nursey I think I have wet myself...

[davefreer]

On the good (for certain values of good) news - Tasmania stands in with a good chance of winning its first Man-Booker Prize. This http://www.wst.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/74951/owner_builder_kit.pdfRead more... )

Comments

[antikva]

LOL, It's the same here in Victoria and I nearly went insane trying to find the Builders Legendendary Tales....err, I mean Regulations. Have you thought about one of the shed options [ quaker barns are popular here as a house] as a base for a house? I believe they are in kit form or possibly seeing if they have ex-school buildings for sale that can be transported in? Some States have them and strip them out ready to be turned into a house.

Apart from that, I don't know, my brother is a builder but he's in Qld, so wouldn't have the info for Tassie :(

[davefreer]

:-)I've looked at the barn/shed type options. On the plus side you have a good idea of the base cost, and at least in theory they go up fast. On the down side they tend to be pretty cold. Look, at this stage the entire excercise is a guessing game. I am doing this much same way as I do my base research for a book - making sure I know as much as possible about the subject in general so that all the possible paths are visible. My brother was the director of provincial park services construction side so for practical details I am way better off than the average bloke. But I kind of expected a simple, clear checklist and supportive info. I've looked at the Tas fisheries (DIPW) site info on aquaculture for instance (purely out of curiousity). That is damn well set up, contains tons of information, references to more, and is a supportive legal framework. You have to fit into it, but the purpose is not to make it hard for you to do this. It was the bits about my marriage and the safety of my kids with paint stripper that got me. Now if they

[msss]

Ouch. The stupid, it hurts.

Be careful though - there's an insane amount of building regulation that could make your house fail an occupancy test. For example, we weren't allowed to connect our water tank to our downpipe ourselves, because that would involve "roofing" which is reserved for plumbers. Urgh. Someone paid off a politician for that one, I'm sure of it.

[davefreer]

Gaah. I'll have to live with it, but don't expect me to like it ;-). You know, my present house is an 'owner build'. It's about 35 years old. It's now had all of it's pre-sell inspections - and sailed through every one of them, which, I have been informed by everyone from the termite and borer inspector to the electrician is abnormal. The reason is fairly simple: Murphy (who built the initial part) Martin and us who added to it, were all building for ourselves and for life. Murphy's beams are twice the required thickness. (and the guy was no idiot - the supports for them are over-engineered too.) He cut the timbers here on the farm, but otherwise yes the building would have cost far more than 'minimum-spec' by a professional builder. But if he'd got a professional to do exactly what he's done - it would have cost 3 times as much, I am sure. And Murphy was a craftsman (he was a cabinet-maker by trade) so the amount of love and care he put into the house is something you would struggle to buy

[msss]

Unemployed plumbers might beat you up?

Well, I am a lawyer, so I'm good at thinking up improbable (but only just this side of impossible) scenarios. It's supposed to be something to do with drainage - apparently rainwater is VERY DANGEROUS if your tank overflows. Because it might undermine the foundations of your house or something. *shrug*

But seriously, you could deal with that by adding an overflow pipe leading back to stormwater. I think this one is just a little protectionist monopoly put in for the mates.

[ext_64262]

Come now, Dave. If you didn't have the occasional officious numb-skull around to throw coconuts at, you'd be bored out of your mind. :-D