Timber frame build

shivermetimber

Looking for solid advise on what I might be missing. I've been exploring the idea of a timber frame house for residential use for a long time now (self build and foreign options included) and recently came across structures provided and built by an Irish company. They have said that the builds are fully regulation compliant and cert of compliance can be provided. Construction looks good, insulation seems on par with requirements and part L can be fulfilled. They have a lot of examples of builds completed around the country and have a showroom to visit.

I know there have been many discussions here and elsewhere about 'log cabins' and that this kind of build just isn't possible but no real solid advise. Surely given the above there is a chance that all the boxes can be ticked build wise, pending planning of course. Anything I'm missing?

B-D-P--

To be clear,
Are you looking at a log cabin or a timber framed?

Log Cabins are a no go really.
Timber frame: Theres ample discussions had here, pros and cons, We've gone into depth on the topic at liest 5 times.

everybody has their own opinion, some say its better thermal, others say its worse sound transfer. there are many many more pros and cons.

However we usually all agree, its not cheaper, and barley quicker.

shivermetimber

B-D-P-- wrote: »

To be clear,
Are you looking at a log cabin or a timber framed?

Log Cabins are a no go really.
Timber frame: Theres ample discussions had here, pros and cons, We've gone into depth on the topic at liest 5 times.

everybody has their own opinion, some say its better thermal, others say its worse sound transfer. there are many many more pros and cons.

However we usually all agree, its not cheaper, and barley quicker.

Technically speaking the structure is of the 'log cabin' type however they are double walled, fully insulated and the manufacturer says they can provide cert of compliance so they seem a step up from the typical log cabin shed out the back garden type build.

sydthebeat

could you pm a link to that company please?

shivermetimber

sydthebeat wrote: »

could you pm a link to that company please?

Done

flc37ie6ojwkh8

Have you guys seen the youtube channel "Pure living for life"? They built a fantastic timber frame.

Bawnmore

shivermetimber wrote: »

Done

Could you PM me that as well if you don't mind.

shivermetimber

Konnor Unsightly Acrobat wrote: »

Have you guys seen the youtube channel "Pure living for life"? They built a fantastic timber frame.

No but have seen many more around. Actually have a design similar to theirs done up myself (hybrid of irishvernacularhouse frame design and bru 1.25 layout) but I am more curious about current commercial modular offerings and how they stack up against regs etc to see if they are viable.

sydthebeat

having looked at the link to the site theres a few things thats clear

1. they offer a single skinned 60mm version or a double skinned version with 100mm iso supersaver quilt
2. their roof specs are for a standard 100mm rockwool or 100mm PIR as an upgrade
3. no spec on windows or doors

so first off, even their upgraded spec doesnt come anywhere close to meeting building regulations. Im sure they would argue that its dependent on the plug ins of heating and ventilation etc, but realistically no, they are no where near compliant. No mention of air tightness anywhere on their website.

so my impressions are that they are another company who proved glorified garden sheds for €10,000's with no chance of mortgage approval for the purchase of same as a habitable dwelling.

shivermetimber

sydthebeat wrote: »

having looked at the link to the site theres a few things thats clear

1. they offer a single skinned 60mm version or a double skinned version with 100mm iso supersaver quilt
2. their roof specs are for a standard 100mm rockwool or 100mm PIR as an upgrade
3. no spec on windows or doors

so first off, even their upgraded spec doesnt come anywhere close to meeting building regulations. Im sure they would argue that its dependent on the plug ins of heating and ventilation etc, but realistically no, they are no where near compliant. No mention of air tightness anywhere on their website.

so my impressions are that they are another company who proved glorified garden sheds for €10,000's with no chance of mortgage approval for the purchase of same as a habitable dwelling.

Thanks for the look over. The website definitely lacks a lot of key info. You can get a better impression of the predesigned and custom builds on fb.

Would a double wall (100mm and 30mm ish) construction with 100mm iso quilt not be near compliant if combined with an airtight membrane? As far as I can see they are using a vapour barrier - Fakro brand. What kind of insulation density would be needed if that's not up to scratch? 150mm or more? Pretty sure all glass is double glazed. Also wondering how they can have no problem saying it is compliant and provide certs etc if not.

Lumen

This is what a proper "log cabin" looks like to me:

http://www.woodwrights.ie/Shed.html

I think the creator of that posts here sometimes. I asked him what it cost him in materials and the answer was 15k (free labour and design).

And that's for something that is technically a shed and so isn't required to meet building regs (and presumably doesn't in several respects: foundations, ventilation etc).

BryanF

shivermetimber wrote: »

Thanks for the look over. The website definitely lacks a lot of key info. You can get a better impression of the predesigned and custom builds on fb.

