The news has been fixated on schools but it’s a much bigger issue. A lot of public buildings including hospitals and social housing were built using RAAC within the materials 70 year history.
It took 40 years after the first use of RAAC to notice the structural problems. The knowledge of these faults has been known for the last 30 years but suddenly in 2023 all schools that were built using RAAC need to be closed. This is a gross mismanagement by the government of information that should have been implemented when the ‘cracks’ started to appear.
All of these buildings could have been upgraded over time, and improved to better standards but it all comes down to funding.
The main point of this is how sad it is that they realised that this problem is suddenly so important the week that children go back to school. What happened during the summer holidays when they could have planned better alternatives for the schools without much disruption. It’s going to disrupt thousands of students and their education but also the parents who work.
Why was the design life of these buildings only 30 years?
It seems to me that cost cutting and bad design are causing all the problems. The buildings have been neglected and poorly managed by public bodies causing disasters later on.
And I've always wondered what the word 'sustainable' means since it's been bandied around so often in the context of saving the earth. The argument about Victorian buildings being built poorly is a joke they have been around for donkey’s years. It's new development you have to worry about.
It's new development you have to worry about.
A lot of questions come to mind when thinking about the materials used in constructions that my be efficient, light-weight, higher strength or even cheaper but how long do those elements last? There must be some studies done on the longevity of an element.
Now with RAAC. if the design life of a building was around 30 years then it would be possible to say that those buildings constructed in the 1950’s would have had problems already visible in the 80’s? Or, were the problems starting to show so they stopped using RAAC in the mid 90’s? Each building should then come with a certificate saying that after 30 years of use the building would need some major servicing or additions to the structure.
Either way, if there were problems with RAAC then the buildings that were built should have been checked and dealt with at the time. The disruption that this will cause not just to schools, but hospitals and social housing is huge. How was this allowed to happen?
This is a title from the Building magazine “Conservative Party conference: UK’s schools must be designed to last 100 years, says RIBA president”
UK schools and public buildings have been designed and built with one main factor that takes precedence over everything else, the BUDGET. There may be a great design with all the key factors and ‘buzz’ words but when it comes to the cost of construction then the standards start to lower to fit the budget. RAAC was used for this reason as it was a cheaper alternative, and to make matters worse the buildings were not maintained over the years (even after faults occurred in the 90’s) all because of budgets.
It made me think about what Muyiwa Oki is going to achieve in two years. How is he any different from the previous presidents in achieving anything that benefits the architects, or improving the built environment where architects are at the forefront.
AT’s webinar on educational buildings this wednesday showed how educational buildings should be designed and built, looking at longevity, flexibility of use and energy efficiency.
There was a presentation by Ian Dryden, SIG Design & Technology talking about ‘Fragile deck replacement’. He gave a clear indication to why decks fail (including RAAC), how these failures can be remedied and above all be avoided.
It’s worth watching
https://arqnetwork.com/forums/cpd-management/education-buildings-you-can-learn-from/#post-1589
© 2020 – 2024 arqnetwork - All rights reserved.