Indy

Back with an update after another (and final) round of updates with our architect. The main changes we've made are around the palette of materials and colour choices as the design is fairly contemporary/modern but the choice of traditional materials (mainly brick) and colours (red/white) was coming across as quite brutal/intimidating? We asked an open ended question to the architect and this was the recommendation on what they'd do if it was their house. I hadn't really considered going for a render finish in white and grey roof, but I do have to say - it looks quite good on the renders. Plus it matches what the next door neighbours did, so will be an easier sell to the planners. Other changes are more subtle like increasing the roof overhang slightly so we can fit some external lighting on, making provisions for solar panels on the south side of the roof (not reflected on the renders) and some internal changes to the roof design. Basically opted to simplify internally and go for a raised truss roof which will allow us to keep the costs low (expensive steel not required), and the missus wasn't really into the whole vaulted ceilings look. Settled on this now and the 'crisp white offset by the grey' look has really grown on me in the last 2 weeks since we first saw it.

Same as us then, we used https://deepdeneecology.co.uk

Getting good at sales sounds much easier than it actually is. Some of the best sales people I've known don't do any active selling and certainly none of the pushy double glazing tactics. You start by building trust, showing that you understand the client, identify their pain points and then propose the solution. Your solution may not be the only solution, but if it resolves their problem by being in the right place at the right time (and roughly at the right cost), the client will usually be tripping over themselves to give you their money. There's all the usual psychology stuff around EQ, emotional intelligence, empathy, building and nurturing relationships, giving more than taking out - some of which may not directly apply to a transactional relationship like the one with architects, as they're usually engaged for a singular purpose.

I'm going to add my comments here since I've been engaged in a bit of back and forth with some of the posters on here, on my own thread in the new build form (where my design was knocked quite a bit). To answer your original question, there is one simple answer. You have to be good at sales. You can design the most brilliant houses but if you can't sell them to your clients then they're not getting built. Sometimes its as simple as laying out the rationale for your design choices, other times its going to be make your clients realise that what they want vs what they need are 2 separate things. I also agree firmly with the advice on this thread that people who want to self build often do so because they can't find anything on the general market that meets their needs. Which means hundreds of properties viewed, rejected and through that process - usually a good list of what works and what doesn't for them. If you automatically assume that people don't know what they want and they should go with what you're recommending - you've lost before even getting started. You may find the odd example of someone who will go with a completely new design, but people are people and confirmation bias is a real thing. They will want to work with someone who gives them what they want, calls them brilliant and praises their 'design nous'.

Happy to send you a discreet message as I wouldn't like to plaster that over a public forum. They were very competitive I'll add - not the cheapest and not the most expensive either.

This one is a big improvement over the initial designs you've posted and I can only say thanks again, but the major drawback with this design is the room sizes and how they would be constrained. We do have to deal with the fact that its a narrow plot, and if we leave 2m on one side, then create a hallway in the middle on the 1st floor all the way through - that would lead to quite small room sizes internally. One of the, if not the primary reason for us to self build was the room sizes and how I couldn't find anything on the market that really met our needs. I like big expansive rooms and most of the properties available on the market usually have the primary room of a decent size and the others are too small to do anything decent with.

In a way I'm glad that the post has generated such a healthy amount of discussion including some deep, somewhat philosophical arguments about what constitutes beauty and what's a good design etc. I'm going to stick to my guns and say I still really like the frontage. Not because I have to dig my heels in and back up my initial assertion, but because I truly do. My wife does, our families do and even some of our close friends we've shown it to. Some of that may be politeness but not everyone would collectively lie to us if they were that drastically bad. I will concede that none of them are self builders or immersed in the topic as deeply as the posters on this thread, and that was exactly the reason why I posted and kept coming back on this forum. Yes, I have seen better designs and I have seen worse designs. I would even put my neck above the parapet to say that I actually liked some of the designs on the McMansion website posted earlier. I see nothing wrong with designing a house that has a wow factor. Why shouldn't you feel proud of something if you're spending that much time, effort and money on it? It will still be built with fabric first principles - airtightness, thermal efficiency, MVHR, ASHP, UFH and now increasingly likely to include Solar PV connected to DHW. But that doesnt mean I want go for a bland square box or design only for efficiency. I am incorporating the feedback into my discussions with the architects and see where this takes us. Don't disagree with the fact that time spent now at the design stage will save us a lot of grief later, though its really hard to reconcile when every fibre of my being just wants to get the plans submitted so we can feel a sense of achievement for checking that box! Budget wise, my thoughts have been massively refined since the time I posted my other costing thread. 2 visits to the NSRBC and Build it Live this weekend lead me to believe £2-£2.5k/sq m is achievable and that's a much easier pill to swallow as compared to the £3.5k I was being quoted earlier.