1. Would a double wall (100mm and 30mm ish) construction with 100mm iso quilt not be near compliant if combined with an airtight membrane?
2. As far as I can see they are using a vapour barrier - Fakro brand. What kind of insulation density would be needed if that's not up to scratch? 150mm or more?

3. Pretty sure all glass is double glazed.
4. Also wondering how they can have no problem saying it is compliant and provide certs etc if not.

1. No
2. More. And roof should be [edit] subject to vapour calc
3. Not necessarily compliant. BER will dictate windows. are they doing the BER and commencement notice for you?
4. Ask for a copy of the certs?

shivermetimber

BryanF wrote: »

1. No
2. More. And roof should be [edit] subject to vapour calc
3. Not necessarily compliant. BER will dictate windows. are they doing the BER and commencement notice for you?
4. Ask for a copy of the certs?

Thanks for the input. I was thinking of asking for a copy of the certs alright as they said they can provide them for planning needs. Might just head down to the showroom for a gander and face to face questioning.

Gumbo

shivermetimber wrote: »

Thanks for the input. I was thinking of asking for a copy of the certs alright as they said they can provide them for planning needs. Might just head down to the showroom for a gander and face to face questioning.

Prepare to be disappointed.

shivermetimber

kceire wrote: »

Prepare to be disappointed.

Oh I am! Just trying to explore all possibilities to the fullest

sydthebeat

shivermetimber wrote: »

Oh I am! Just trying to explore all possibilities to the fullest

just be aware that there are different regulations required to be complied with when comparing

A NEW INDEPENDENT HOUSE BUILD

to a

AN INDEPENDENT ROOM ANCILLARY TO, AND FOR THE ENJOYMENT OF, AN EXISTING HOUSE

I suspect a lot of these certifications are based upon the latter

shivermetimber

sydthebeat wrote: »

just be aware that there are different regulations required to be complied with when comparing

A NEW INDEPENDENT HOUSE BUILD

to a

AN INDEPENDENT ROOM ANCILLARY TO, AND FOR THE ENJOYMENT OF, AN EXISTING HOUSE

I suspect a lot of these certifications are based upon the latter

Didn't know about this. Probably clutching as I imagine the latter literally means joined on to the main homestead somehow but say for example the structure is intended to be a gate lodge to an already existing farmstead with house in place would it then be considered the latter? If so what are the different set of regulations and do you think this would help somewhat with planning?

Metric Tensor

sydthebeat wrote: »

AN INDEPENDENT ROOM ANCILLARY TO, AND FOR THE ENJOYMENT OF, AN EXISTING HOUSE

Also known as a shed.

BryanF

shivermetimber wrote: »

for example the structure is intended to be a gate lodge to an already existing farmstead with house in place would it then be considered the latter? If so what are the different set of regulations and do you think this would help somewhat with planning?

No, the former
No, new house regs apply
No, ‘planning for new dwelling’

shivermetimber

BryanF wrote: »

No, the former
No, new house regs apply
No, ‘planning for new dwelling’

Thought as much, ah well. Still curious as to how all of this companies structures are going up with planning etc and being openly residential.

As a side not it's such as shame given the current housing situation that the rules cannot be relaxed somewhat or amended for certain situations. There is literally no room for people to think outside the box.

Metric Tensor

shivermetimber wrote: »

As a side not it's such as shame given the current housing situation that the rules cannot be relaxed somewhat or amended for certain situations. There is literally no room for people to think outside the box.

Rules are there for a reason though. Would you argue that considering the current cost of new cars we could make seatbelts optional or allow bald tyres because new ones are so expensive?

Thinking outside the box is not a problem ... look at SIP panel systems, external insulation, PV panels, MHRV - all of these have changed the building industry hugely in the last 10 years.

It's people who try to change the "box" into something else altogether, that suits the product they are selling, that are causing problems!

sydthebeat

shivermetimber wrote: »

1. I imagine the latter literally means joined on to the main homestead somehow?

shivermetimber wrote: »

2. for example the structure is intended to be a gate lodge to an already existing farmstead with house in place would it then be considered the latter?

shivermetimber wrote: »

3. If so what are the different set of regulations and do you think this would help somewhat with planning?

1. Doesnt necessarily have to be physically attached. You can have a room / workshop / hobby room / etc etc detached from a house which can be used "for the enjoyment of the dwelling". This would be subject to different building regulations then if it was a new dwelling.

