When visiting friends recently, I was quite disturbed by the lack of quality, craftmanship and general 'sturdiness' of their home.

Of course, I didn't say anything to their faces, as that would be rude. So I come here instead to slag them and their home off with you good people.

The walls, as with most new builds in the UK, were hollow and seemingly entirely constructed from plasterboard, save for the external brick facings. The floors too, wooden, even though this was a block of apartments, each being in quite close proximity to the others. The communal stairs and area - all wooden too. This annoyed me somewhat, as I stayed overnight and my friends are non-smokers. This meant I had to venture down the stairs and outside for my fix...all well and good, you might think. However, to do so meant waking up all the inhabitants of the flats on either side of the stairs, as they creaked and strained under my immense weight.

I can understand this in a convertion but surely it isn't the best idea in a purpose built block?

The block itself had been constructed directly underneath some very noisy pylons too. Whilst standing outside in the rain having a chuff, I was treated to what can only be described as a delightful concerto of buzzing, hissing and crackling directly above me. Had I to live directly underneath that constantly, I think it would drive me insane. But most of the residents of this block, my friends included, had paid good money for the privilege!

I do get the financial angle, and there is something to be said for the sustainability issue, but what do you all make of it?

If there are few of us that can actually still build things for ourselves, don't you think it dangerous that such standards and what is deemed 'acceptable' is dictated and left entirely the responsibility of a few greedy developers? We're talking social housing here too now, as local councils don't tend to build their own stock any more, but leave it up to a developer. It is one thing for a private individual to have to get finance to pay for this poorly constructed tat (I suppose it could be argued that there is an element of choice here, at least) but I really take issue with the fact that those awaiting housing from their local authority have next to zero choice in the matter. Modern council housing for example, for all it's accolades and sustainability, is pretty crap in comparison to its predecessors, imo.

I'm rather fond of architecture and the issues surrounding the built environment, so I may well have griped about this before.

Please accept my apologies if you have already witnessed this.

I have next to nothing good to say about the common modern building techniques you hit on.
Modern timber frame and brick veneered buildings are bloody awful in my book. Not to mention the way that the estates they live on tend to give more external space to cars than they do people.

The thing that jumps out at me from your OP is that these have been put directly under the National Grid

It was quite alarming, dubs.

It's almost as if the planner thought...rather than waste this little sliver of land, we'll squeeze this one last block in. These suckers won't mind.

The block itself was pushed right up against a main road, and a car park was added to the rear. In the main, the pylons stretched over the car park but were one of them to have fallen, a line even, it would have landed directly on the roof. And the noise!?

I can't believe people actually pay for this stuff.

The whole place was weird actually...it was one of those 'new' towns, I suppose. They even had their own train station for an easy commute to London. It was a stones throw from 'Lakeside', also a plus in some people's books. But basically, the sprawling housing seemed to have been chucked up because of its location to the shopping centre and London.

I wasn't impressed. Can you tell?

You did better than I'd have. I'm not sure I could have refrained from comment

Most of the problems come from the building regulations which dictate the methods to be used and define the government requirements. In recent years the climate scam has been used to introduce many of the changes in construction techniques aimed at energy efficiency. Some of the changes in recent years include K glass, Celotex/Kingspan insulation and now Air Source heat pumps or solar panels. The later technologies are requirements for buildings employing traditional brick and block construction. Part L is the specific part of the building regulations responsible for many of the changes - more info here https://www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/approveddocuments/partl/.

Living under pylons or in close proximity of transformers isn't good for health due to the large EMF fields generated. There are lots of resources on the web which explain the negative effects of living in EMF fields.

Anyone remember all those people that went out to prove the pylon point by walking under them with fluorescent tubes?

dubmeup wrote:
What happened dub?

Basically Irre, they walked under the pylons holding up the tubes and the tubes lit up

Here's a fairly recent vid of someone doing it:

And another:

No, the new houses are definitely not built to last. One of my brothers-in-law & wife bought one - though it will have been 20 years ago now - and I was shocked to see that the kitchen wall cabinets needed to be bolstered on legs which stood on the floor cabinets, because the interior walls weren't strong enough to hold their weight. They also can't get a hand rail or even curtain rails to stay in place.

And the central heating system and plumbing have recently had to be completely changed, because where they were guaranteed for 20 years (or whatever it was) they were never expected to live longer than that. They just stopped working.

The worst thing though, is that because the walls are made of tissue paper, when you stay over-night, you can hear every fart, snore and whimper from the other bedrooms.

Gilly wrote:
This is true, Gilly. I did much farting and whimpering in my mate's spare bedroom just to test this theory out. They didn't say anything the next morning, but I could tell they were embarrassed.

Strangely, I haven't been invited back yet.

It just makes me think about some of my neighbours. Thankfully, I'm on the top floor here, with concrete floors and brick walls all round. The noise some of these buggers make with their music and weekly police raids does grate somewhat. I can only imagine what it'd be like with hollow walls and wooden floors.

Imagine if they were above me!

I was told by a female five-o, who's brother is a site-manager, 25 years.

So, if planned obsolescence is now worked into even the constructed environment, eventually, there will be nothing physical around to indicate we were even here?

It's ok Abs, I give you:



The Woolaway Bungalaow,


Designed as a short term POS pre-fab solution to rural housing shortage and still going strong decades later. These things will outlast the Uranium we bury in the Sea

I know someone who owns an 11 year old house that is starting to crack in two. New builds I see have tiny gardens and they just squeeze as much as they can into the smallest possible space.

My house is an old stone coal miners cottage, it's 160 years old, but tbh we had to replace the joists and it gets quite damp. With a bit of tlc I think it could survive another 160 years though.

My grandparents had to live in something similar following the war, dubs. They always told me they loved it and would have happily stayed there, but they got demolished and replaced with brick-built structures eventually (which interestingly...have since been demolished and replaced with predominately wooden-built structures under the guise of 'redevelopment').

Anyway, all well and good when surrounded by a nice garden and nobody on top of or underneath you, I'm sure.

LesleyPumpshaft wrote:
I don't think my place is long for this world, unfortunately.

It was completed in the late fifties and as I may have mentioned, is thoroughly well built. Solid walls, ceilings and floors and adequately designed to afford the inhabitants with much light and space. Not so, whatever they dream up to replace it, I fear.

It sits on quite a big bit of land with communal gardens to the front and rear. It may not be nice to look at, but I really love it, neighbour issues aside.

What i'm thinking is that they will tear them down and put up a taller structure that makes use of all the land, though. They did something similar at the end of the road last year, so they've already upped the maximum floor level for the street.

Just a matter of time, really.

I'm actually just waiting for them to pull out the old 'asbestos' card on the place, though quite why it should worry them after sixty odd years of inhabitants, I don't know. Well, I do, actually.

Ab Origine wrote:
Nah mate, they're F'in shite

Ab Origine wrote:
Isn't asbestos only a problem once you start fannying around with it though?

LesleyPumpshaft wrote:
Apparently so, but it's a crowd pleaser, especially if you've got your greedy eye on a plot for redevelopment.

Ab Origine wrote:
I can well imagine! It's a good one to put the shits up people.