Mark wrote:
ian henden wrote in message
...

If the alternative to non-snitching is to end up with crappy ugly uPVC
windows next door, then I know what I would do.

Christian.

You can get some perfectly acceptable (visually) PVC sash windows these
days.



You could be suffering from Retinitis pigmentosa or Glaucoma, free eye tests
are available to check for this.




-


I've never understood why a plastic couldn't be developed that actually
looked like wood painted white.

On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 17:48:02 -0000 Christian McArdle wrote :
I don't know about your borough. In ours, there aren't nearly enough.
Strangely enough, my particular house isn't actually in a conservation area,
although it probably should be, given its current barely spoilt nature.

Well that's the difference in our philosophy. In my book the decider for
whether your house should be in a CA is not whether it is barely spoilt,
rather whether the area is of particular merit. IOW "this is the best example
of late large Victorian houses in the Borough" should be the test, not "this
is one of 23 examples of late large Victorian houses in the Borough"

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On 9 Nov 2006 11:13:44 -0800 Ian wrote :
Do you think that Merton College, Oxford (to choose an example at
random) should be able to do anything it likes to its buildings?

I don't know the building but probably not. However it would
probably be judged to be in the finest 1%? 2%? of buildings in the
country and on that basis special protection is arguably justified.

According to LB Camden website "A conservation area is an area of
special architectural or historic interest, the character or
appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance."
and more than 50% of the borough is in a CA. When more than 50% is
special ISTM that the word has been seriously devalued.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:07:22 -0000 Christian McArdle wrote :
There is no need for council tax supplement. Enforcement could be
funded from fines from transgressors and planning application fees.

Why should I have to pay (I wouldn't at present) have to pay to get
permission to prune my trees. Even more, why should I have to pay to (try
and) get permission to prune overhanging branches of my neighbour's tree
- if I cut them back without permission I am liable to a £10K fine.

How much, with on-costs, do you think that it costs the Council to
process each application for works to trees in a CA? I somehow doubt
whether it's less than £200. Why is council tax so high - ever more
bureaucracy like this.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

I've never understood why a plastic couldn't be developed that actually
looked like wood painted white.

The problem is not in the surfaces, which can be made acceptable. You might
even find something sufficiently UV stable. I find the main visual
impairments a

1. Joins, which are too dark, obvious and mismatched. They often open up
when the window is stressed by movement or differential heat expansion. The
non smooth joint also attracts dirt. A wooden window has these joins glued
and planed off for a solid joint that won't have surface roughness or
movement.

2. Physical size. uPVC is weak, which means that all members are too fat in
all directions. This cuts down on the glazing size, gives a tellytubby
appearance and makes the window too deep, so that the top sash juts out much
further than the bottom.

Indeed, when I looked at them, the plastic sash window was actually a good
inch wider than the wall into which it was to be installed. The wooden sash,
even double glazed was a perfect match.

Christian.

Tony Bryer ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

According to LB Camden website "A conservation area is an area of
special architectural or historic interest, the character or
appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance."
and more than 50% of the borough is in a CA. When more than 50% is
special ISTM that the word has been seriously devalued.

I wouldn't disagree with you there.

Sounds like the normal planning regs for the borough need to rethought, and
the CA status brought back to more appropriate levels.

Well that's the difference in our philosophy.

Actually my philosophy is that the majority of residents want it. It is just
that residents of unspoilt period streets are more likely to want it than
others.

In my book the decider for whether your house should be in a CA is
not whether it is barely spoilt, rather whether the area is of particular
merit. IOW "this is the best example of late large Victorian houses
in the Borough" should be the test, not "this is one of 23 examples
of late large Victorian houses in the Borough"

It does have some history. It was originally called the "Belle Vue" estate
when built in 1909. What happened was that a local builder, with
insufficient capitalisation, started building houses at one end of one
street. He would build a few and then get the cash for them to enable him to
build more. However, his designs got ever more elaborate with each tranche
as his bank balance grew, so the houses get bigger and more ornate in
batches along the street and then coming back the other way. We live in the
first, cheapest block, which is the only terraced one, with six houses, but
with high specificiation in Victorian/Edwardian Reading terms.