2. I personally would consider a gate lodge an independent new dwelling, and as such would need to be compliant to new dwelling regulations

3. there are many differences. the main one is that the energy efficiency regulations (Part L) have separate sections for "new dwellings" and "material alterations or extensions". The regs for new dwellings are vastly more onerous than material alterations.


also, dont be getting too confused equating planning to building regs... they are two completely separate issues. People often flout planning laws by erecting unauthorised structures. ... or moreso by getting planning for one particular use but using it for another use ie a "workshop" becomes a rented annex......

shivermetimber

Metric Tensor wrote: »

Rules are there for a reason though. Would you argue that considering the current cost of new cars we could make seatbelts optional or allow bald tyres because new ones are so expensive?

Thinking outside the box is not a problem ... look at SIP panel systems, external insulation, PV panels, MHRV - all of these have changed the building industry hugely in the last 10 years.

It's people who try to change the "box" into something else altogether, that suits the product they are selling, that are causing problems!

I hear you however I do feel that having all new builds be around passive house standard, which was once the pinnacle of building standards is very very limiting. I have looked into SIP panel systems and other modular alternatives but even these are still very expensive here. Elsewhere is different but of course :rolleyes: I just have a hard time grasping how with all of these 'advancements' it is nigh on impossible for a working low income earner with a relatively small three figure mortgage possibility to be able to build a small, humble dwelling today.

shivermetimber

sydthebeat wrote: »

...also, dont be getting too confused equating planning to building regs... they are two completely separate issues. People often flout planning laws by erecting unauthorised structures. ... or moreso by getting planning for one particular use but using it for another use ie a "workshop" becomes a rented annex......

Possibly this is what is happening with these builds but a lot of them are openly being used as residential and some are fresh new builds and not near any previous dwellings.

Metric Tensor

shivermetimber wrote: »

I hear you however I do feel that having all new builds be around passive house standard, which was once the pinnacle of building standards is very very limiting.

That's pushed by our national commitment to the environment. And I agree with you that a large cost has been put on prospective builders in order to ensure emissions from newly built dwellings are very low. I'm not convinced it's a fair distribution.

BUT if dwellings were being built to a lesser level of emissions then we would have to find another way to cut emissions - ban meat maybe? or milk? or cars? or kettles? - it has to come from somewhere and rightly or wrongly the decisions have been balanced as they are. Having said that - life cycle carbon costs tend to be completely ignored in the additions. That needs to be changed - but products created at huge carbon expense abroad don't register on our 2020 targets!

shivermetimber wrote: »

it is nigh on impossible for a working low income earner with a relatively small three figure mortgage possibility to be able to build a small, humble dwelling today.

Depends on your definition of small and humble! Dispensing with the flat screen tv and the manicured lawns you could build a nice 1200 sq ft house for €150,000. (Site costs are another issue!)

shivermetimber

Metric Tensor wrote: »

That's pushed by our national commitment to the environment. And I agree with you that a large cost has been put on prospective builders in order to ensure emissions from newly built dwellings are very low. I'm not convinced it's a fair distribution.

BUT if dwellings were being built to a lesser level of emissions then we would have to find another way to cut emissions - ban meat maybe? or milk? or cars? or kettles? - it has to come from somewhere and rightly or wrongly the decisions have been balanced as they are. Having said that - life cycle carbon costs tend to be completely ignored in the additions. That needs to be changed - but products created at huge carbon expense abroad don't register on our 2020 targets!




Depends on your definition of small and humble! Dispensing with the flat screen tv and the manicured lawns you could build a nice 1200 sq ft house for €150,000. (Site costs are another issue!)

I completely agree but I do think it's been taken a bit too far. I'm vegetarian so no skin off my nose about a meat ban :pac:

Regarding small and humble, it would be just that. All I would need is around 900 sq ft max but I have been told plenty of times from various people that to do so for 100-130ish is impossible (site excluded). Plenty of superb examples of low cost builds elsewhere that have though.
I have come across a new modular type SIP offering from one of Irelands leading passive house builders that may work within my range but am still looking into it.

Metric Tensor

Probably not what you want to hear but with that budget you'd get more bang for buck if you buy a run down house and gradually do it up bit by bit as more funds become available.

shivermetimber

Metric Tensor wrote: »

Probably not what you want to hear but with that budget you'd get more bang for buck if you buy a run down house and gradually do it up bit by bit as more funds become available.

Oh no, I'm open to everything. Have to be! I'm just exploring what's possible as I have access to land in a good location. Unfortunately just not enough monies to do anything with it it seems

shivermetimber

The new government backed lending may change things however as it seems it's open to new builds too. Hmmm..

Gumbo

shivermetimber wrote: »

The new government backed lending may change things however as it seems it's open to new builds too. Hmmm..

They still won’t lend for a garden shed type structure.

shivermetimber

kceire wrote: »

They still won’t lend for a garden shed type structure.

That ideas was only being entertained to try and see what I can do with what I got and can get With this I could aim for a more regular type self build.