Gamekeeper turned Poacher!

[Fredd]

Self built couple homes, now full time developer for last 10 years. 

 

Only build to sell never build for others as I am greedy about profit!

 

Learnt a lot over the years in the trade, feel free to ask questions you may not get an answer you like but it will be honest.

 

First tip. If you are using timber frame and not completing your build withing 4 months you are throwing £10000's down the drain for no reason. I've yet to see a case for small builds (less than 5 on a site) where there is a business case for anything other than block brick or block render.

 

cheers!

Edited February 7, 2018 by Fredd

[Onoff]

I'm betting you're not building passive homes?

[Fredd]

your right there!

 

Too expensive cost point over a normal house. 

 

Everyone cant drive an aston right. 

[Barney12]

1 hour ago, Fredd said:

 

First tip. If you are using timber frame and not completing your build withing 4 months you are throwing £10000's down the drain for no reason. I've yet to see a case for small builds (less than 5 on a site) where there is a business case for anything other than block brick or block render.

 

Wow, that’s a massive oversimplification. “no reason“ ? There are plenty of reasons why people choose timber frame, speed of build is just one of them. Your statement over cost might be true for a “developer built box” on a one off basis but is not always the case for a self builder. 

 

Oh oh and one last thing; all the self builders I’ve met have never listed “profit” as primary driver. 

 

[MikeSharp01]

1 hour ago, Fredd said:

 

First tip. If you are using timber frame and not completing your build withing 4 months you are throwing £10000's down the drain

Why? I guess it is because profit today is better than the same profit tomorrow. If so it has perhaps lost its connection with many economic models and approaches which can work for slower builds and makes several assumptions about motivation behind the build.

Edited February 7, 2018 by MikeSharp01

[Fredd]

Let me try to explain.

 

For the 99% of buyers on a mortgage they need value.

 

The supposed benefit to a builder of timber frame is speed and im yet to be convinced of that. The likes of Permissons, taylor wimpey love them or hate them etc crack them up very fast, much quicker than buggering about with wood frames.

 

Now I appreciate self build is a niche market, and like kitchens everyone has a different opinion and requiremtn from the build.

 

BUT if you are on a shoestring budget, do the math. Self builder wont complete a build in 4 months so even the dubious speed benefit is of no use. The eco side doesn't add up to me either.

 

Back of fag packet:

 

Extra cost of timber frame over brick and block for a 'normal' 250m2 house - £30000 

 

Lets assume its twice as eco as a normal EPC cat c new build. What savings are we looking at ?

 

Here is the EPC from the last build we did 180m2

 

 

Now lets say you can save half of that (which Is being very optimistic) £600 a year. You would be looking at 50 years to just break even! 

 

So in purely cost terms timber frame has no upside only downsides. Put that money saved into a larger build of better spec.

 

 

 

[Barney12]

But, yet again you are focusing on “cost” and “average/normal”.

[ToughButterCup]

So, a non-self builder joins a  self-build group.

Excellent I say!

Bring it on - about self-building, that is.

[PeterW]

19 minutes ago, Fredd said:

The likes of Permissons, taylor wimpey love them or hate them etc crack them up very fast, much quicker than buggering about with wood frames.

 

Taylors round here use timber frame - as do Bovis and a number of the other volume builders. 

 

Faster to market, easier to finish, quicker to first fix. The list goes on.  Labour is your biggest variation not materials. 

[dpmiller]

Dunno about your cost differences between block and timber, for my 280m2 design a cheapo "developer spec" erected frame kit w/ trusses and first floor deck would've been £28k total.

[Onoff]

I think the majority on here are looking long term and energy efficiency. Add in the "self" bit as in they can do  (& enjoy? ) a lot of the labouring themselves. Look at some of the real perfectionists on here and the crux is it's not always about the money. Some self build for the journey and / or the sheer achievement. Read some of the comments ref peoples mission to make their place airtight and hunt down potential loss points. A for profit builder probably doesn't really care about detail or running out of half a metre of airtight tape! 

[Alexphd1]

80% of the mass builders in this area use timber frame...... 

[ToughButterCup]

We aren't comparing like with like.

 

The word  self is not the same as mass.

[ProDave]

Mass building is a different game to self building. Yes you want to build cheap for maximum profit. You also have the economy of scale on your side.

