though the amount of time and money we'd spend kitting out this timber shell will be not much different to what we'd spend on a 'van. The only down side is that we won't be able to sell it afterwards, but a caravan would have to be craned out anyway, which might negate the pittance it will probably be worth anyway. Am I stark-raving mad?

Did they do any local ground-level searching (GPR?) or was that all off utility company plans? I've got the local Gas and Water company plans and they're next-to-useless, I'd already reached the assumption of the information they provided long ago.

Our plot is at the end of a small shared driveway. It's about 60m until you get to our plot and it is shared with 3 other houses (one of which we own). The driveway is old and in dire need of resurfacing, something we'll do once we finish our build, but for now we need to run a water pipe from the highway to our plot. All 3 existing properties are on mains gas, mains water and 2 of them have mains sewage and underground telephone cables. I know you can get a detector that'll find power, but is there any way to locate the gas and water pipes without digging? Or should I just contract this work and let it be someone elses problem?

...and this is the reason we're planning to use ICF. Bricklayers have been a major concern of mine and the very reason why I refuse to be bound to them. The exterior walls are the most substantial part of and planned build and that I would feel so out of control of if we didn't build using Timber or ICF.

Thanks everyone. Very helpful. While you're here, let me give you another scenario. Our plot is a subdivision and is off a shared privately owned driveway (not owned by us). Our mains water connection has to be made at the highway, so down the private drive. Once we have finished our build, we plan to orchestrate the resurfacing of the shared drive. The existing property was built in the 1950's and almost certainly has a lead water main and the water meter is in a weird place (10m inside next doors drive - 60m from the highway). The local water authority do a lead replacement service, so at the moment we're in discussion about what they'll replace. They want to go only to the highway boundary, but this leaves the 60m length of pipe from there to the meter in next doors drive as lead (which they probably laid years ago), which seems stupid to me. Now, I could lay a second pipe alongside the one for our new build to switch the old property over to a modern MDPE pipe and get the meter where they want it, down by the road. There would be fairly extensive additional works needed by me because the digging to get the new pipe to the old house would be fairly hefty and complex (2 almost crossed over RPA's). I think that the water authority should help me out with my costs for the highway crossing to connect the main for the new build as they'll have to make the same crossing for the old house as part of their lead replacement service. Is that reasonable? Otherwise, I'll be paying for the crossing and they'll use that to connect the old property, which they would have done at no cost to me had we not been after a further connection.

Get your mind out of the gutter. I mean your Water Main? Our planned build is a good 150m from the highway, where the mains water will be connected. We have been told that 32mm is our specified size, according to the modeler at the water company. This is against the guidelines in their literature, which says over 100m needs 50mm pipe. Do I trust them? They've suggest that they will take responsibility if I have low pressure issues, but I cannot see them ever agreeing to re-dig my 150m run and replace all the driveway etc along the way. They said that if I go against their advice and fit 50mm, then I have to take responsibility for it. Thoughts...?

Unfortunately I have to lay the first 10metres of the drive before we can have the water connected. Do you think the water authority will prefer it run horizontally into a shuttered box or curved up out of the ground? Or better still, can I obtain and fit the chamber they'd use and run the pipe into it to enable me to finish the surface?

Sorry to hijack, but looks like I'll need 50mm Water pipe due to being over 100m from connection point. What's this stuff like to work with? I imagine the bend radius is huge?! Ideally I want to run 2 pipes, 1x25mm to renew the pipe for the old property and 1x50mm for the new one before we reinstate the shared drive. Can these both go in the same run of ducting?

We've got some samples here of a product called HD Clad Pro by Composite Prime. I'm no expert, but it looks nice actually. I know nothing of the price though sadly.

That's where we're at. She was on board at first, but now isn't. The wall is in terrible condition too, so would be dicey to alter, we were happy to take it on.

Is currently serves 3 properties. We're planning to add number 4.

We are getting close to planning submission, our current problem is our visibility from the shared driveway. A pre-plan application was processed about 18 months ago and suggested no issue to the right (the fence is currently 4ft), but to the left, this wall is too high to see over. In more recent conversations, the local Highways guy suggested that as long as he can see over it when he comes to check, that will be fine, but of course we don't have anything formal. If you look closely, you'll see a Water Main cover, which sits above the level of the driveway. For reference, this is roughly at the 2.4m setback point and is roughly a metre from the top of the wall. The option to alter the wall has been mooted, but is unlikely. An obvious solution is to add material to the driveway (approximately 150-200mm), bringing it up to about where the Water Main cover is, this can easily be blended out up the drive. However, it will create a bit of a ramp. Presumably, as long as this meets the required gradient specs and is amenable to the driveway land owner, could this be a workable solution? I know there is a finer level of detail around vision splays over private land, is there a chance they might not throw the full book at us for what is a fairly modest development that is otherwise highly inoffensive and unlikely to meet many other objections?

If you mean the Living Room one, we can't. The add-on to the Kitchen/Dining area was to give a bit more space there, the Living Room is hard up against an RPA if you look closely.

