I could live with a house that pays me £1800.00 a year rather than gives me elccy bills!
Yeah but how much extra did they have to pay for the build in order to achieve that? From a financial perspective I suspect the rate of return is too low. Actually, they spent so much on the place – mainly the arch and windows – that I’d like to know if the house is worth as much on the market as it cost to build; it seems to me that usually self-builds include a profit once finished.Posted 9 years agomatt_outandaboutSubscriber
Nice house, mad/fun/different/liked the architecture – but silly mahoney to build, impractical to live in a lot of that space.
I am not sure it will meet Passiv Haus stuff on-going – and £1800 a year, errrr, no it won’t. There is a reason most Passiv Haus look like boxes, and few have as much glazing as they did, few have cavity walls like they did, and very few have big arches and high areas, few have bathrooms and sinks and kitchens at different ends of the house etc….
Nice and airtight though 🙂 we need more of that.Posted 9 years agosteve_b77Member
1800 quid a year return only works out at 247 years to make your money back, assuming that there are no other bills in the mean time!!
To be honest I liked how it looked, but still not overly sure of how stable it’ll be.
What happens if the air/poo smell recycling unit packs up when they’re asleep, as the house is “air tight” wouldn’t the CO levels go up rather rapidly or is the space too big for it to matter?
I’d love it if he had this mego eco-friendly giving back house and a Range Rover Vogue with a V8 petrol engine parked out back 😆Posted 9 years agothepuristSubscriber
Why spend a packet building a self supporting arch if you’re going to have 2 flanking walls that could just as easily support it? It’d be trivial to keep the same finishes inside & out but have a lot less faff with the construction. The only reason for doing it would be so that you can dismantle the sub-structure and leave the arch in situ, but he was never going to do that. And IMO the interaction between the curves and the rectilinear form of the rooms was quite jarring, especially inside – too many ideas, too little critque.Posted 9 years agomatt_outandaboutSubscriber
I want to know what is ‘eco’ about that resin floor…its amazing what BS people buy into…
thepurist – Member
Why spend a packet building a self supporting arch if you’re going to have 2 flanking walls that could just as easily support it
As Boris would say, Architect having a w*nk off?Posted 9 years agooldgitMember
This new series ain’t doing it for me.
Architect + money = dull.
It’s up there with ‘Stars in their eyes’ now.
See I’m going to watch a programe about a geezer from Basildon building a rocket to go to the moon. But not one about NASA doing the same, if you know what I mean?Posted 9 years agotheginjaninjaSubscriber
Wasn’t keen on it at first but they created something really special for them I think as well as some decent materials. The “carbon neutral” tag is bullshit though. Won’t use any carbon when lived in but those tiles have a fair chunk of carbon embodied in them.
And yes, I am an Architect.
As for the cost involed with the eco measures. It may be generating £1800 now but that figure will surely rise. Energy isn’t going to get cheaper for quite some time now is it.Posted 9 years ago
The topic ‘Grand Designs’ is closed to new replies.