There certainly aren't any other comparable streets in Reading. The houses
are far more similar to those built contemporaneously in the London suburbs,
with bay windows extending to the upper storey. The subtle changes in house
style (i.e. terracesemi, brick colour, bay angles, roof pitch, etc.) every
block of houses is pretty unique and lends real character.

Christian.

Why should I have to pay (I wouldn't at present) have to pay to get
permission to prune my trees. Even more, why should I have to pay to (try
and) get permission to prune overhanging branches of my neighbour's tree
- if I cut them back without permission I am liable to a £10K fine.

Personally, I don't think that general tree maintenance should be subject to
approval. Also, the rules for tree removal should take into account the
existing tree cover and whether excessive provision has been provided. OK,
if it is the only tree for miles, it should be protected. If you have what
amounts to an aboretum interferring with your enjoyment of the property,
there should be much laxitude given.

How much, with on-costs, do you think that it costs the Council to
process each application for works to trees in a CA? I somehow doubt
whether it's less than £200. Why is council tax so high - ever more
bureaucracy like this.

Indeed. Tree pruning and like-for-like maintenance should be removed from
the system.

Christian.

Christian McArdle wrote:
Why should I have to pay (I wouldn't at present) have to pay to get
permission to prune my trees. Even more, why should I have to pay to (try
and) get permission to prune overhanging branches of my neighbour's tree
- if I cut them back without permission I am liable to a £10K fine.

Personally, I don't think that general tree maintenance should be subject to
approval. Also, the rules for tree removal should take into account the
existing tree cover and whether excessive provision has been provided. OK,
if it is the only tree for miles, it should be protected. If you have what
amounts to an aboretum interferring with your enjoyment of the property,
there should be much laxitude given.

How much, with on-costs, do you think that it costs the Council to
process each application for works to trees in a CA? I somehow doubt
whether it's less than £200. Why is council tax so high - ever more
bureaucracy like this.

Indeed. Tree pruning and like-for-like maintenance should be removed from
the system.

Christian.


If everyone who comlained about a tree being cut down simply planted
another one, there would be no problem.

I trashed about 50 trees in my garden. Have replanted at least 30 so
far..nice trees: Trees I WANT to be there.

If there is an article 4 restriction on the area, then they need
planning permission to change the windows. So the first step is to make
enquiries as to whether that has been applied for and granted.

As regards the derogatory remarks here, I am very much a "live and let
live" person.

However, when you are talking about planning permission and
conservation areas, if you allow things like that to take place, and
fail to act, then it can devalue other properties in the vicinity.

Consequently, it is not correct to say that the issue does not affect
neighbours.

johnmids2006 wrote:

However, when you are talking about planning permission and
conservation areas, if you allow things like that to take place, and
fail to act, then it can devalue other properties in the vicinity.


I find the way property value seems to find its way into just about any
argument these days absolutely appalling. Everyone seems totally
obsessed with the value of their property, it has become the primary
consideration when making any changes. I think this is very sad.


--
Grunff

On 2006-11-10 12:32:07 +0000, Grunff said:

johnmids2006 wrote:

However, when you are talking about planning permission and
conservation areas, if you allow things like that to take place, and
fail to act, then it can devalue other properties in the vicinity.


I find the way property value seems to find its way into just about any
argument these days absolutely appalling. Everyone seems totally
obsessed with the value of their property, it has become the primary
consideration when making any changes. I think this is very sad.

I suspect that a couple more interest rate rises might cool their
enthusiasm a bit...

Andy Hall wrote:

I suspect that a couple more interest rate rises might cool their
enthusiasm a bit...


Indeed, I'm just amazed the madness has lasted this long.


--
Grunff

Christian McArdle wrote:
I've never understood why a plastic couldn't be developed that actually
looked like wood painted white.

The problem is not in the surfaces, which can be made acceptable.

I've never seen a plastic that looked anything like painted wood. Why
that should be I don't know. Something to do with light and texture I guess

You might
even find something sufficiently UV stable.


I find the main visual
impairments a

1. Joins, which are too dark, obvious and mismatched. They often open up
when the window is stressed by movement or differential heat expansion. The
non smooth joint also attracts dirt. A wooden window has these joins glued
and planed off for a solid joint that won't have surface roughness or
movement.

The joints being mitred means all 4 pieces have to be the same width,
which doesn't look right. Presumably the non-smooth bit is to avoid
sharp edges where the pieces meet.


