Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise

Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional

and

High Rise Housing Stock

Draft Final Report

On behalf of

SAVILLS COMMERCIAL LIMITED 25 FINSBURY CIRCUS

LONDON EC2M 7EE

Prepared by

CURTINS CONSULTING ENGINEERS PLC 26-29 ST CROSS STREET

LONDON EC1N 8UH

TEL: (0207) 213 9000 FAX: (0207) 213 9001

Email: [email protected]

Our Ref: 70061.Draft Final Report Date: September 2006

CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary 2.0 Introduction 3.0 Composition of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock 4.0 Review of Existing Information/Data 5.0 Investigation Strategy 6.0 Assessment of Potential Defects 7.0 Details of the Investigations 8.0 Property Type Descriptions 9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations 10.0 Refurbishment Options and Mortgageability Issues 11.0 Budget Costs Appendices A BHCC Non-Traditional and High Rise Property Listings (September 2005) B Schedule of Property Addresses and Construction Types C Historical Information D Impressionistic Survey Notes E Schedule of Intrusive Investigations F Concrete Cover and Carbonation Results G Chemical Analysis Results and Certificates H Bibliography I Acknowledgements

1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Purpose of the Study In September 2005 Curtins Consulting Engineers plc were invited and subsequently

appointed by Brighton & Hove City Council (via Messrs Savills Commercial Ltd) to undertake a structural assessment of their non-traditional and high rise housing.

In brief, the underlying objective of this study is to provide a robust appraisal of the

Council’s stock with a view to establishing whether it will safely provide for a further 30 years of cost effective service and, if so, what structural, remedial or improvement works will be needed and when during this term.

1.2 Non-Traditional Houses and Flats Following a review of the limited ‘desk top’ material that was available concerning

recent repair history and maintenance issues, Curtins sought to undertake their own detailed investigation of the ten constituent property types.

Having verified and augmented our initial findings, more particularly through the

intrusive survey work and associated laboratory analysis, we have concluded that the stock is largely in a sound and serviceable structural state such that it should easily sustain a further minimum 30 year life subject to the works prescribed in this report being implemented.

Fortunately, most of the property types pertinent to this study has been significantly

repaired and/or improved in some way over the past 10-15 years. Whilst this majority continues to benefit from the over-cladding work that was undertaken previously, their continued long term performance will likely come to depend on the level of maintenance they are subsequently afforded as it is evident that even some of the more comprehensively repaired houses suffer from varying degrees of what may be classed as ‘superficial’ impairments.

In view of this, the majority of the prescribed repairs have been designated for

completion within years 11-15 and 16-20. By and large, these works are confined to maintenance provisions such as renewing pitched or flat roof coverings, repairing cladding, re-pointing brickwork and applying protective treatments to exposed concrete elements or structural steelwork.

As regards those properties which remain in a ‘un-repaired’ state, specifically the

Cornish type (II) flats, the No-Fines flats and the Unity houses, we have recommended that as a minimum measure these are over-clad within years 1-5. In addition to enhancing a building’s appearance, this work will usefully negate the need for ongoing repairs by virtue of the manner in which the cladding will safeguard the structure against further deterioration.

1.0 Executive Summary (Continued) 1.3 Medium and High Rise Blocks of Flats Having broadly followed the same investigative approach adopted during our analysis

of the non-traditional houses we have concluded that all of the high rise blocks are inherently robust.

The extensive refurbishment work undertaken to all but one of the eight Bison and

Wates large panel system (LPS) type blocks, namely Kingfisher Court, has served to ensure that these properties remain in good structural order. However, like the non-traditional houses and flats, they are not entirely devoid of defects, albeit these are generally minor in nature. Examples of the more ‘superficial’ items that require attention include, but are not limited to, the following:

Isolated instances of reinforcement corrosion and cracked/spalled concrete.

Inadequately maintained roof and balcony coverings.

Corroded balustrade and guard railings. In recognition of above, the bulk of the prescribed repair works again constitute little

more than ongoing maintenance requirements such as renewing flat roof coverings, re-pointing brickwork, replacing movement joints and applying protective treatments to exposed concrete elements. It will also be similarly important that the cladding is properly maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s guidelines, especially if it is to fulfil its anticipated service life.

