search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
4 INDUSTRY NEWS


Housebuilder & Developer


Publisher Lesley Mayo


James Parker


FROM THE EDITOR


The Grenfell Tower fire is probably the worst disaster of its kind since WW2, and what will necessarily be an extended period of investigation is unfortunately going to add further misery and trauma. However for the construction industry, and in particular those overseeing the system of regulations that are supposed to govern quality, this tragedy has thrown up a host of very searching questions which they must answer.


For anyone that knows the complexity of Building Regulations and the inspection regime, it should come as less of a surprise than to the general public that all 181 samples have ‘failed’ the BRE’s new fire safety tests.


Yes, the cladding may have been switched for a cheaper alternative that did not offer “limited combustibility” required under Regs, but as commentators have pointed out, this may not give the full picture. I do not wish to pontificate or add more confusion in the wake of such devastation, but it is important that we avoid any knee-jerk conclusions – this needs to also be the approach taken by the investigation. It must leave no stone unturned.


Cladding is being stripped from buildings which were the subject of well- meaning regeneration programmes designed principally to drastically improve thermal performance, and try and make inroads on the UK’s sluggish carbon reduction performance. If we just focus on one very visible construction element, aren’t we missing the bigger picture?


ON THE COVER


    


07.17


 


    


    


What might be the most unforgivable legacy, because it could and should have been addressed, is that the system of regulations which should protect building users have been allowed to grow piecemeal into a web of convoluted and contradictory guidance which is hard for anyone to clearly interpret.


It’s of course true that Building Regulations being vague and/or confusing could be useful for some seeking to achieve cheaper and less appropriate alternatives. Approved Document B has been interpreted by some commentators to mean that the insulation, not the cladding surface itself, is required to be fire retardant however, further clouding the issue. In this way, Grenfell may have ‘complied with regs’ but the cladding could still have been a major part of the reason for the fire spreading so rapidly.


If Approved Document B does not explicitly state that cladding should be of limited combustibility, we should not be surprised that this is interpreted to mean that it doesn’t. Should we have accepted a regulatory framework where ‘desktop studies’ on product performance can be accepted if sufficient test data doesn’t exist on them?


A NEW WAY OF LIVING


 


The only good thing to come out this appalling tragedy may be the possibility that the regulatory framework might be turned inside out, so the country ends up with a truly robust system that protects its citizens.


Vantage Point Archway Tower © Essential Living go to page 13


James Parker


The manufacturer of the paper used within our publi- cation is a Chain-of-Custody certified supplier operating within environmental systems certified to both ISO 14001 and EMAS in order to ensure sustainable production.


Subscription costs just £48 for 12 issues, including post and packing. Phone 01435 863500 for details. Individual copies of the publication are available at £5 each inc p & p.


All rights reserved


No part of this publication may be reproduced or trans- mitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechani- cal, including photocopying, recording or stored in any in- formation retrieval system without the express prior written consent of the pub- lisher. Although every effort is made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of material published in Housebuilder & Developer, the publisher can accept no responsibility for the claims or opinions made by contributors, manufactur- ers or advertisers. Editorial contributors to this journal may have made a payment to- wards the reproduction costs of material used to illustrate their products.


Printed in England


Managing Editor James Parker


Assistant Editor Jack Wooler


Editorial Assistant Roseanne Field


Senior Sales Executive Sheehan Edmonds


Sales Executives Suzanne Easter Kim Friend


Production Assistants Mikey Pooley Shelley Collyer Carmen Simpson


Audience Development Manager Jane Spice


Managing Director Simon Reed


Cointronic House, Station Road, Heathfield, East Sussex TN21 8DF


Advertising & administration Tel: 01435 863500 info@netmagmedia.eu www.hbdonline.co.uk


Editorial features Tel: 01435 863500 james@netmagmedia.eu


Press releases editorial@netmagmedia.eu


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52