2. Physical size. uPVC is weak,

Mainly because it's hollow. I'm sure a moulding could be made an inch
narrower but I guess there are other technical considerations

which means that all members are too fat in
all directions. This cuts down on the glazing size, gives a tellytubby
appearance and makes the window too deep, so that the top sash juts out much
further than the bottom.



Indeed, when I looked at them, the plastic sash window was actually a good
inch wider than the wall into which it was to be installed. The wooden sash,
even double glazed was a perfect match.

But how often will it need painting? And if it does, it's a sure sign
the wood is failing rather than the paint. The basic design of the
sliding sash gives extra protection but IME even hardwoods have a
limited life in sunny aspects. I personally have never seen degraded
upvc. Yeah, I know, it just looks **** from the beginning.
I've got pvc at the back and lovingly restored originals at the front
which seems a reasonable compromise to me.

On 2006-11-10 12:57:06 +0000, Grunff said:

Andy Hall wrote:

I suspect that a couple more interest rate rises might cool their
enthusiasm a bit...


Indeed, I'm just amazed the madness has lasted this long.

Gordon's coming. Then the party really will be over....

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 13:01:09 GMT Stuart Noble wrote :
I personally have never seen degraded
upvc. Yeah, I know, it just looks **** from the beginning.
I've got pvc at the back and lovingly restored originals at the front
which seems a reasonable compromise to me.

I went for white powder coat thermal break aluminium. A little more
expensive and not quite as good as wood or PVC for insulation but
slimmer frames, maintenance free and recyclable at the end of their
life.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

Grunff ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

However, when you are talking about planning permission and
conservation areas, if you allow things like that to take place, and
fail to act, then it can devalue other properties in the vicinity.

I find the way property value seems to find its way into just about any
argument these days absolutely appalling. Everyone seems totally
obsessed with the value of their property, it has become the primary
consideration when making any changes. I think this is very sad.

Ummm, since this is a discussion *about* property, it's very relevant.

I am, of course, assuming that you wouldn't mind a substantial chunk -
perhaps tens of thousands of pounds - being knocked off the value of your
own most valuable asset because of other people trying to do something on
the cheap...?

Stuart Noble ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

The joints being mitred means all 4 pieces have to be the same width,

No, it doesn't. You can mitre between two different width pieces - you just
adjust the angle to compensate.

But how often will it need painting? And if it does, it's a sure sign the
wood is failing rather than the paint.

Eh...?

On 10 Nov 2006 13:32:17 GMT Adrian wrote :
I am, of course, assuming that you wouldn't mind a substantial chunk -
perhaps tens of thousands of pounds - being knocked off the value of your
own most valuable asset because of other people trying to do something on
the cheap...?

The idea of tens of thousands of pounds being knocked off the value of your
home because a neighbour has installed plastic windows in their home is
ridiculous. Declaring on your sale particulars that you have made a
complaint to the council about them and as a result they are now not the
sort of people you want to mix with just might.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

Andy Hall wrote:
On 2006-11-10 12:57:06 +0000, Grunff said:

Andy Hall wrote:

I suspect that a couple more interest rate rises might cool their
enthusiasm a bit...


Indeed, I'm just amazed the madness has lasted this long.

Gordon's coming. Then the party really will be over....



No government would be foolish enough to jeopardise a system that keeps
the population in order so effectively. Keep the hamsters on the wheel I
say.
I wonder if that would work in Iraq. Give everyone a plot of land and
ship some estate agents out

Tony Bryer ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

I am, of course, assuming that you wouldn't mind a substantial chunk
- perhaps tens of thousands of pounds - being knocked off the value
of your own most valuable asset because of other people trying to do
something on the cheap...?

The idea of tens of thousands of pounds being knocked off the value of
your home because a neighbour has installed plastic windows in their
home is ridiculous.

If a conservation area becomes heavily compromised, it certainly can and
will.

Which is more likely to sell for a premium? A pristine period home in a
street of pristine period homes, or a pristine period home in a street of
homes that could easily be pristine period if it wasn't for the fact they
were groaning under hideous tupperware, stone cladding and visually
incongruous extensions?

Adrian wrote:

Ummm, since this is a discussion *about* property, it's very relevant.

