rufusmacdoofus Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Hi everyone. We are over the moon that we have a plot, and we have planning and are now in the challenging stage of budgeting and deciding who to go with. I have spent several hours now on this site audit has been invaluable with so far, so hoping you can help with this. We have decided on timber frame over SIPS. Would anyone be happy to share their views on the frame companies they looked at, who they chose and how it has gone for them with that supplier? I know what you are promised if not always what is delivered and I would love all the good and bad stories. I would also love some tips on what to look out for so that we compare like with like. I would be particularly interested in views on MBC too, if you have gone with them and if you didn't, why not. Many thanks indeed. Jo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redoctober Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Congratulations and welcome to the forum - Have a look at this link which is the latest I think to cover your question - Others might chip in with their views on MBC as and when. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan F Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 (edited) Hi and Welcome, We've just made this decision a couple of weeks ago. Rather than tell you who we decided to use, it's worth first mentioning what considerations/questions we asked oursevles as part of the decision making process I think: 1) Do you want supply and erection, or are you happy to use someone else locally for erection? 2) Do you want timber-frame supplier to design and lay the foundations as well as the timber-frame? 3) What level of insulation do you want? Are you looking for passive house levels of insulation? Might you be interested in certification? 4) When do you need to build? (some more competitive options may have a longer lead time) 5) Do you want the timber-frame only, or would you prefer (at a cost) to use a firm that can supply closed panels with windows pre-fitted etc.? If you can answer some of these questions, I think that will narrow down the options... Dan Edited August 9, 2019 by Dan Feist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rufusmacdoofus Posted August 9, 2019 Author Share Posted August 9, 2019 Just now, Dan Feist said: Hi and Welcome, We've just made this decision a couple of weeks ago. Rather than tell you who we decided to use, it's worth firsy mentioning what considering we took into account as your requirements may be different to ours: 1) Do you want supply and erection, or are you happy to use someone else locally for erection? 2) Do you want timber-frame supplier to design and lay the foundations as well as the timber-frame? 3) What level of insulation do you want? Are you looking for passive house levels of insulation? 4) When do you need to build? (some more competirive options may have a longer lead time) 5) Do you want the timber-frame only, or would you prefer (at a cost) to use a firm that can supply closed panels with windows pre-fitted etc.? If you can answer some of these questions, I think that will narrow down the options... Dan Hi Dan We were going for supply and erect. We are considering both options but I have a price for foundations plus supply and erect and the groundworks prices are fairly similar to my groundwork quotes so am happy either way Not passive house. 0.14 - 0.13 No desperate hurry but want to get on with it. We have finance in place but are living on site in a tiny house with 3 children so not ideal! We haven't had any quotes for closed panels with pre fitted windows but would be happy to look at it.I have spent a lot of time on hear reading everyones views on windows so there are certain brands that I feel disinclined towards! I am feeling now that perhaps we should go for a one stop shop to get out of the ground and in the dry so we can take a breather and then organise subbies and do the internals ourselves as much as possible. House is a very simply design. We have spent a lot on the plot so we are trying to keep the costs down as much as possible for the build without trying to compromise on quality. Would appreciate any advice either on the forum or via DM Many thanks indeed Jo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rufusmacdoofus Posted August 9, 2019 Author Share Posted August 9, 2019 34 minutes ago, Redoctober said: Congratulations and welcome to the forum - Have a look at this link which is the latest I think to cover your question - Others might chip in with their views on MBC as and when. Good luck. Thank you, that is much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rufusmacdoofus Posted August 9, 2019 Author Share Posted August 9, 2019 Dan, very sensibly, asked my why not passive house? I replied the following. I have three children who leave all the doors windows open so not sure how effective PH is in that scenario! Plus we have a massive amount of glazing on a south facing site so was also a bit worried about solar gain. Tell me if you think I am wrong? I also love a fire and one company said if we go passive house we will hardly have the heating on so a fire would be out of the question. I know its a really small thing but we really wanted a wood burner. Plus we have lots of animals, children over, need a cat flap etc..... So I am just being practical and thinking about the way we actually live. Please tell me if I am wrong or missing something here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Harris Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 9 minutes ago, rufusmacdoofus said: Dan, very sensibly, asked my why not passive house? I replied the following. I have three children who leave all the doors windows open so not sure how effective PH is in that scenario! Plus we have a massive amount of glazing on a south facing site so was also a bit worried about solar gain. Tell me if you think I am wrong? I also love a fire and one company said if we go passive house we