|
|
 Greenham Common |
| November 23, 2011, 2:20pm |
|
Posts: 1,974
Gender:  Male
Posts Per Day: 1.79
Location: Equine way
|
If the report confirmed a dry winter and spring was the most likely cause of the problem, what would be the hold-up in releasing that opinion, even if only as a 'without prejudice' interim report? The delay is ominous. |
|
|
|
|
|
| brian |
| November 23, 2011, 5:43pm |
|
Posts: 1,965
Gender: Male
Posts Per Day: 1.78
|
Well, they've made their "Shut up" statement I see. All we can do is wait. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
| November 23, 2011, 5:52pm |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.81
|
Well, they've made their "Shut up" statement I see. All we can do is wait.
This is the standard of our local councils I'm afraid? Treat the taxpayers as mushrooms?  |
|
|
|
|
|
| Marcsie |
| November 23, 2011, 6:37pm |
|
Posts: 9
Posts Per Day: 0.01
|
Hmmm on 'Jack O'Newbury's House' right next to the Parkway development!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
| November 23, 2011, 6:55pm |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
WTC are certainly culpable for Parkway - SLI were chosen by them to build, according to their design brief, largely on their land (sold for £1). As has been noted many listed buidlings were demolished and others partly demolished, the height of the development contravened local guidelines, and the whole thing was contrary to WBC's own commitment in their 'Vision 2025' that development would be 'within scale' of our old market town.
Without WBC pushing for it Parkway would not have been built. I guess you could argue that damage to the park (owned by WBC) was self-inflicted.
However, NTC lease the park (or most of it) and should not be the ones footing the repair bill if the Parkway pumping caused it just because they decided the plans were okay.
As West Berks are the ultimate landowner, should it not be they who foot the bill for the studies and repairs? |
|
|
|
|
|
| brian |
| November 23, 2011, 9:02pm |
|
Posts: 1,965
Gender: Male
Posts Per Day: 1.78
|
Hmmm on 'Jack O'Newbury's House' right next to the Parkway development!
That looks like a fairly recent strain gauge bonded either side of the crack. There is a bit of a problem with the brickwork in that at some time, the building appears to have been repointed. Because of the age, it should have been a lime mortar mix which will allow movement without the bricks cracking. Looking at that photograph, I would suspect a cement joint has been made. That will cause the bricks to give way. So, where was English heritage when that was done. |
|
|
|
|
|
| blackdog |
| November 24, 2011, 10:36am |
|
Posts: 1,321
Posts Per Day: 1.20
|
That looks like a fairly recent strain gauge bonded either side of the crack. There is a bit of a problem with the brickwork in that at some time, the building appears to have been repointed. Because of the age, it should have been a lime mortar mix which will allow movement without the bricks cracking. Looking at that photograph, I would suspect a cement joint has been made. That will cause the bricks to give way. So, where was English heritage when that was done.
It is hard to tell when the work was done - perhaps English Heritage were still thinking about being invented? Not that English Heritage are that involved today, it is WBC's duty to ensure that work carried out on listed buildings is acceptable. That said you shouldn't get this sort of movement on a timber frame house (the bricks are just there to fill in the gaps between the beams) - is this on the Tudor bit at the front or the later buildings at the back? Not that it matters in terms of planning consents. I would also like to see the listed building consent that allowed them to screw those dodgy lights along the building. |
|
|
|
|
|
| brian |
| November 24, 2011, 11:28am |
|
Posts: 1,965
Gender: Male
Posts Per Day: 1.78
|
...... That said you shouldn't get this sort of movement on a timber frame house (the bricks are just there to fill in the gaps between the beams) -
.
Very true, but when these old boys built these houses, they expected the frame to move and that is why they used lime mortar. The properties of lime mortar and that is what was used right up until the twenties, is that the mortar does not set in a chemical way like cement and remains flexible for decades. If the joint slips, then it heals with the oxygen in the air and doesn't normally stress the bricks. That's why the pre 1920 houses rarely have footings and rely on a couple of rows of headers straight on top of the dirt. As soon as the quick chemical setting cement came along, then houses needed huge concrete footings to prevent even minor movement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