The top image shows the current iteration of our floor plan. The cut-away shape of the North-East corner came primarily out of a need to avoid root protection areas along the Eastern boundary, but our Architect also used it make it feel like the the Entrance hall is linked more to the 'Living' block than to the 'Bedroom' block, with long views from the front door, which I can see/accept. It has created some nice angles that have been utilised internally, which we like. For clarity, the Living block is single story, the Bedroom block is 2 story, each with a monopitch roof. However, I am aware that it comprises of 3 corners and am concerned that the complexity in building this might mean that we are, in essence paying for space that is ending up outside We have decided to remove the 2 trees that caused the RPA issues as they are relatively low value Cypresses. I have mocked up the second image, which just shows that corner 'squared off', ignore the internal layout as it was just a Photoshop 'cut n shut'. It reduces the number of corners to 1, keeps the wall area around the same and gives us a load of internal space we didn't have. It will necessitate, we think, a bit of a redesign (and probably some extra design cost). So, what's your opinion? Will Option A be more expensive to build than Option B (ICF is likely)? Should we favour design over buildability? Are we mad to not bring the cut-away corner back into the building?

It wasn't easy choosing an architect. We saw a few, produced a shortlist, but one stood out above all the others. The most expensive one, by far. They seemed passionate about our project and we seemed to be 'on the same page'. We dug deep and went with our gut feeling. Fast forward a few weeks, our relationship is very different now. We think we have inadvertently become 'difficult clients', at least that's how it feels. We had an early problem with a tree survey that we had instructed before we appointed the architect and it resulted in a set-back, we feel that things started to degrade at this point. We have a lovely design concept that we are very happy with, but we aren't quite there yet. However, we feel as though our Architect just wants to get it done and over with. She has pushed us through the design phase, constantly reminding us that we might miss our timeline if we aren't more efficient with some of our decisions (despite us actually being ahead of where we thought we'd be), then she went on leave for a week and returned to tell us that a 'more important project' had to take priority and we would now have to wait a month. She hasn't answered an email I sent nearly 2 weeks ago. On paper, she is very experienced, we are not and it seems that a few aspects of our project have caused her major headaches, but we didn't know because she didn't tell us. Our plot is FAR more complex than most, with a complex topography and our desire to retain several mature trees, but that's also part of its appeal. Many of the complications that have arisen could have been avoided if she had been more keen to return for a site-visit, to better understand how her design fits into the plot and hear our thoughts, opinions and concerns. It's a heart-breaking position to be in, we put a lot of faith in this company, we were excited that we had finally found someone that we resonated with, but now we are simply not enjoying it and I'm worried it'll affect the final stages of perfecting our good design. We are worried that if we call it out, the whole thing will fall out of bed and that's the last thing we want, not least because of the money it will probably cost us, but also because we are happy with the concept. We have had some issues for sure, but I honestly don't feel like we've been difficult beyond expectation. Should we go out on a limb and make our feelings known? Or stop whining and suck it up?

We just debating Exterior Finish options. We will probably be building with ICF and are favouring standing-seam Zinc for our two monopitch roofs. The building has a bit of a 'Scandi' influence and features some slatted screening areas that really lend themselves to being wood. We would love to carry this on with further wood cladding, but are a bit nervous about the longevity and ongoing maintenance. Any installations we have seen of timber cladding looks great on day 1, but looks like s**t a year later, though this might just be because it's on housing estates where the quality might be poor. Larch seems to be a popular choice, as is Cedar I think? Has anyone got anything to add to the timber cladding argument? Beyond that, taking an approach towards a mass-finish for the majority of the building, render is, we think and obvious choice. Although we can't rule out these corrugated panels that seem to be making an appearance on Grand Designs a lot lately. Large Format Porcelain Tiles are another area of interest for the lower portion of the building or Stone Slips... I'd really appreciate your views on exterior finish options. What did you go for and why? Also, pictures would be a great help. Furthermore, what are the planning implications of choosing finish materials, then changing your mind later on?

No, nobody else could benefit from it. It currently has a shed on it that's about to collapse and they're not really interested in replacing, so the land won't 'feel' like a loss to them. What I'm really saying is that I accept the legal costs as they, it seems, are unavoidable. But if the value of the land is less than the value of the tree work I agreed to, I might see if I can buy the land and let them worry about their tree (it's ugly but doesn't affect my plans in the slightest).

So, it turns out that the land is owned by a Church. So it appears that we have to follow their strict procedure to buy it. This means that we need to instruct our own conveyancer and also a chartered surveyor to report on the land in question. We will also need to cover their legal costs as this is in no way beneficial to the Church. I expect this will cost us around £3k in fees. With that in mind, we might be better to buy the land for it's true value and forget the original offer to sort the tree. Any guesses what it might be worth? It's around 15m2 of 'garden land' that currently forms a corner of a rarely used lawn/overspill car park?

I'll take a look at it then. It's not an essential transfer for our project, but just enables us to save more trees. There is no mortgage on their land, but there is on ours at the moment.