I am, of course, assuming that you wouldn't mind a substantial chunk -
perhaps tens of thousands of pounds - being knocked off the value of your
own most valuable asset because of other people trying to do something on
the cheap...?


This is exactly what I mean - you're so wrapped up in property value
that you can't even see how irrelevant it is to a conversation about the
merits of snitching on your neighbours. To you, and apparently a large
percentage of the population, it always boils down to how it will affect
the value of your property.


--
Grunff

This is exactly what I mean - you're so wrapped up in property value that
you can't even see how irrelevant it is to a conversation about the merits
of snitching on your neighbours. To you, and apparently a large percentage
of the population, it always boils down to how it will affect the value of
your property.

I'm less concerned with monetary value. I'm more concerned with living is a
good looking area without concrete, plastic and stone cladding in evidence.

Quite frankly, snitching on a faceless property developer does not occur to
me as an antisocial act. I know loads of my neighbours in the street. None
would consider installing plastic windows and all would consider it
completely acceptable to snitch to the council about it.

The neighbour opposite, when seeing our new wooden sashes arrive, was very
interested in finding out where we got them from, as his house is one of
only three on the street with plastic (including ours, unfortunately).

Christian.

Grunff ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

Ummm, since this is a discussion *about* property, it's very
relevant.

I am, of course, assuming that you wouldn't mind a substantial chunk
- perhaps tens of thousands of pounds - being knocked off the value
of your own most valuable asset because of other people trying to do
something on the cheap...?

This is exactly what I mean - you're so wrapped up in property value
that you can't even see how irrelevant it is to a conversation about
the merits of snitching on your neighbours. To you, and apparently a
large percentage of the population, it always boils down to how it
will affect the value of your property.

So you wouldn't mind, then...?

Christian McArdle wrote:

I'm less concerned with monetary value. I'm more concerned with living is a
good looking area without concrete, plastic and stone cladding in evidence.

I know that. While we disagree on the main thread subject, I wasn't
suggesting that property value was your motivation.


Quite frankly, snitching on a faceless property developer does not occur to
me as an antisocial act. I know loads of my neighbours in the street. None
would consider installing plastic windows and all would consider it
completely acceptable to snitch to the council about it.

Hmmm.



The neighbour opposite, when seeing our new wooden sashes arrive, was very
interested in finding out where we got them from, as his house is one of
only three on the street with plastic (including ours, unfortunately).

I just don't understand why anyone would find it that offensive. I can
understand why you would be annoyed if your neighbour had a burnt-out
Capri in their front garden, that's fair enough (although I still don't
think that it would be a good enough reason to report them).

But to get this hung up about what material their window frames are made
from? No, no way, I just don't get it. From anything more than say 20
metres away, you just can't tell with most windows. And even if you can
tell, I don't see why it's anyone's business.


--
Grunff

Adrian wrote:

I am, of course, assuming that you wouldn't mind a substantial chunk
- perhaps tens of thousands of pounds - being knocked off the value
of your own most valuable asset because of other people trying to do
something on the cheap...?

This is exactly what I mean - you're so wrapped up in property value
that you can't even see how irrelevant it is to a conversation about
the merits of snitching on your neighbours. To you, and apparently a
large percentage of the population, it always boils down to how it
will affect the value of your property.

So you wouldn't mind, then...?


I didn't answer because the question is meaningless, only you just can't
seem to see it. The question only has any meaning in the context of
property-porn TV programming. In the real world it has zero meaning.


--
Grunff

Why should I have to pay (I wouldn't at present) have to pay to get
permission to prune my trees. Even more, why should I have to pay to
(try and) get permission to prune overhanging branches of my
neighbour's tree - if I cut them back without permission I am liable
to a £10K fine.

No reason at all. It is your neighbour's responsibility not yours.

Personally, I don't think that general tree maintenance should be
subject to approval. Also, the rules for tree removal should take
into account the existing tree cover and whether excessive provision
has been provided. OK, if it is the only tree for miles, it should be
protected. If you have what amounts to an aboretum interferring with
your enjoyment of the property, there should be much laxitude given.

How much, with on-costs, do you think that it costs the Council to
process each application for works to trees in a CA? I somehow doubt
whether it's less than £200. Why is council tax so high - ever more
bureaucracy like this.

Indeed. Tree pruning and like-for-like maintenance should be removed
from the system.

