God is in the Details

I like those Ferd. I would consider taking planning decisions away from L.A.s . In my opinion the quality is poor, and the local planning committee are "not in my back yard" The other thing that i have a problem with is "Making new buildings fit in with the local venacular." That is my pet hate. Lets all build new stuff, that looks like old stuff. Lets never move our architectural style forward. Lets instead have roads of houses where in 25years, you won't be able to tell which one's in the road were built when.....because they all look the bloody same.

I am not sure about number 4.

This is extra compulsory stuff for the sake of it.  House fires happen so infrequently these days, and fatalities even less.  And try getting one that works of mains pressure, the local waterboard will not guarantee that there will be enough flow when it is needed.

 

There should be one set of rules, with one interpretation only, for the whole country.  That would make life simple for everyone.

'Local Plans' are a nonsense.  The only locals that contribute are the ones that have an interest.

Edited January 28, 2021 by SteamyTea

Ooops. This shouldn't have published itself yet.

 

Glitch in the time-indexed draft post filing system.

 

But - what's done is done.

The worse thing about blogs on here is that you cannot go back and edit things after half an hour, this is really a dumb idea.

I think big house builders, or any major construction site should have a building officer, (paid for by the council which would be in turn paid for by the greedy house builders, I know sadly that then means buyers pay but it will be worth it) more or less seconded to site, to reduce possibilities of them being bought off, a government level inspector should also be present going around sites and checking things all look good. Anything more than say 4 houses or a commercial site should have this level of supervision and checking for quality, mortar samples pulled, insulation inspection, quality of workmanship etc. etc.

 

Whoever thought the big house builders could be trusted was just beyond daft. 

 

If you consider some of the pay-outs and remedial work costs this would actually work out cheaper for the main contractor!

2 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

The worse thing about blogs on here is that you cannot go back and edit things after half an hour, this is really a dumb idea.

 

No idea why that was changed, presumably it's the software rather than an edit by the admin here.

7 minutes ago, Thedreamer said:

 

No idea why that was changed, presumably it's the software rather than an edit by the admin here.

It was the admin being paranoid about 'spammers' I was told.

I'd probably look for minimum sizes too, some new builds are far too small.

Also make building control and the builder more liable (or easier to hold to account) for any issues, if a building fails then it wasn't only built incorrectly but not properly inspected. I suppose this ties in with the inspect every building rather than the one or two on the estate that have been done right so that the rest of the shoddy ones can pass without being checked.

 I would like to see small build exemptions for a one off builds. In some instance the building regulations can cause a really hinderance.

 

Disability ramps should be abolished in certain circumstances, they should always be installed in developer homes, but a common sense approach should be adopted by building control. As an example our build was funded by an agricultural grant it would have been extremely difficult to work rough hill grazing if you were in a wheel chair. If the circumstances arose where a ramp was needed for us later it should be installed later by us, ramps can be costly.

 

Without the agricultural grant and the ability to demonstrating that we would could work the agricultural ground we could not have got the grant and been unable to build. 

 

Some self builders don't have a endless pot of money and it's a build of necessity to provide affordable housing.

 

The ventilation was another area where I felt regulations could be relaxed. We have trickle vents which work well, but you can't compare ventilation in our exposed property and a terrace street in the middle of the city.

 

Principle based approach, common sense. 

Carbon tax- Tax builders profits in proportion to the house owners first years energy bills? 

1 hour ago, SteamyTea said:

It was the admin being paranoid about 'spammers' I was told.

 
That happened a lot as it happened but the mods were generally quick to hide them. Someone would post something bland and then a day or so later would go back and edit the posts to include links to all sorts of companies including those selling viagra and the like, or links to building companies or products. 
 

Makes it much easier for the mods to not have to worry about reviewing content posted days or weeks before. 
 

 

2 minutes ago, newhome said:

That happened a lot as it happened

So does that mean that the membership vetting process is not working?

2 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

So does that mean that the membership vetting process is not working?

There is only so much you can do to vet someone when we don’t ask people for personal details. 

2 hours ago, Thedreamer said:

 

No idea why that was changed, presumably it's the software rather than an edit by the admin here.

 

There is a parameter to set.

 

For blogs you can post your draft to 2031, and edit it there.

 

This was what I forgot here  - posted to 2021 and the calendar caught up.

 

Since I have a scooter ('mod') I was able to tidy it up.

7 hours ago, Carrerahill said:

If you consider some of the pay-outs and remedial work costs this would actually work out cheaper for the main contractor!

 

I agree with this but I would still prefer the on-site everyday inspection to be internal, not external. 

 

Better if external inspection performed an air-tightness test on every home and possibly some kind of a thermal imaging test. When 10 out of 10 homes fail this (which they will) and the developer has to fix them all before they are signed off they will learn really quickly. 

Building regs is just a joke. It can only be useful if its enforced , and enforced by people who cannt be "influenced". As for self certifying trades people, its even worse.

 

I have a whole suite of certificates. Not one job is compliant with the applicable regs. Some pretty much not at all. Many were council BCO's.

 

I dont know what the answer is. There are not enough knowledgable/skilled people in the industry anyway. If you take away a whole load to be inspectors, it will make things worse.

 

 

5 hours ago, Ferdinand said:

 

There is a parameter to set.

 

For blogs you can post your draft to 2031, and edit it there.

 

This was what I forgot here  - posted to 2021 and the calendar caught up.

 

Since I have a scooter ('mod') I was able to tidy it up.

 

I don't know if it possible, but perhaps certain privileges like this could be relaxed for advanced members, as these individual are established in the forum? Not really fussed as my old self build blog is done, but it was frustrating with the last few entries, particularly if I came across a spelling/grammar error after posting.

15 hours ago, oldkettle said:

 

I agree with this but I would still prefer the on-site everyday inspection to be internal, not external. 

 

Better if external inspection performed an air-tightness test on every home and possibly some kind of a thermal imaging test. When 10 out of 10 homes fail this (which they will) and the developer has to fix them all before they are signed off they will learn really quickly. 

You are never going to get someone on the payroll to do this 100% by the book through. 

 

3 days to hand over, major problem - boss leans on him to let it pass this time. Inspector gets on good terms with some of the labourers, Friday afternoon shot, he and his pals all want to knock off early and he passes a stage just to be one of the lads!

 

 

2 hours ago, Carrerahill said:

You are never going to get someone on the payroll to do this 100% by the book through. 

 

 

Maybe a slight misunderstanding here : the tests I suggested should be external, i.e. not conducted by the employees of the developers, so hopefully the same kind as you suggested originally, just a different function.