 

But building cheap is NOT building good. It's at best building adequate.  Most people accept it simply because most people don't know better.  It amazes me when someone buys an old house with an EPC F and then complain about the heating bills. Why don't they do a bit of research about the biggest purchase in their life, yet they would not buy anything other than an A+++ refrigerator?

 

If you think an epc of C is good for a new house, think again. I am aiming for an A and that should be where the mass builders are aiming now?  I have a suspicion that eventually people will wake up to the EPC and it's implications, and as a resuilt older poor houses will become worth less.  That is starting already as in Scotland you can no longer rent out a house with an EPC F so instantly those are no longer of interest to landlords so reduced demand.

 

Most self builders do so because they want something better than a mass builder's average house and self build is the only way to lavish the care and attention needed.

 

In this argument neither side is going to be changed. The mass builder will carry on churning out cheap adequate houses and the mass public will keep buying them, and the self builder will still strive for something a lot better.

 

[Ferdinand]

Welcome @Fredd to the forum.

 

I quite like your slightly provocative approach and look forward to some vigorous debate.

 

I have an interest in keeping costs down and encouraging self-builders at lower price points, and I hope to come back later on with a couple of questions.

 

Ferdinand

[jack]

Welcome to the forum @Fredd. Always good to have someone stir the pot as long as they do so respectfully. 

[Nickfromwales]

Hi Fredd. 

Speed building to maximise profit, by turning out houses built to current regs ( or usually worse )  isn't really the ethos of this forum.

Typically I'd expect someone like yourself to have joined in order to compare performance / build quality and ASK for figures on which to base your arguments for either method.  Here folks have designed, built and are now living in their homes, and have been kind enough to give a warts-n-all account of how things did or didn't work out. Best of all though are the performance figures, some of which are incredible. Could you heat any of your builds with a hairdryer ? Folk here could. Not fiction or speculation.....Fact. 

 

Chucking up an EPC cert isnt really good enough for your particular argument to be taken seriously TBH. EPCs are based on assumptions. Most 'express' builds don't get properly inspected mid build and often are found to have had poorer quality insulation and airtightness, mostly due to contractors being on, or given, tight budgets. 

Self builders WANT a thorough inspection, WANT to pay for superior work quality ( and ethics ), rather than maximise profit and focus on turnaround times. 

For this forum, we're apples and your oranges I'm afraid. 

Stick around and have a read of a few of the blogs. I'm an old dog that's learned a few new tricks here . 

[MikeSharp01]

1 hour ago, Fredd said:

Now lets say you can save half of that (which Is being very optimistic) £600 a year. You would be looking at 50 years to just break even! 

Interesting point @Fredd but it misses the essential point that most ecocentric self builders have much longer term goals. In our case we are thinking of our possible great grandchildren's environment where the house we are building is still paying back 100 years from now. I appreciate that the design lifetime of timber frame might be questioned but 100 years seems not unreasonable and you might expect much more than that, perhaps an order of magnitude, if you look at medieval timber framed buildings still standing. 

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, recoveringacademic said:

We aren't comparing like with like.

I suspect that @Fredd may well be using different terminology than us.

when he speaks of timber frame, is he talking factory built and erected on site, or a joiner on site waiting for a delivery of timber lengths to be cut to length 'by the lad'.

Big difference in time and cost.

 

In economics there is a difference between 'price' and 'cost'. Economics is not accountancy.

@MikeSharp01 mentions 'economic models'.  They are, what they are called, models.  There are many different models, some fit historic data better than others, future data, is by its very nature a prediction, and then has uncertainty built in.  Uncertainty in modelling is not an unknown.

1 hour ago, ProDave said:

Mass building is a different game to self building. Yes you want to build cheap for maximum profit. You also have the economy of scale on your side.

This is a very important point, self-builders often have different values and are willing to spend time and cash on what they consider important, not what a market researcher considers is important to the average buyer.

If I was a property developer (a term that means many different things to different people), I would be building places that were easy to mortgage, basic and simple to maintain, from easily obtained materials etc.

If I was building my own place it would be very different.  I would be taking our old mate Ed Davie's approach and trying to do as much work myself, he has gone for a Toblerone design: https://edavies.me.uk/

If I was building 6 houses, things may be different, but then I might rent a factory unit and build modules for erection on site.

