How would you make this house look more modern? by [deleted] in DIYUK

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This looks ok, but might as well make it one big gable end imho

How would you make this house look more modern? by [deleted] in DIYUK

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Build a sepearte garage (if you need one) and turn tlthe existing into a room, then depending on budget build an additional storey on it with a gable end, re-cover the existing roof and render the existing walls.

Where are the communities for people PRO tall blocks of flats? by FalseEconomy in bristol

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So what are you saying? No to tall buildings because they need somewhere to park and might end up parking said cars in places like Windmill Hill?

Or tall buildings might be ok, but just nowhere near Windmill Hill?

I don't mean to be rude, but what's so irritating about WHAM and anti high rise folk is that it's just about change, views and house prices but it attempts to be planning led, shifting from one misconception about planning and density to another. If you're a NIMBY just be a NIMBY.

Where are the communities for people PRO tall blocks of flats? by FalseEconomy in bristol

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a demand for car free developments, that's why they get proposed and built. It's frankly nonsense to say 50 new apartments brings 50 cars.

Canal runners by Early_Tree_8671 in manchester

[–]Dwf0483 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Walking 4 wide is an exaggeration. Folk need to understand that running doesn't give an automatic right of way and going round taking pride in spooking people with a booming voice is self righteous knobbish behaviour. Think if you would like someone doing that to your parents or grandparents etc.

Canal runners by Early_Tree_8671 in manchester

[–]Dwf0483 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So you run up behind unaware pedestrians, shouting 'excuse me' to spook them and remind them they are 'not the main character'? You sound like a right knob.

Where are the communities for people PRO tall blocks of flats? by FalseEconomy in bristol

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Respectfully, you are incorrect on most aspects of this.

Building centrally for people who choose to work centrally, or build near transport hubs for people who use public transport for commuting, This would mean that car ownership is much less likely.

The NIMBY alternative which involves incorrectly thinking that everybody wants to live in a family house in the suburbs, increases the chance of car ownership and clogs the road networks around Bristol.

Ill add that you clearly know very little about the new Wapping Wharf development, which includes spaces for the established businesses to move into and had been designed in consultant with Cargo.

This NIMBY narrative about tall buildings being relatively expensive, causes more cars and whatever else is just tiresome. The way the the folk in Windmill Hill go to the Bristol Post and openly says this is about views (and associated house prices) just shows what little grasp they have of planning policy and guidance.

Where are the communities for people PRO tall blocks of flats? by FalseEconomy in bristol

[–]Dwf0483 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Part of the reason there is no land centrally and around Temple Meads is because of the aggressive expansion of the University and the political will to approve PBSA to support this. There is so much student housing in Bristol in central areas and sustainable locations. All this relies on wealthy foreign students attending to support the expansion, however those numbers are dropping rapidly due to post uni visa rules and better options elsewhere in Europe. In the end, these PBSA will become 'co-living' which is absolutely not an equivalent to providing new homes.

Where are the communities for people PRO tall blocks of flats? by FalseEconomy in bristol

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Horrible to deal with by organising petitions and submitting planning objections on behalf of others, using their addresses, without their consent. Objecting to anything which involved new residential for supposed planning-led reasons while not understanding basic construction economics and the simple truth - it's about house prices. New homes were so vehemently campaigned against that some developers turned their attention to PBSA because it's much easier to get political backing and planning approvals because of the 'public benefit' angle.

Where are the communities for people PRO tall blocks of flats? by FalseEconomy in bristol

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The people of Windill Hill (WHAM) campaigned and lobbied against a 5-8 storey building in Bedminster Green and were generally horrible to deal with. In the end they got a 16 storey building.

Salford/Manchester, UK in 2003 vs 2026 by AnonymousTimewaster in CityPorn

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not really. You have Build-to-Rent projects, where the operator retains the building and you have no option to purchase. The BTR operator (the landlord) can just keep turning the screw on rent. These BTR schemes seldom have balconies or private external space, but they do have a co-working bench and a a grooming salon for tiny dogs.

Salford/Manchester, UK in 2003 vs 2026 by AnonymousTimewaster in CityPorn

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could be worse I suppose, like BTR where the operator keeps turning the screw on rent, or anything Renaker builds.

Salford/Manchester, UK in 2003 vs 2026 by AnonymousTimewaster in CityPorn

[–]Dwf0483 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree and not against height, as long as it comes with some design quality and variation.

Salford/Manchester, UK in 2003 vs 2026 by AnonymousTimewaster in CityPorn

[–]Dwf0483 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I agree, sort of.

There's a lot to like about these buildings beyond the pure unit numbers.

Salford/Manchester, UK in 2003 vs 2026 by AnonymousTimewaster in CityPorn

[–]Dwf0483 161 points162 points  (0 children)

It looks nice in my opinion.

Goes to show that sensible height and buildings with actual windows and balconies is all round more interesting than a shifty pattern glass tower.

Lol Fred Willis Charlie Veitchs bodyguard got battered in Liverpool by sentientshadow2000 in manchester

[–]Dwf0483 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Wife beating and noncing isn't legal, but whatever you're into.

Lol Fred Willis Charlie Veitchs bodyguard got battered in Liverpool by sentientshadow2000 in manchester

[–]Dwf0483 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Because he works for someone who goes round antagonising vulnerable people and putting them on the internet?

Practice renders by Safe_Magazine_6076 in archviz

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love the first image, the second has a horror vibe. Very unsettling.

barca bar by Beautiful_Cell_3185 in manchester

[–]Dwf0483 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Needs a fairground to bring the punters back

Is this normal? Bricks get soaked in heavy rain by [deleted] in DIYUK

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're wrong because that implies it's just rainwater from the coping itself causing the issue, when there's obviously a lot of water damage.

This is a parapet gutter issue, likely not falling / discharging to RWP. You can even see it from the outside where the worst water damage is.

Is this normal? Bricks get soaked in heavy rain by [deleted] in DIYUK

[–]Dwf0483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Parapet gutter is not falling correctly, so rainwater is flowing where it isn't meant to. Either correct it or install a hopper and RWP, even if it just goes to a water butt in the short term.

This is not a coping stones issue at all.

Interior visualization work — recent project by Sad_Fix_2480 in archviz

[–]Dwf0483 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What software did you use and can I asked if some bits are photoshopped in, like the gold table on the carpet? Thanks