D
Deleted member 174758
All I know is that I'd still be getting instructions to build stuff where the drawings bear no resemblance to what we can actually do in reality!
Sponsored Links
D
Deleted member 174758
---
Walls are brilliant, as are those who build them. People should have more walls.
D
Deleted member 174758
But, but, but...
You are NOT being consistent, Woody.
I do like the idea of wooden walls, though.Top man!
You are NOT being consistent, Woody.
I do like the idea of wooden walls, though.Top man!
Sponsored Links
The occupants were largely the poor buggers who suffered the worst because of shoddy workmanship (labourers and builders on bonus rates) and constructions put together from designs made with no developmental history.
In fact there's a great documentary on YouTube (done in the '80s) called the Great British Housing Disaster well worth a watch.
D
Deleted member 174758
It's still happening, with architects specifying combinations of materials and technologies which aren't proven or simply don't work. I'd agree that price work is part of the issue, but the lack of knowledge, experience and ability on the parts of both construction management and the workforce (particularly many of the younger "hot shots" who are simply aren't adequately trained) is frankly rather depressing.
I lived in a (nearly new) factory built pre-cast concrete maisonette in the early 1970s. The insulation was completely inadequate and coupled with aluminium framed single glazed windows and an electric warm air heating system meant that many people couldn't afford to heat their homes adequately in winter. These buildings were eventually demolished in the 1990s (at 30 or less years of use, although they carried on building the things, almost unchanged, into the 1980s) because the steel connectors between the sections were corroding badly and rebar in the walls was also corroding in part because the wrong type of cement had been specified. Poorly designed, poorly made, poorly installed. That was a "new town" house for you. A fine example of architects imposing their will on the masses. I was glad after 3 years to get out and into an old terrace house which I could at least heat with gas, fit double glazing into and insulate better - the first winter my heating bill more than halved
I lived in a (nearly new) factory built pre-cast concrete maisonette in the early 1970s. The insulation was completely inadequate and coupled with aluminium framed single glazed windows and an electric warm air heating system meant that many people couldn't afford to heat their homes adequately in winter. These buildings were eventually demolished in the 1990s (at 30 or less years of use, although they carried on building the things, almost unchanged, into the 1980s) because the steel connectors between the sections were corroding badly and rebar in the walls was also corroding in part because the wrong type of cement had been specified. Poorly designed, poorly made, poorly installed. That was a "new town" house for you. A fine example of architects imposing their will on the masses. I was glad after 3 years to get out and into an old terrace house which I could at least heat with gas, fit double glazing into and insulate better - the first winter my heating bill more than halved
Last edited by a moderator:
It was the people in the buildings and social change on the estates that caused the problems.
Yes there were some build issues, but the same problems occurred in allmost all the Victorian built slums - buildings which where well built.
I've been involved with lots of post war system builds on the estates, and my view is that when you see different families in similar housing, but not experiencing the same or any issues, then it must be the people who are the main factors, not the buildings.
D
Deleted member 174758
Not true! The maisonette I lived in was one of the better ones, yet it had noticeable issues, such as poorly fitting windows which the new town development authority couldn't be bothered to fix, so I packed the gaps with newspaper and applied mastic (expanding foam was still in the future back then). That block, and many others, was subsequently condemned for structural defects such as rotted ties and blown concrete well before its' time. Over the years I've talked with people who lived in this sort of housing in Cwmbran, Harlow, Skelmersdale, Stevenage, etc who all complained about cold, damp houses, poorly built and poorly maintained. That was very common in 1960/70s new town and social housing, so much so that many, many buildings were demolished early.