will hardly have the heating on so a fire would be out of the question. I know its a really small thing but we really wanted a wood burner. Plus we have lots of animals, children over, need a cat flap etc..... So I am just being practical and thinking about the way we actually live. Please tell me if I am wrong or missing something here? Welcome. With a "massive amount of glazing on a South facing site" you will need to take very serious measures to avoid over-heating, and this may well be worse for a non-passive house (insulation works both ways, it keeps heat out in hot weather). We have a large glazed gable that faces South and have had to spend a fair bit on reducing solar gain from it. Looking back now I wish that I'd specified Sage glass, as although it's expensive it does allow large areas of glass to be used whilst keeping the solar gain under control. I also wish I'd been allowed to fit external window shutters (the planners weren't happy about fitting them) as they would have been a great help, too. One key thing to consider when looking at build methods and insulation is decrement delay. Some insulation materials can have a very short decrement delay, which means the house may respond relatively rapidly to external temperature changes, particularly when the sun is shining on a wall or roof. Others can have a long enough decrement delay that the heat doesn't have time to penetrate the wall or roof before the sun has moved away. The latter is preferable, as it leads to a more even temperature indoors, which most people find more comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSS Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Welcome. We have a timber frame with similar u-values to your target and (relative to the size of the property) quite a lot of south-facing glazing (albeit SageGlass). We don't open any windows/doors as air quality is crucial to my wife's health, but we do have active cooling capability (though it's not been needed often). We had our groundworks (up to slab) done by a local contractor and then the timber frame made and erected. We then used subbies and did quite a lot of the rest ourselves. We did a fair bit of research into the various TF suppliers and narrowed it down to two who we had detailed discussions with and quotes from. In the end we chose the one we felt most comfortable with, not least because (when you're spending near £100k) we liked that our money was held in ESCROW until agreed stages were completed before release to said supplier. The two were Touchwood and Scandia Hus, and we went with the latter. They're not the cheapest, and don't (or at least didn't) offer the u-values of the likes of MBC, but we've no regrets about our choice. Whichever route you choose, it has to be what you believe is right for you (and your budget), but be prepared for a rollercoaster ride and make sure you have a healthy contingency. We hoped to spend £240k and ended up spending around £305k on our fairly complex chalet bungalow design of 165m2 (GIA) plus a double attached garage. Even if you plan everything to the nth degree, at times you'll still question why you ever started, but it will be worth it in the end. Enjoy the ride ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rufusmacdoofus Posted August 10, 2019 Author Share Posted August 10, 2019 Thank you NSS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amateur bob Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 On 09/08/2019 at 13:12, rufusmacdoofus said: Hi everyone. We are over the moon that we have a plot, and we have planning and are now in the challenging stage of budgeting and deciding who to go with. I have spent several hours now on this site audit has been invaluable with so far, so hoping you can help with this. We have decided on timber frame over SIPS. Would anyone be happy to share their views on the frame companies they looked at, who they chose and how it has gone for them with that supplier? I know what you are promised if not always what is delivered and I would love all the good and bad stories. I would also love some tips on what to look out for so that we compare like with like. I would be particularly interested in views on MBC too, if you have gone with them and if you didn't, why not. Many thanks indeed. Jo just curious that your planning is passed and now your choosing a TF supplier, i was going to choose TF supplier and one of their designs then get them to do the planning, have you just gone for outline planning or is it drawn up in detail by an architect and now your getting a TF company to build to your plans? im just at early stages of the process myself,thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Harris Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 6 minutes ago, Amateur bob said: just curious that your planning is passed and now your choosing a TF supplier, i was going to choose TF supplier and one of their designs then get them to do the planning, have you just gone for outline planning or is it drawn up in detail by an architect and now your getting a TF company to build to your plans? im just at early stages of the process myself,thanks! I'd guess that the vast majority of self-builders get planning consent first and then seek out a builder. Planning can place constraints on the design that may well change the type of construction used. For example, we had a bit of a battle in that the planners initially wanted our house to be constructed from the local stone. I fought this and succeeded in getting them to agree to timber, but that was the exception here, as most of the other new builds in the village have been in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 On 09/08/2019 at 16:51, rufusmacdoofus said: I have three children who leave all the doors windows open so not sure how effective PH is in that scenario! Unless they're leaving them all open in the middle of winter, this doesn't make much difference. We have PH levels of insulation and airtightness, and regularly have doors and