Being as Brighton is situated in an area of comparatively high environmental exposure,

the need for continued regular maintenance will be of particular importance. Coastal weather conditions will be far from ‘kind’ to these buildings and it would therefore be prudent to ensure that the cladding is, in the very least, periodically inspected.

Where Kingfisher Court is concerned, we have recommended that this is over-clad

with a similar if not identical system to that used on the four neighbouring Wates type blocks. Whilst not deemed necessary for structural reasons, this work would undoubtedly obviate the need for an ongoing high level of maintenance as well as certain cyclical repairs.

Optional enhancement works have chiefly come to include enclosing the exposed

balcony areas which will hopefully see an end to the cosmetic and hygiene problems that arise with perching gulls and pigeons, whilst improving the habitability of the flats.

Having reviewed the report prepared by Ecovert Management Ltd in November 1999

regarding the six medium rise blocks on Dartmouth Crescent and Fitch Drive, we note that some of the recommendations, principally those concerning the pre-cast floor beams, have yet to be adopted. Being as our advice concurs with that previously tendered by the aforementioned, our recommendations in respect of the proposed remedial works have not sought to deviate from those initially proposed. However, we have suggested that consideration be given to over-cladding these blocks. Although not essential from a structural viewpoint, this work offers the potential to notably improve thermal efficiency as well as enhance their aesthetic appeal.

1.0 Executive Summary (Continued) In June 2006 we received instructions to widen our appraisal to encompass the

Council’s stock of traditional R.C frame high rise blocks. Having extended our regime of visual and intrusive investigations to include the twenty

properties identified under Section 8 of this report we have concluded that, like the Bison and Wates type blocks, these buildings do not appear to suffer from any significant structural defects.

Whilst conducting our surveys it became apparent that all of the blocks have, in the

past, required some element of repair and although only a few of the properties, more notably Theobald House, have benefited from any comprehensive level of refurbishment, all are deemed to be in a sound and serviceable condition such that routine maintenance alone should ensure they continue to perform satisfactorily for at least another 30 years.

In keeping with the general nature of the works prescribed elsewhere, provisions have

been made for renewing roof coverings as well as concrete and brickwork repairs. In addition, the proposed measures have also come to include replacing certain proprietary components such as curtain walling.

1.0 Executive Summary (Continued) 1.4 Mortgageability Issues A total of 238 houses and 131 self-contained flats which collectively form the

constituent Cornish, Reema, Unity and Wates stocks are classified as being ‘Defective’ under Part XVI of the Housing Act 1985. Consequently, most lenders would not consider these to be a sound investment for mortgage purposes, although some institutions will provide for properties that have been repaired using recognised over-cladding systems such as those approved by Norwich Union or more notably NTHAS. Whilst the Cornish type (I) flats, Reema and Wates houses have all effectively been party to this more cost effective approach, it is nevertheless anticipated that these and the remaining Unity houses will all need to be reinstated in accordance with a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme if full mortgageability is to be achieved.

Accepting the above to apply in the broader sense, it is important in this instance to

remember that these licensed repair schemes were only ever intended to deal with single and two storey houses. Flats were effectively excluded from consideration at the time and are accordingly still approached with some caution by lenders today.

Before any long term decisions are taken with respect to the Reema houses, the

Council are advised to investigate the potential for redeveloping the existing sites to accommodate an increased number of new, traditionally built, properties. Whilst a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme will serve to provide a fully mortgageable solution, the requisite scope of works and associated costs are such that it is often makes better financial sense to demolish and rebuild.

Being as none of the other non-traditional dwellings are designated defective, there

will be no recognised restrictions on mortgageability. Mortgages should therefore be readily available, subject to the individual status of the applicant and condition/marketability of the property.

As regards the medium and high rise flats, whilst lenders can be reluctant to provide

mortgages for these dwellings, the fact that some individual units are understood to be in private ownership (leasehold) may suggest that mortgageability has already been established locally.

1.0 Executive Summary (Continued) 1.5 Budget Cost Summary A summary of the budget costs that have been derived for each of the non-traditional

and high rise property types is tabled overleaf. These figures, the manner in which they are to be interpreted and the rational for their projected timing, are all more particularly defined in Section 11 of this report.

Table 1 identifies the costs in connection with what have been prescribed as minimum

basic structural/fabric repairs, i.e. those required to ensure the stock continues to perform satisfactorily for at least a further 30 years. Table 2 repeats the exercise with consideration for the enhanced works that have also been proposed.