[Cpd]

Welcome Fredd,  your opening statement is well and truely above my pay grade so i cant comment on that.... however i am sure it will provoke some vigorous debate. I use this forum as a life line of useful information and it is a fantastic resource and i am very greatful for all contributions, both relevant and non relevant to me. I also feel that as long as one joins with a good will towards the fundamental ethos that the forum then it really does not matter where you come from or what your personal stance is. There are many opinions that i struggle to find common ground with but it all helps me to become more educated beyond my own limited knowledge. I look forward to following your input and hope we can all keep cool heads.  

[Barney12]

48 minutes ago, MikeSharp01 said:

ecocentric self builders

 

LMAO. That nails it describing the majority of us on this forum

Perhaps though add; mad, crazy, poorer, tired, sleep deprived, stressed.

 

Ooooh and I built timber frame then added a cavity, concrete blocks and render. That means I almost built it twice. I'm clearly fully paid up :).

 

Oh hang on "ecocentric" I thought you'd typed "eccentric".

 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Barney12
Typo

[billt]

1 hour ago, ProDave said:

It amazes me when someone buys an old house with an EPC F and then complain about the heating bills. Why don't they do a bit of research about the biggest purchase in their life, yet they would not buy anything other than an A+++ refrigerator?

 

Heating costs are actually a pretty small part of the running coasts of a house, so, even if you are one of the tiny number of vaguely rational people, it's not going to come high on their house purchase agenda. It's still location, location, location (and then kitchen!)

 

EPCs have no good relationship to heating costs. Our house would have an EPC of D or E without the PV systems, however the PV systems bring it up to an A. Having PV doesn't reduce the heating costs of the house.

 

We still have several single glazed windows, which will be looked on with horror by other forum members, but it makes no economic sense to do anything about them as the extra heat loss is relatively trivial and the aesthetic implications aren't trivial.

[Barney12]

1 minute ago, billt said:

Heating costs are actually a pretty small part of the running coasts of a house, so, even if you are one of the tiny number of vaguely rational people, it's not going to come high on their house purchase agenda. It's still location, location, location (and then kitchen!)

 

That is very true. I was talking to a local estate agent (in the pub) about my place recently. He said "you are having granite worktops aren't you? People expect them round here."). Houses these days remain a consumer purchase for the masses. Just go and look at the show home of any developer and that's clear to see.

[jack]

Also, costs aside, my heavily insulated and airtight house is a very pleasant place to be in winter. Fresh air from the MVHR, and a nice even warmth throughout, with no cold spots, drafts, or intrusive radiators.

 

Building this way did cost more, but last year my electric bill for the entire 12 months was around £900 - and we have no gas, so that covers heating, hot water, lighting, cooking, and everything else.

 

It certainly cost me more to build this way, but I expect to be here 20+ years, so it all works out in the end. And given how long I plan to be here, I'm happy that we spent a bit more on decent windows etc, as it makes it a much more pleasant place to be.

[Jeremy Harris]

4 hours ago, Fredd said:

your right there!

 

Too expensive cost point over a normal house. 

 

Everyone cant drive an aston right. 

 

 

Our passive build cost around 10% less versus a conventional build in the same location, according to a well-respected architect who came to look at it and asked me for the cost breakdown spreadsheet.

 

There's a VERY big difference between the economics of building houses on a development and building a single house on a solo plot.  Just about every cost associated with building a single house is higher, from no sharing of costs for things like services, ecological surveys, flood risk surveys, contamination reports, highways reports, you name it.  Then add in that all of the mobilisation costs for every trade on site has to be borne by a single house, and it soon becomes clear that all these "fixed costs" significantly exceed the tiny difference that a bit more insulation and very much better airtightness costs.  The latter two elements are way down in the noise of the overall build cost, and may well be recovered by other cost saving elements with some build methods.

 

For example, because of the very much higher accuracy of our passive frame, there was around 20% less wastage on plasterboard and cutting .  There was also a saving because the dead flat slab (which included the UFH pipes and next to no additional cost (around £300 IIRC) was so flat that all the floor coverings could be laid directly onto it, with no need for screeds or any labour to get the floor dead flat.  Just those two aspects potentially saved around 3% of the passive frame and foundation system cost.