windows open. During the shoulder months, it's often just a nice thing to do when the temperature is right. During warm summer days, we keep everything tightly closed up during the day to keep the heat out, then open up once the temperature drops to purge as much heat as possible overnight. On 09/08/2019 at 16:51, rufusmacdoofus said: Plus we have a massive amount of glazing on a south facing site so was also a bit worried about solar gain. Having a bit less insulation is going to make virtually no difference to overheating if you have too much solar gain. Plan for brises soleil, external blinds, solar film - anything to reduce to impact of solar gain. Don't underestimate solar gain to the east and west - on summer mornings you'll get loads of gain from those directions. The heat of the morning sun getting in on a summer morning can set you up for a miserably hot day. Also, solar gain to the south can be a killer in the shoulder months - the sun is lower in the sky so tends to get under the window reveals and overhangs. On 09/08/2019 at 16:51, rufusmacdoofus said: I also love a fire and one company said if we go passive house we will hardly have the heating on so a fire would be out of the question. I know its a really small thing but we really wanted a wood burner. They're right about fires and passive house levels of insulation and airtightness. You repeatedly hear stories of people spending a lot of money installing a wood burning stove, and using it once. However, even if you go for less than passivehouse levels of insulation, I'd encourage you to reconsider the fire. Health-wise, they're one of the most damaging things you can do, both for yourself and your neighbours. More practically, you're still likely to generate far more heat than is practical, even in a house with U-values of 0.13-0.14. That's especially the case given where you live. As for recommendations, we went with MBC about five years ago and were very happy with the work they did for us. A couple of minor mishaps along the way were rectified with zero fuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amateur bob Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 3 hours ago, JSHarris said: I'd guess that the vast majority of self-builders get planning consent first and then seek out a builder. Planning can place constraints on the design that may well change the type of construction used. For example, we had a bit of a battle in that the planners initially wanted our house to be constructed from the local stone. I fought this and succeeded in getting them to agree to timber, but that was the exception here, as most of the other new builds in the village have been in stone. would most go for outline planning to start with and then reapply with detailed drawings once architect and builder are on board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Harris Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 19 minutes ago, Amateur bob said: would most go for outline planning to start with and then reapply with detailed drawings once architect and builder are on board? I opted not to bother with outline. IMHO, outline PP is mainly of use if your a vendor looking to sell a plot with PP, so as to increase its value, but want to leave the detailed design to a possible purchaser. Even then I'm not wholly convinced that having two sets of planning delays (typically at least 12 weeks each) makes much sense. Outline is possibly slightly less risky if trying to just establish the principle of development on a site, as it focusses the planners on that, rather than design-related stuff. You still need plans and drawings for outline PP, but they only need to be fairly simple. Whether you choose to use an architect or not is really an individual choice, bearing in mind that architects tend to be a bit costly. Most houses in the UK aren't actually designed by architects, it seems, and there's some merit in using an architectural technician if the design is fairly straightforward. They can generally do all the drawings, look after a planning application, etc, for a bit lower cost than a fully qualified architect. You can also choose to do as I did, and do the whole job yourself. I didn't find the planning process difficult; a bit irritating at times, but not technically demanding. Hardest thing to learn for me was the design aspect, together with researching the building regulations. The drawings weren't hard to do, but then I didn't need to produce lots of structural detail drawings as the timber frame company looked after all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patp Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 Quote - "They're right about fires and passive house levels of insulation and airtightness. You repeatedly hear stories of people spending a lot of money installing a wood burning stove, and using it once. However, even if you go for less than passivehouse levels of insulation, I'd encourage you to reconsider the fire. Health-wise, they're one of the most damaging things you can do, both for yourself and your neighbours. More practically, you're still likely to generate far more heat than is practical, even in a house with U-values of 0.13-0.14. That's especially the case given where you live." Do the health implications also apply to a simple open fire @jack? We are having a fireplace designed in for aesthetic reasons. Not sure what we will do with it. We have had a woodburner and gave it up because of the mess it created and worries over our lung health. Like the poster above, though, we just love the idea of a fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 4 hours ago, patp said: Do the health implications also apply to a simple open fire @jack? We are having a fireplace designed in for aesthetic reasons. Not sure what we will do with it. We have had a woodburner and gave it up because of the mess it created and worries over our lung health. Like the poster above, though, we just love the idea of a fire. Without doing any research, I'd assume an open fire might be 10-100 times worse than a woodburner. The combustion process is less controlled/efficient, so you're likely to get more unpleasant combustion products, and a greater proportion of those products will escape into the room compared to a woodburner. Really, just don't do it. If you must have something "flamey", then Opti-myst electric fires are one option (there may be other brands). