Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.
Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
 Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.

The AECB accepts no responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this site. Views given in posts are not necessarily the views of the AECB.



Fundamentals: The ten biggest mistakes made in recent UK house building philosophies?

Bottom of Page

31 to 60 of 77

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. >
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 8th 2009
     
    Where are we up to -- anyone fancy a go at a top 20 or 30 list?
    • CommentAuthorludite
    • CommentTimeJan 9th 2009
     
    Please forgive me howdytom. I did misunderstand your post. I thought you advocated 'communal/family/mansion' living on the basis that a large house would have less surface area than lots of small ones - but what you were actually saying was that some CRAZY houses get past planning when other ones - with great ideas, avante guard designs or green credentials miss out because they don't look fake victorian enough.
    • CommentAuthorludite
    • CommentTimeJan 9th 2009
     
    So far all the points are great. Maybe it should be a top 50.

    Who mentioned the (excellent) point about good houses for the 'rich' and rubbish ones for the 'poor'. This is why I hate the term 'affordable housing' - it's just spin for 'rubbish'.
  4.  
    Forgive me if I'm being naive, but whats wrong with sash windows? i like mine.
    • CommentAuthorbiffvernon
    • CommentTimeJan 11th 2009
     
    So do I.
    • CommentAuthorludite
    • CommentTimeJan 11th 2009
     
    BrianR "external render without drainage channels".

    Please can you explain? Are we talking about concrete on exterior walls? Where/how do you put in drainage channels?
  7.  
    Posted By: quercusroburForgive me if I'm being naive, but whats wrong with sash windows? i like mine.


    They look nice, but they can never have the same level of performance as, say, casement windows.

    See this article "Double hung inherently flawed": http://www.thermotechfiberglass.com/Column3.htm

    Paul in Montreal.
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 11th 2009 edited
     
    My latest list for us to vote on:

    Brutalist apartment blocks
    Sash windows
    External render (without drainage channels)
    Bitumen roof tile underlay
    Micro-bore copper pipes
    Flat roofs
    Bitumen roof felt
    Iron/Alum windows (with no insulation)
    Halogen lighting
    House driveways (instead of front gardens)
    Cavity walls
    Blob and dob
    Not making housing adaptable to the ever changing needs of the 'family':
    Aerated concrete
    The present planning system
    The concept of an entirely rigid, inflexible structure for a home (cf. deep foundations).
    Too little insulation
    British plumbing.
    Using second derivatives of carbon counting as a means to measure how sustainable a home is.
    Blanket application of micro-renewables.
    not building air tightly
    cement mortar
    The idea that a house should have a life span of 25-30 years
    uninsulated suspended floors
    The implementation, wasted opportunities and misuse of the Town + Country Planning Act, by government and others (such as planners)
    Roof trusses
  9.  
    I remember many years ago, back when they still mattered, circa 1977, that The Clash were asked to write an election manifesto for some music paper, the point that stuck in my mind was that "planners and architects should be made to live in the housing estates that they design" or words to that effect...
  10.  
    <blockquote><cite>Posted By: tony</cite>Roof trusses</blockquote>

    What exactly do you mean by roof trusses and why don't you like them?
  11.  
    Posted By: tonyBrutalist apartment blocks


    What!

    How? why?

    If you mean the corrupt procurement and inappropriate housing policy combined with no money for maintenance then yes - but many of these buildings were essentially sound and a step forward replacing slums where people lived in essentially shanty town building standards with massive overcrowding minimal sewerage and no hot water or heating.

    The problem was the implementation (from council officers, central housing policy and yes including architects) of the post war mass housing developments, not the basic ideas behind the buildings as a type.

    :confused:

    J
    • CommentAuthorTheDoctor
    • CommentTimeJan 12th 2009
     
    James N, you are spot on.

    the proof is the success of this building type elsewhere in the world.

    the UK's premise that these were sink estates, and a very narrow demographic were moved in en masse, resulted in their abject failure.
    A full spectrum community would have worked.

    a friend had a top floor apartment in one of these towers in Dundee. It cost him £12,000 to buy, and he sold it four years later for £12,500.
    two rooms let covered twice the mortgage, and the views were STUNNING.

    a bit scary in the lift at 2.00am, though!
    • CommentAuthorludite
    • CommentTimeJan 13th 2009
     
    external render without drainage channels????? please explain!

    what's wrong with roof trusses?

