Drawings, we need some drawings to answer further ....
Wood vs. Steel for Dormer Loft Conversions: A Debate with My Architect
- Thread starter mariohi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dormer loft conversion
Check PM.
Bloody stupid IMO, no wonder jobbing builders are turned away.
You should really share them with the forum though, just delete your address etc.
Can you expand on this one?
Here is the link to the plans with the address and other details removed:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Sbg2iBaR8CLuDaQBvi5pKTph4QlCSekH?usp=sharing
Because all of the structure is steel, domestic builders like building with wood and masonry and steel beams not Meccano. Sure it's all very nice and perhaps even cost effective on paper (given the current price of timber) but only if someone is willing to build it. Metsec stuff is absolutely fine per se, it's used extensively throughout the industry and the world but not really for domestic extensions. You would need a builder happy to build with it so would be looking for a more commercially orientated contractor used to throwing up steel sheds and like, they will know the best suppliers and will be familiar with building with this stuff but would they be interested in a piddly (for them) loft conversion? I daresay others will throw in their two pennies worth.
Last edited:
This looks like a system. Like Ecotrus but with metsec channels.
Not that difficult but I'm surprised your architect didn't discuss it with you before offering a fait accompli. Decent builders could handle it but they won't want to risk it unless they've at least seen it done. I specified a very large metal roof last year due to planning constraints. The quotes were astronomical. I sourced the materials and persuaded a carpentry business I know very well to take it on - they didn't want to. I walked the boss through the various elements and he eventually agreed. Afterwards he was gobsmacked at how easy it was and now sees it as a useful extra range of work. But the architect should have discussed it with you.
Not that difficult but I'm surprised your architect didn't discuss it with you before offering a fait accompli. Decent builders could handle it but they won't want to risk it unless they've at least seen it done. I specified a very large metal roof last year due to planning constraints. The quotes were astronomical. I sourced the materials and persuaded a carpentry business I know very well to take it on - they didn't want to. I walked the boss through the various elements and he eventually agreed. Afterwards he was gobsmacked at how easy it was and now sees it as a useful extra range of work. But the architect should have discussed it with you.
Thank you all for the replies, this actually confirmed what I was thinking but this is not my specialty so good to hear it from someone with more knowledge in this subject.
Unfortunately, the company who designed this is not taking any of this on board and demanding payment for this design. For changing the material to the wood they asking for extra money. This project has no use for me but I offered to pay half of the agreed cost to get this settled but they decided to take it to Small Claims.
Their defence is this is the common way of doing this and that they build similar conversions earlier this year.
When discussing this while the survey was done and measurements taken I made it clear that I'm looking for steel beams on the floor and everything else in wood. Unfortunately, this is only my word against another person's word.
Any advice on how can I defend my case?
The main points for now are:
- they failed to consult the choice of materials
- provided solution is uncommon for domestic extensions and builders are not familiar with this type of designs
- Project too small for large companies which are experienced in this type of builds
Any ideas on what else should I add to this and how to make my case stronger?
I put some more details in the document here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Sbg2iBaR8CLuDaQBvi5pKTph4QlCSekH?usp=sharing
Unfortunately, the company who designed this is not taking any of this on board and demanding payment for this design. For changing the material to the wood they asking for extra money. This project has no use for me but I offered to pay half of the agreed cost to get this settled but they decided to take it to Small Claims.
Their defence is this is the common way of doing this and that they build similar conversions earlier this year.
When discussing this while the survey was done and measurements taken I made it clear that I'm looking for steel beams on the floor and everything else in wood. Unfortunately, this is only my word against another person's word.
Any advice on how can I defend my case?
The main points for now are:
- they failed to consult the choice of materials
- provided solution is uncommon for domestic extensions and builders are not familiar with this type of designs
- Project too small for large companies which are experienced in this type of builds
Any ideas on what else should I add to this and how to make my case stronger?
I put some more details in the document here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Sbg2iBaR8CLuDaQBvi5pKTph4QlCSekH?usp=sharing
Reading your response to what I assume is the particulars of claim there is one glaring error in the designer's evidence.
I cannot see any reference to a written fee quote or confirmation of their conditions of engagement. Nor can I see any reference to a written instruction from yourself. That immediately puts the designer on the back foot because they have not clearly explained the professional service they intend to provide nor their charges. The court will not look favourably on this as it is a fundamental requirement for providing a professional service. No wonder there have been misunderstandings and a design that you are not happy with as it would seem nothing has been agreed in writing.
Also now that I have seen the drawings they look very amateurish. Does the designer have any kind of professional qualification?
One final point, unless the 2 windows in the face of the dormer are obscure glazed and fixed shut that is not permitted development. I know in post #13 you said that you had an LDC but you cannot have clear glazed openable windows on a side elevation below 1.7m from floor level under permitted development.
I cannot see any reference to a written fee quote or confirmation of their conditions of engagement. Nor can I see any reference to a written instruction from yourself. That immediately puts the designer on the back foot because they have not clearly explained the professional service they intend to provide nor their charges. The court will not look favourably on this as it is a fundamental requirement for providing a professional service. No wonder there have been misunderstandings and a design that you are not happy with as it would seem nothing has been agreed in writing.
Also now that I have seen the drawings they look very amateurish. Does the designer have any kind of professional qualification?
One final point, unless the 2 windows in the face of the dormer are obscure glazed and fixed shut that is not permitted development. I know in post #13 you said that you had an LDC but you cannot have clear glazed openable windows on a side elevation below 1.7m from floor level under permitted development.
@wessex101 Very good points here. I was so confused with other bits I completely missed so obvious ones. Thank you for pointing this out.
Can they recommend a builder that will use their spec if they have done a few already?
@SpecialK Initially they recommended a builder and all was very promising but when he heard about the steel, all changed and it even didn't go to the quote stage. The company which did the design also builds but they are more focused on industrial projects and mentioned they are expensive. At the planning permission stage, they were saying about 40K, when they provided structural plans and I was not able to find anyone I asked what would cost if they build it and they dropped the ballpark figure of over 60K + VAT (just a reminder this is 8x4m loft conversion) which was way over my budget for this project.
What is so amateurish about the drawings? Is there anything missing, or not done up to the standard? I was told this was prepared by a Structural Engineer, and the plan is signed by initial and last name but qualifications are not listed.
Now when searching the documents they didn't mention windows or the type at all, the only reference is the view of the elevation which indicates a clear openable window - this is also what I was told.
The drawings just look very sparse and sloppy. I guess they are the planning drawings but even so there is a complete lack of any annotations, except the size and position of the radiators which is rather bizarre. Also the floor plan shows a small window on the rear dormer cheek but not shown on the elevation drawing and it appears that window would clash with the existing roof gable verge. I see a lot of drawings and these just don't look very professional. Possibly because they have been drawn by a "structural engineer", not renowned for their design and draughtsmanship skills. Probably about as good as a set of structural calculations prepared by an architect.
The permitted development error is as much the planning departments fault as the designer. Although as the drawing is so vague it doesn't actually say that the windows are clear glazed and openable. Whenever I've submitted a similar LDC application they always insist on a notation on the drawings to confirm side windows to be obscure glazed and non openable below 1.7m. It could be an interesting situation if the planning department come back after the work is completed and kick up a fuss about the windows and certainly not an argument I would want to find myself involved in.