Grand Designs: building a shed in Peckham

Anyone see "Grand Designs" last night? Chap built a flat-roof house on a narrow site in Peckham. He basically banged up a metal frame and clad it in some "phenolic plywood" or something, with sliding glass sky-lights.

  • I missed the beginning. They built a house which appeared to block out the light to the side windows of the adjacent property. In a case like this is it OK so long as the neighbour does not complain to the planning dept when plans are announced?

  • The flat roof had a plywood base. How long would this last? I used to have problems with the plywood on my old flat roof garage.

  • Peckham has a dodgy reputation. Wonder if there were any break-ins during the build. They never tell you stuff like this!

Bruce

Reply to
bruce_phipps
Loading thread data ...

It's also OK if the side windows were put in without planning permission, as a colleague found out. (Planning dept suggested applying for retrospective planning permission -- there was nothing to lose as the windows had been in long enough that even if it was refused, they couldn't be forced to remove them.)

It probably got attacked by condensation from underneath. With proper insulation and ventilation, that shouldn't happen.

Reminds me of a recent flight back from Los Angeles... "Ladies and Gentlemen, we will shortly be landing at Heathrow. Passengers on the lefthand side of the plane should find they have a good view of the River Thames, London Bridge, Tower Bridge," and he went on to list several more attractions I don't recall. "I'm sorry, but passengers on the right hand side of the plane can only see Peckham." It caused quite a giggle at the end of a long flight.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

I think he was restricted to a single storey as it was out of keeping with the rest of the housing there, and because it would have affected the light of the neighbouring houses. He also had to hide it from the road front. In the end, it looked sort of similar to the garage of the house on the right - I guess that was partly by plan of the planners.

Anyone else notice the "For Sale" board at the house on the left mid-way through?

D
Reply to
David Hearn

He uses a steel frame, a concrete fire board, something like 50mm to

100mm of PIR foam, and then the plywood over the top.

I thought he had a barrage on the right hand side, and the house to the left did not have any low level windows?

Ought to be good for 30 years min I would have thought - probably much longer. There were three layers resin bonded together - with the roofing layers over the top.

Judging by the way that Kevin seems to revel in "it all going pear shaped" on some of the builds, I bet they would! ;-) Perhaps that is why they built a "stealth house".

Not to my personal taste, but a very impressive achievement and result all the same.

Reply to
John Rumm

Not in this program but another property development program, guy buys burned out shell at auction and proceeds to renovate it..... part way through it showed that his boiler and generator were stolen.

Reply to
Paul ( Skiing8 )

I've looked on the C4 web site. The house next door is quite a handsome house. It has ground floor and

1st floor side windows.

Total cost was =A3170k + =A340k for the land...and he made the glass roof himself on the cheap. And got free/cheap labour from his mates. The building costs seem very high for the end result.

Bruce

Reply to
bruce_phipps

Yes, that was a good program. "So you wanna be a Property Developer".

Somebody fly-tipped in the blokes back yard as well.

Bruce

Reply to
bruce_phipps

I loved the sliding glass roof.

Reply to
chris French

The spa bath hidden under the bed seemed an interesting idea, until you start to think about the practicalities. We have one from the same supplier and, whilst it is great, the amount of steam (water vapour for pedants) it gives off is enormous. This is acceptable in a bathroom, but their whole open plan bedroom, complete with its acres of glass, would be awash.

Chris

Reply to
Chris J Dixon

yeah, that was it..... he didn't have such a good time.

Reply to
Paul ( Skiing8 )

On a flight from Brisbane to Sydney we were over the sea flying past Sydney. The announcement went

Passangers on the right hand side of the plane will have a panaramic view of Sydney harbour. Passangers of the left hand side will have a view of passangers of the right hand side!

Guy

-- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Guy Dawson @ SMTP - snipped-for-privacy@cuillin.org.uk // ICBM - 6.15.16W 57.12.23N 986M

4.4>5.4 4.4>5.4 4.4>5.4 The Reality Check's in the Post! 4.4>5.4 4.4>5.4
Reply to
Guy Dawson

Yep. If I had been that house I would have bid enough to get the land at auction so as to extend the garden and stop some idiot squeezing his erection against my toilet window.

Reply to
Mike

It was 50mm which I can't see meeting part L. As indeed I can't see how half the structure got through most parts of the regs. I assume the BCO had to be lenient as it was on TV. Bet he'd rather have condemned the whole thing.

Reply to
Mike

How do you know it was not the same idiot selling the bit of land adjacent to his toilet window in the first place, since it was a chance to get an extra 40K for not much, and "who cares since I am flogging the house anyway!" ;-)

Reply to
John Rumm

Perhaps that is the idea to save needing curtains ;-)

Reply to
John Rumm

.....and 210k in London buys you what exactly?

a) single room shitty studio flat out in the middle of nowhere b) druggies council flat hole out in the middle of nowhere

....err thats it

Reply to
Kevin Theteenager

What I meant was that for 170k building costs I would have expected a more substantial building. Maybe even some brickwork...

Bruce

Reply to
bruce_phipps

Thought te 170k included the land...

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Why>? that building was substantial enough.

I was very impressed with the way he did it. That steel would stand more earthquakes than bricks ever would, and the ply cladding was fine by me.

Essentialy it was a timber frame type building with the timber replaced by steel.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

I had no particular problem with the construction. I just thought it didn't work, as a finished house: it was, well, a posh kids' den, nothing more.

Reply to
Sam Nelson

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.