I agree. The problem, as ever, is setting a definition so that reasonable
work can be done without bureaucracy and preventing the abuse that is likley
to occur if the rules are relaxed.

Peter Crosland

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 14:10:13 +0000 Grunff wrote :
I just don't understand why anyone would find it that offensive. I can
understand why you would be annoyed if your neighbour had a burnt-out
Capri in their front garden, that's fair enough (although I still don't
think that it would be a good enough reason to report them).

Over my back fence, also in the CA, is a large Victorian mansion which
has been boarded up for four years and is a definite blight on the
streetscene.

Why? The owner could sell it for £1m+ to someone who would restore it (at
great expense) to a single family house. They can't because it was
bedsits and our planners will not allow a reverse conversion from
multi-occupancy to a single family house on the grounds that it
represents a loss of smaller dwelling units which are in short supply.
The idea that turning a boarded up empty house into one that is occupied
increases the housing supply, not to mention paying a lot in Council Tax,
improving the environment, making the neighbours happy etc is quite
beyond them. The owner has permission to turn it into six s/c flats but I
suspect has decided that financially this makes no sense.

And who is the wicked owner of this boarded-up property? Richmond Housing
Partnership, the body formerly known as LBRuT Housing Department. So your
taxes and mine are going to pay for insurance, routine garden clearance,
security etc of this eyesore when £1m could be going into their funds to
provide economically viable social housing.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

Christian McArdle wrote:
This is exactly what I mean - you're so wrapped up in property value that
you can't even see how irrelevant it is to a conversation about the merits
of snitching on your neighbours. To you, and apparently a large percentage
of the population, it always boils down to how it will affect the value of
your property.

I'm less concerned with monetary value. I'm more concerned with living is a
good looking area without concrete, plastic and stone cladding in evidence.

That's fair enough.

I assume you also take steps to remove graffiti from walls and street
furniture, get rusting vehicles removed from front gardens, ensure that
there are no noisy children bashing footballs around in the street,
remove litter, ask people with noisy exhausts to get them silenced,
take steps to prevent drunk teenagers from damaging property and waking
everybody up in the middle of the night. Because surely all of the
above the affect quality of life of any normal reasonable person, and
the way the area is 'perceived'; way way before the composition of
someone's windows are even noticed ?

IMHO, YMMV

Adrian wrote:
Stuart Noble ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

The joints being mitred means all 4 pieces have to be the same width,

No, it doesn't. You can mitre between two different width pieces - you just
adjust the angle to compensate.

Try making a sash using mitres. There are good reasons why they're 45 degs.


But how often will it need painting? And if it does, it's a sure sign the
wood is failing rather than the paint.

Eh...?

Paints don't fail as quickly as substrates

I assume you also take steps to remove graffiti from walls and street
furniture, get rusting vehicles removed from front gardens, ensure that
there are no noisy children bashing footballs around in the street,
remove litter, ask people with noisy exhausts to get them silenced,
take steps to prevent drunk teenagers from damaging property and waking
everybody up in the middle of the night. Because surely all of the
above the affect quality of life of any normal reasonable person, and
the way the area is 'perceived'; way way before the composition of
someone's windows are even noticed ?

We have all of those things already. Especially after the old BX in
someone's garden was removed.

Personally, I think the lack of plastic windows puts the chavs off living
there in the first place.

Christian.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
.. .
I assume you also take steps to remove graffiti from walls and street
furniture, get rusting vehicles removed from front gardens, ensure that
there are no noisy children bashing footballs around in the street,
remove litter, ask people with noisy exhausts to get them silenced,
take steps to prevent drunk teenagers from damaging property and waking
everybody up in the middle of the night. Because surely all of the
above the affect quality of life of any normal reasonable person, and
the way the area is 'perceived'; way way before the composition of
someone's windows are even noticed ?

We have all of those things already. Especially after the old BX in
someone's garden was removed.

Personally, I think the lack of plastic windows puts the chavs off living
there in the first place.

Really! I must be chav then, as I happen to like plastic windows. Where
did I put my whippet?

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
.. .

We have all of those things already. Especially after the old BX in
someone's garden was removed.

Mine's still there :-)

cheers,
clive

The message
from Stuart Noble contains these words:

I wonder if that would work in Iraq. Give everyone a plot of land and
ship some estate agents out

Nah, they'd just shoot the estate agents. So - not everything's bad in Iraq.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Stuart Noble wrote in message
...
Mark wrote:

You can get some perfectly acceptable (visually) PVC sash windows these
days.