As to Victorian slums, I feel that you may be too young to remember the massive slum clearance programs undertaken in the 1960s and early 70s - programs which saw wholesale compulsory purchase of large swathes of back to back terraces, under dwellings, of houses with rotten bricks or still with beaten earth flooring, with outside tip toilets or communal privies, and so on. many of these properties were cheaply and shoddily built (Jerry-built), but most of the worst Victorian housing had disappeared by the 1980s, which is possibly before your time. So no, not well built at all
I'm pretty sure that all of us who are in the trades have done some council house bashing at one time or another. I recall the ones which were spotless, and some which smelt dreadful and where you'd think about wiping your boots on the mat as you left. But I still feel that planners and architects are partly responsible for the malaise which often besets public housing - for example the homes heated (as mine was) with electric heating that even someone on a decent wage struggled to pay for because the heating was so inefficient, and so expensive to run in a very poorly insulated building. No wonder, then, that poorer, less well educated tenants found themselves making a choice between heating on electric and not eating, or using a paraffin or gas heater (with all the condensation and black mould that brings) and still being able to feed and clothe themselves. Yes, electric warm air heating in the 1970s was that expensive, and when we were in the middle of miners strikes or a three day week (due to a war in the Middle East) and there was no electric for heating, what then? As I said, I was fortunate - many weren't at a time of 20 to 30% local unemployment (if you want a really bad example look at the statistics for Skelmersdale after Courtaulds then Thorn pulled out in the early to mid 1970s, around 45%). It isn't always down to what blood-sucking scumbag landlords call "scumbag tenants"
Last edited by a moderator:
I tend to see and have seen more problem people than problem properties.
A big part of the buildings becoming run down and lacking in maintenance is the way they are used and abused by the occupiers. Intentionally or unintentionally there is an attitude that "it's the council's/association's house so their problem". But when a place looks rundown, the street gets run down and spirals into places like the slums that the new estates were intended to replace
So often, that sad looking tenant with their sad looking kids and the mould strewn walls and ceilings in the background that makes a great photo in the papers showing the "poor tenant" and the "bad landlord", has tended to come about by the tenant's use of the property not necessarily the landlords failure to maintain.
And those estate parks, paths, amenities etc have suffered similarly by the users and abusers and wider social problems and change.
I don't remember the times, but have heard about the times when the "rent man" would order, yes order not ask, the tenants to cut their over-grown grass, and tidy their messy garden, and paint their things that needed painting and keep the inside decorated nicely, or else they would be out. This kept the estates nice looking and with that came the attitude to keep all parts of the estate in good order.
I would dispute that the Victorian houses that became slums were not well built. When the same Victorian houses that became privately owned are still going strong. They became slums because of how they were lived in and cared for.
You see it now with the plethora of regen schemes and council housing being transferred to associations or tenant's groups. The place gets a total makeover, looks great, has great performing housing, but as soon as the controls lax, the problem tenants arrive or are not controlled, the place takes a dive, the paint starts to flake, the gardens get over-grown and the whole estate heads back to the way it was before.
A big part of the buildings becoming run down and lacking in maintenance is the way they are used and abused by the occupiers. Intentionally or unintentionally there is an attitude that "it's the council's/association's house so their problem". But when a place looks rundown, the street gets run down and spirals into places like the slums that the new estates were intended to replace
So often, that sad looking tenant with their sad looking kids and the mould strewn walls and ceilings in the background that makes a great photo in the papers showing the "poor tenant" and the "bad landlord", has tended to come about by the tenant's use of the property not necessarily the landlords failure to maintain.
And those estate parks, paths, amenities etc have suffered similarly by the users and abusers and wider social problems and change.
I don't remember the times, but have heard about the times when the "rent man" would order, yes order not ask, the tenants to cut their over-grown grass, and tidy their messy garden, and paint their things that needed painting and keep the inside decorated nicely, or else they would be out. This kept the estates nice looking and with that came the attitude to keep all parts of the estate in good order.
I would dispute that the Victorian houses that became slums were not well built. When the same Victorian houses that became privately owned are still going strong. They became slums because of how they were lived in and cared for.
You see it now with the plethora of regen schemes and council housing being transferred to associations or tenant's groups. The place gets a total makeover, looks great, has great performing housing, but as soon as the controls lax, the problem tenants arrive or are not controlled, the place takes a dive, the paint starts to flake, the gardens get over-grown and the whole estate heads back to the way it was before.
I did a job a couple of years ago where the client didn't want skirting. The walls finished with a 10mm gap at the bottom (galvanised beadings).
I dread to think how black the lowest parts of the walls are after being bashed by the vacuum cleaner.
Your posts often have an air of "the way she was dressed, she deserved it". I genuinely hope that I am wrong. Some of your advice, I would agree with, other times you seem to be a parody account, hell bent on being confrontational for the sake of it. Anywho, as you were, regardless, I shall duck out at this point.
Thank you. I'll be here all week.
D
Deleted member 174758
I'm waiting for the telegram on Saturday, "Audience with me all the way STOP Managed to shake them off at the station!"
I'm too young for 'The Goons', but 'Highway' is a blast from the past!
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- carlosfandango1976
- Wood / Woodwork / Carpentry