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Harris Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 +1 to what @jack says above, an open fire will be significantly worse than a closed wood burner in terms of combustion products and particulate emissions. Another alternative, if you want flames to look at, is an bio ethanol fire. They don't give out much heat, generate no pollution (just a bit of water vapour) and can look pretty nice. The only downside is that the running cost can be a bit high, but for use occasionally just for the look of flames they seem a good idea. No need for a chimney or flue, either, which is another big thing in their favour, as chimneys take up a lot of space and waste a great deal of heat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_r_sole Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 (edited) . Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitpipe Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 8 minutes ago, JSHarris said: Another alternative, if you want flames to look at, is an bio ethanol fire. They don't give out much heat, generate no pollution (just a bit of water vapour) and can look pretty nice. We looked at a bio ethanol burner for internal flames and even built a faux fireplace to accommodate it - however even the smallest unit kicks out a lot of heat - 2-3kw which would make our living space unpleasantly hot. In the end I got an app for the TV and will get an ethanol burner for the patio some day. As @jack says, even if you build to BR airtightness and insulation standards, you'll likely overheat in summer with too much glazing. As many here have discovered - airtightness and insulation can help keep a house cool as much as keep it warm and use of ASHP to cool a slab can help even more. I got a lot of timber frame quotes and was surprised at the variation in what was actually supplied - some included only floors and structural walls (other room framing was not included) and they expected cranes, safety systems etc to be provided. Other's did a more complete solution with practically all first fix timber included and few options in between. Made it tricky to do like for like comparison as it meant getting joinery, crane quotes etc. from others. Pretty much all of them will require you to provide your own scaffolding. I went with MBC based on reputation from others here, a turnkey passive standard package and price. Note I built the frame over a basement so did not get the additional foundation system delivery advantage. Also agree that this idea that passive houses are soulless hermetically sealed boxes is pervasive - ours has doors and windows open on all but the warmest and coolest days - kids & animals come and go. However with use of exterior window blinds, thoughtful window placement and some cheap shading, plus stack ventilation, it never gets that hot in summer and requires little heat in winter - 400m2 and we spend about £1 a day on electric and same on gas over the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Harris Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 Worth noting that the heat output of many bioethanol fires is way over-stated, and there are lots around that only deliver about 1 kW. The key is to ignore the hype and look at the fuel consumption rate, as a rate of about 0.17 litre/hour is roughly equivalent to 1 kW. This bioethanol fire, for example: https://www.easyfire.co.uk/bioethanol-fire-burner/bio-ethanol-burner-small.html , states that it will burn for 3 hours on 0.4 litres, which equates to a heat output of about 1.3 kW. There are others around that are similar. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 3 hours ago, JSHarris said: Another alternative, if you want flames to look at, is an bio ethanol fire. They don't give out much heat, generate no pollution (just a bit of water vapour) and can look pretty nice. I looked into these when we were planning the house and concluded that they really weren't "fire-like" enough to be of interest. The ones I saw had fairly stable (i.e., boring!) flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patp Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 I have just been researching them @jack. They do look a bit fake on first glance. Has anyone seen them installed inside a woodburning stove? We have such an item in the garage which could be refurbished for the new build if the bio ethanol flame would look realistic inside one. I imagine the heat output would be reduced but if the effect was good enough then it could be a consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Harris Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 Some friends have an LCD screen installed inside a small wood burning stove that apparently looks very good. Next time I see them I'll try and find out what make it is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joth Posted September 2, 2019 Share Posted September 2, 2019 If you're used to a gas fire, they can look very realistic. The most recent one I saw was installed in an authentic looking Victorian cast fire place and I had no idea it was bioethanol until I was told. (The conversation started on how the chimney was sealed up, and I was shocked to see that the fire was still in use!) Others I've seen are more like an LED light-show sitting over hot pebbles in a glass box, very modern but nothing like what I associate with a "fire place". But neither looked like a "real" wood burning fire. I think the style the room and setting would make a huge difference to affect it achieves 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now