You could be suffering from Retinitis pigmentosa or Glaucoma, free eye
tests
are available to check for this.



I've never understood why a plastic couldn't be developed that actually
looked like wood painted white.

That still would not work for me, if you have a nice period property like
this
http://i15.tinypic.com/44q08c3.jpg
plastic windows will always look wrong.

For the lovers of plastic tack there will always be new build estates like
http://i15.tinypic.com/29aywio.jpg
even the fake Tudor panels are plastic
and really you cant tell the difference, from a distance ;-(



-

Owain wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:
I assume you also take steps to remove graffiti from walls and street
furniture, get rusting vehicles removed from front gardens, ensure that
there are no noisy children bashing footballs around in the street,
remove litter, ask people with noisy exhausts to get them silenced,
take steps to prevent drunk teenagers from damaging property and waking
everybody up in the middle of the night.

Absolutely.

Glad to hear it. For the record I live in a 20 year old house, on a modern
estate. I often pick litter up in the road outside, place upright *again*
the council's bin on a nearby footpath, and take a cloth of solvent to
street furniture.

Because surely all of the
above the affect quality of life of any normal reasonable person, and
the way the area is 'perceived'; way way before the composition of
someone's windows are even noticed ?

It's called "zero tolerance" - in this case of chavvy naffness.

Residents' Association 1, Satellite dishes allowed to remain more than
three days nil.

Perhaps someone from a "Victorian conservation area" can explain to me how
their street is permitted to be cluttered up with modern but roadworthy
motor vehicles, and sodium street lighting. I assume all VHF and UHF yagi
antennas have been removed from the chimney stacks BTW ?

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:26:11 +0000, Owain
wrote:

Residents' Association 1, Satellite dishes allowed to remain more than
three days nil.

Do you allow the far more unsightly outdoor terrestrial TV aerials?

--
Cynic

Owain wrote:
Cynic wrote:
Residents' Association 1, Satellite dishes allowed to remain more
than three days nil.
Do you allow the far more unsightly outdoor terrestrial TV aerials?

Not on the front of the building, no.

They're round the back where the washhouses and middens used to be.

Were you permitted to relocate them indoors ?

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

Owain wrote:
Mark wrote:
For the lovers of plastic tack there will always be new build estates
like
http://i15.tinypic.com/29aywio.jpg
even the fake Tudor panels are plastic
and really you cant tell the difference, from a distance ;-(

What distance? Google Earth?

Owain


What a revolting pastiche, I suppose they're going for the chav market.

One thing you have to watch out for in Victorian conservation areas is the
tendency to stick wooden 4 x 3 pane mock Georgian windows in. Then of course
there is the ubiquitous 'Wendy house' door, eg.
http://www.chindwelldoors.co.uk/cata...ar_glazed.html
A clear example of architectural infantilism. Roof tiles are another of my pet
hates.

All of these offensive architectural features where attempted in a planning
application opposite me (I live in a conservation area). I objected and got the
application turned down on those grounds, three times until it was suitably
modified. It has now been accepted pending detailed plans (which I'll
scrutinize with equal care). So I urge the original poster to take a firm stand
and don't tolerate plastic crap any more than you would stone cladding.

Scott wrote in message
...
Owain wrote:
Mark wrote:
For the lovers of plastic tack there will always be new build estates
like
http://i15.tinypic.com/29aywio.jpg
even the fake Tudor panels are plastic
and really you cant tell the difference, from a distance ;-(

What distance? Google Earth?

Owain


What a revolting pastiche, I suppose they're going for the chav market.

One thing you have to watch out for in Victorian conservation areas is the
tendency to stick wooden 4 x 3 pane mock Georgian windows in. Then of
course
there is the ubiquitous 'Wendy house' door, eg.
http://www.chindwelldoors.co.uk/cata...ar_glazed.html
A clear example of architectural infantilism.

To be honest im not that bothered by plastic windows in modern houses
But front doors are another matter
Take your pick from these fine examples
http://www.doorexpress.co.uk/doors/FrontDoors.asp
http://www.anglianhome.co.uk/doors_pvcu_styles.htm





-