Ok, quite hard reading all these comments but there's no trolling. Only our inexperience showing here as I freely admit we're not designers and our vision is very heavily influenced by what we've seen so far. Which has been mostly developer built exec boxes so I guess that's coming through. I didn't really set out to build something that has 'architectural merit', and tbh - didnt really set out to build anything at all. The original plan was to refurb but the costs and complexities have led us down this path - so its a learning curve and a steep one at that. I will take the comments into view but will still admit that I still like the overall frontage and can't see what's so horrifically wrong with it. We've already established we can't build a Georgian style house or a full 2 storey house, so its a compromise at this point and I'm trying to find the best way forward. Junking the existing design and starting from scratch seems like quite a big overreaction...

Ok, have had a bit of back and forth with the architects but struggling now to come up with more changes to the front facade, including the porch design. These are the changes we've already made: 1. Incorporate velux roof lights to bring in more light to the centre of the house. 2. Increased window size on the 1st floor to match the ground floor one. 3. Keystone effect above the windows to provide a bit of detailing/design 4. Colour of bricks changed to red, windows and general details to white. Roof will be grey as it gives us a nice classic colour theme that we've seen and like. 5. Porch design - struggling a bit. The ideas that I have are: 1. Reduce the height of the porch to a standard sized rather than 2 storey - as the light is not being transmitted to the house and feels like wasted money on glazing. Even the double height space will not really be used for much. A standard sized porch will have shoe storage, coat storage and benches for seating. OR 2. Porch walls replaced with glass to give it a bit of a wow factor? 3. Some sort of design on the hipped roof between the 2 gable windows on the 1st floor ? A porthole seemed like a good idea but worried it would look like a 3rd eye somehow. Kind of stuck now and would really appreciate any help or suggestions as to what we can do within the current design to make it more visually appealing.

That's a very good price for a main builder driven project, and a generous kitchen budget. People I've spoken to recently at NSBRC seem to indicate £1650 - £1850 / sq m for a self managed build. We're in one the more pricey parts of the SE so if I can get anywhere near that - I'll be a happy man.

I havent yet researched the different ICF systems so not too sure about the woodcrete vs continuous concrete core - thanks for the pointer, something to add to the reading list.

Its always the opposite of what you end up planning for isn't it. Sods law that we'd choose a construction method on price (as a factor) and then end up having to pay over the top once we're locked in!

At my behest. My love for all things Georgian was pricked up again when seeing the examples in this thread. And they were very quick to draw up a few options to demonstrate exactly why it wouldn't work. Planning at the current height is a 'risk' but a calculated one. My original idea was to replace the bungalow with a full 2 storey house including a habitable loft, which was not going to happen. The street is also on a slope, so we've managed to create a bit of height by aligning with the houses 'above ours'. Technically its higher than the current ridge height but visually it seems to fit in. Yes, this is what we're going with. A lower risk option (though not risk free) that has the best chance of getting planning. The street is quite long, and the stretch we're was originally a series of 5 bungalows and 3 x 2 storey houses built by the same developer in the 50s. We're located right at the entrance of the village (2nd house on the street), and as you move up - the houses are all mostly 2 storey ones. Its a mix in terms of construction type really, 30s, 50s, mock tudor, a lot of houses that have been redeveloped recently so include contemporary finishes. Not a lot of Georgian within this part, though there are certainly several multi-million neo-georgian mansion set on private roads on the other side of town that we share a postcode with. And more importantly, can't afford.... yet!

This is something they've already taken into account and some of the design decisions (especially the recessed balcony) was at their suggestion - to fit in with the SAP calcs. And while I thank you for your concern, I do have trust and confidence in their abilities. If anything, I'm guilty of what has been mentioned in the past - i.e. being too prescriptive on what I want and to their credit they've usually run with it and given me most of what I asked for.

Yep, this is very much the intent. Plan is to have insulation far in excess of building regs, but not sure if we want to go all the way to Passiv Haus standards. ASHP, Wet UFH, MVHR. One thing I'm not sold on yet is Solar PV. The plan is allow for this in the future, but trying to understand whether it makes sense to go all in now and take advantage of the VAT rebate or leave space in the plant room, beef up the roof trusses and add in the future.

I assume you're quoting this as a package of labour and materials cost, rather than just materials?

Yeah, Fabric first is the term that was thrown at us several times. This will mean upping the spec on the fundamentals and maybe cheaping out on 2nd fix items like doors/kitchens/bathrooms for now, as the latter will be relatively easier to upgrade in the future.

Ok, so the figure was taken from a comment that one of the architects at the show threw out, and is a very generalised number. I totally agree that you can't compare until you specify in detail the level of efficiency etc that you want, and I don't really have the answers to most of the questions you've posted here. I guess what I'm trying to understand is broad brush strokes - if the costs are the same (ish) for a similar level of passive haus-ness, would one system win over another?

I attended a walk through tour as the first thing when I reached the NSBRC which was led by an experienced builder of many years. His view was pretty much the same, the traditional method isnt suitable for modern, thermally efficient homes and he wouldn't recommend it anymore given that newer tech existed. MBC as a company has been recommended and I spoke to them briefly while there. Seemed quite helpful and are willing to take a look at our custom design to see what they can do. Obviously haven't explored in any detail on how this would come out costwise though the guy did hint that the cost conversations were much easier to have in 2018 as compared to now!