    Besides that Tony, I think you have it all covered. Is that in the right order, or do we now get down to arguing about which should come first?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 13th 2009 edited
     
    We are ready to vote now

    Brutalist apartment blocks
    Sash windows
    External render (without drainage channels)
    Bitumen roof tile underlay
    Micro-bore copper pipes
    Flat roofs
    Bitumen roof felt
    Iron/Alum windows (with no insulation)
    Halogen lighting
    House driveways (instead of front gardens)
    the detached house holy grail
    Cavity walls
    Blob and dob
    Not making housing adaptable to the ever changing needs of the 'family':
    Aerated concrete
    unnecessary sanitary accommodation
    The present planning system
    The concept of an entirely rigid, inflexible structure for a home (cf. deep foundations).
    Too little insulation
    British plumbing.
    Using second derivatives of carbon counting as a means to measure how sustainable a home is.
    Blanket application of micro-renewables.
    not building air tightly
    cement mortar
    The idea that a house should have a life span of 25-30 years
    uninsulated suspended floors
    The implementation, wasted opportunities and misuse of the Town + Country Planning Act, by government and others (such as planners)
    • CommentAuthorTheDoctor
    • CommentTimeJan 14th 2009
     
    nothing wrong at all with a properly constructed flat roof.

    keeps materials to a minimum for space enclosed, and if well designed and installed to sensible falls will last as long as a pitched counterpart.


    you left off the detached house holy grail and unnecessary sanitary accommodation
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 14th 2009
     
    I've edited in the last two now -- sorry

    There are not very many properly constructed flat roofs and the vast majority leek often sooner rather than later.
    • CommentAuthorTheDoctor
    • CommentTimeJan 14th 2009
     
    true - but nothing wrong with them per se

    (i've just built myself one!)

    which brings British workmanship into the mix
  18.  
    ...brutalist apartment blocks...? am I missing something?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2009
     
    How do we get this up to vote on?
    • CommentAuthorludite
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2009
     
    Will someone PLEASE explain about the drainage channels:devil:
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 18th 2009
     
    We are going to get a vote on this in the not too distant future.:swingin:
  22.  
    I think a lot of these things fall into the category of 'easy to do badly' rather than bad per se. Perhaps:

    No. x - The systematic and persistent failure of the industry and regulators to ensure quality construction leading to otherwise sound building techniques, forms and building types being all to often associated with poor performance.

    (this might also condense the list a little Tony, as it is a bit long and damning and makes you sound a trifle scary....)

    :wink:

    J
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJan 18th 2009
     
    It is now "our" list and we will hopefully vote on it soon

    I do tend to be rather harsh but I also feel cavity walls deserve harsh treatment they have and will cost us a nation megga ammounts of wasted energy.

    If you would like to tone down the list please feel free to do so and re post it. I am no one special only the thread starter upper on this one.
    • CommentAuthorhowdytom
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2009 edited
     
    Admin, would it be possible to ammend this poll, so that we can vote on our top ten. voting on one only will not give a very good outcome. better still we should be able to list them in order of importance, then you'll have a meaningfull pole to discuss.

    Tom
    • CommentAuthormenzies
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2009
     
    Roof trusses are included in the original list, are persistently mentioned in comments, and then removed without any suitable explanation as to their initial inclusion and then subsequent omission. Can someone please elaborate on the issues of roof trusses (if any)?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2009
     
    cheapest way to build a roof, universally accepted but neither the best, most sensible and none to easy to mess with.

    edited out of vote for technical reasons. ( lac of space) you want them in again?
    • CommentAuthormenzies
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2009 edited
     
    not at all. i am an advocate of roof trusses, and was slightly taken back by their inclusion in the list of biggest building philosophy mistakes. thought i must have missed something.
    • CommentAuthorModerator
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2009
     
    Posted By: howdytomAdmin would it be possible to ammend this poll, so that we can vote on our top ten. voting on one only will not give a very good outcome. better still we should be able to list them in order of importance, then you'll have a meaningfull pole to discuss.

    Tom


    I don't think it is possible Tom, sorry. I can make it multiple choice
  29.  
    I would like to make the point regarding insulation v airtightness. Having lots of insulation in the middle of what amounts to a collander is like having no insulation at all. Having a very airtight building with no insulation however is still worthwhile.

    Therefore the biggest mistake [at least in terms of energy conservation] is not building airtight houses.

    Prudent levels of insulation combined with airtightness is what we should be now aiming for, particularly in relation to the existing stock.

    Thats my tuppence worth.
    • CommentAuthormenzies
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2009
     
    to be pedantic, it is impossible to have no insulation, or else you are standing outside.

31 to 60 of 77

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. >
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press