I have another thread in the new build design section detailing the journey to get the plans finalised and submitted. In the meantime, have been reading up about how to actually build and also attended the NSBRC show over the weekend and took in their talks/seminars (quite useful for a beginner). So far, I have no preference for a particular method of building apart from wanting what everyone wants - super speed and super cheap, with a top quality finish(!) I've listed out the pros and cons of each to try and understand the differences between the three methods: Traditional masonry - Pros 1. Cheap parts and easy to get insurance/mortgages 2. Easy to DIY in the future Traditional masonry - Cons 1. Slow to build 2. Labour in London is expensive (£500 for a brickie apparently) so cheap parts are offset by the long time it takes to build and get water/airtight. Timber frame - Pros 1. Quick to build when on site as all the design is done prior and built in a factory 2. Can find companies to do foundation slab and erect structure - which is the hardest part of the build. 3. Great insulation and thermal efficiency Timer frame - Cons 1. Used to be about 10-15% more expensive pre-COVID, and this has only got worse with timber prices shooting through the roof. 2. Slightly harder to get insurance/mortgages but this is the dominant method of new builds now apparently. 3. Noise issues are greater in a timber framed house? ICF - Pros 1. DIY element of laying out blocks, meaning some labour costs can be saved. 2. Monolithic structure means efficient house, and a feeling of being much more solid as compared to Timber frame. 3. Less noise issues - especially if paired with a block and beam floor. 4. Used to be relatively expensive - but now very competitive as concrete costs haven't gone up as much as timber in the last 2 years! ICF Cons 1. DIY options will become limited in the future as cutting through concrete isn't fun 2. Waterproofing external insulation is key - though not impossible. 3. As with TF - harder to get insurance/mortgages as this is less popular but now growing. All in all, I'm leaning towards ICF now as having a concrete structure and combination of beam and block floors will get rid of my biggest bugbear - the noise issues in old housing stock. Hate hate hate creaky floorboards and sound travelling through the house when you drop something relatively light. Thoughts greatly appreciated. Cost is obviously a concern though all conversations point to each system roughly equating to about the same in the end - higher part costs are offset with quicker build times (and lower labour costs).

One further update that I forgot to add is that all the glazing on the sides - the advice from the architect is that it wouldn't be worth it. We're building pretty close to the boundary on either side (leaving just over 1m to be compliant with the regulations) and have buildings on either side. So the windows on the sides won't actually bring in much light. Still debating as to whether its worth it, but this seems like sound advice - focus on the front (east) and back (west) glazing and rooflights on top, rather than spend more on the side windows which won't add much in the way of light but will increase cost. Happy to hear opinions on this.

Thank you so much for this, eerily close to what we were going for and great to see a visual representation of a finished product. The only difference would have been the choice of external cladding where we're leaning towards bricks/brick slips rather than render/timber cladding.

A brief update following some very active conversation with my architect this week (who also has a link to this thread and has been through the comments and other sketches). 1. They very kindly drew up a number of different Georgian options for us to consider. Not that this hadn't been considered in the past but laying it on the plot and comparing ridge and eaves heights, its clear that the georgian facade wouldn't work. The Chartered Planning consultant that's part of their firm also provided her professional opinion that the design would be out of kilter with the neighbouring plots and that the planners would take a very strong view of the proposed height of our development - which goes from 1.5 storey to 2 storeys and a loft. The end result is that we've taken their professional view into consideration and decided that it's not going to work. 2. We are in the process of looking at alternative options to pretty up the front facade, which includes the increased glazing on the 1st floor windows, different fenestration options amongst other things. I hope to get updates from them by the end of this week. 3. I've asked them to reconsider the roof design and we're looking to incorporate some rooflights/velux windows to bring more light into the centre of the house and change the design of the front gables so that it allows us to take the glazing all the way to the roof. This will mean a revised roof design and adding considerable cost - so we're considering our options here - but this is something that can be tweaked at a later stage, after planning has been granted.

Spec wise, we're aiming for something similar. ASHP, MVHR, Wet UFH throughout, Wood/LVT floors throughout including first floor (need something hard wearing with kids and dogs), Lots of glazing, decent quality touchpoints like stairs, doors, switches etc. Cost wise - £110 psf seems unachievable for me as I can't really do any of the trades myself. I am planning to act as the PM and general handyman/labourer, and maybe the decorator towards the end. Plan to buy a good spray paint setup, coat the entire house in white and move in, and then decorate in other colours over time.

Agreed, Georgian covered in brick would be the winner for me and timeless to boot but it's about how it fits in with the surrounding houses and how the planners are going to view it. One of the partners within the architect's firm is a Chartered Planner and his advice has been that its possible to get what you want - IF you're prepared for a length fight and waiting for a few years to exhaust all the options. That's very much what I don't want and the options we chose were carefully selected to maximise the chances of winning approval in the 1st go!