Please note that in the case of years 26-30, the total anticipated expenditure does not

incorporate the cost associated with our proposed option to demolish and rebuild the Reema type PRC houses. This figure, which we have budgeted at £23,294,250.00, has been provided for ‘information only’ on the basis that such action need not be considered unless the Council require these properties to be maintained significantly beyond this period.

In accordance with the requirements of the brief, all costs are exclusive of VAT,

professional fees, statutory fees, asbestos disposal costs, compensatory costs including decanting (where applicable) and management charges.

1.0 Executive Summary (Continued) Table 1: Basic Structural / Fabric Repairs (Minimum 30 Years)

SUMMARY OF MINIMUM BASIC REPAIR COSTS

PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION

YEARS

1-5

YEARS

6-10

YEARS 11-15

YEARS 16-20

YEARS 21-25

YEARS 26-30

Non-Traditional Houses and Flats

1,072,380

119,316

2,435,408

3,800,692

468,450

213,722

High Rise Blocks (6+ Storeys)

2,765,009

1,066,435

3,277,465

518,066

1,667,462

151,136

Total expenditure for years 1-5: £3,837,389





Total expenditure for years 26-30: £364,858

Table 2: Basic Structural / Fabric Repairs and Optional Enhancements

SUMMARY OF BASIC & ENHANCED REPAIR COSTS

PROPERTY CLASSIFCATION

YEARS

1-5

YEARS

6-10

YEARS 11-15

YEARS 16-20

YEARS 21-25

YEARS 26-30

Non-Traditional Houses and Flats

2,561,695

119,316

2,415,158

5,584,042

413,100

537,722

High Rise Blocks (6+ Storeys)

2,940,509

1,066,435

3,847,840

518,066

1,667,462

151,136






Total expenditure for years 26-30: £688,858

A brief analysis of the figures summarised above indicates that, if all of the prescribed ‘minimum’ repairs were undertaken, the total anticipated expenditure would equate to £8,468.00 per dwelling taken across all of the 267 houses and 1,806 self-contained flats. This sum would rise to £10,527.00 in the event all of the ‘enhanced’ works are similarly adopted.

2.0 Introduction In September 2005 Curtins Consulting Engineers plc were invited and subsequently

appointed by Brighton & Hove City Council (via Messrs Savills Commercial Ltd) to undertake a structural assessment of their non-traditional and high rise housing.

It is understood that this study, which will form part of a wider appraisal currently being

undertaken by Savills, is required in order that the Council may undertake a review of its housing stock as part of their own asset management strategy. This review will come to entail preparing forward projections with respect to the repair and maintenance work needed to safeguard the structural integrity of their housing stock over the next 30 years and may be used, in conjunction with other detailed information, to produce a maintenance plan for each classification or type of property that will be of value to their overall business plan.

In consideration of the above and in the absence of a definitive project brief, Curtins

immediately set about formulating detailed proposals which sought to contribute to the Council’s principal aims and objectives.

The key outputs of our report may be summarised as follows: 1. Identify any remedial works deemed to be of an urgent nature i.e. that required

within the next 12 months. 2. Identify conditions and/or defects that are likely to affect the structural

performance of the properties during the next 30 years and thereafter prescribe whatever repairs and/or improvements are considered necessary to maintain the same over this period.

3. Identify any properties where their condition or other circumstances dictate that a

minimum future life of 30 years cannot be achieved. 4. Identify any property archetypes within the non-traditional classified stock that are

designated as being ‘Defective’ under the terms of the Housing Act 1985 and where appropriate, prescribe that which is needed to achieve full mortgageable status using licensed repair schemes.

5. Provide budget costs in respect of the various options which illustrate planned

expenditure over the next 30 years and present these such that it will be possible to interrogate or ‘drill down’ to individual cost items for a particular property type.

As to ensure each function of the brief was met, it was proposed that Curtins would:

Review any historical information pertaining to each of the property types.

Interrogate Council staff as part of an exercise designed to tease out anecdotal information regarding maintenance and repair issues.

Undertake a superficial or ‘impressionistic’ examination of the stock in order to assess its present condition.

From the information obtained above, devise and undertake intrusive surveys that will target potential weaknesses in terms of design or construction.

2.0 Introduction (Continued) Our investigations commenced on 4 November 2005 when Curtins attended a meeting

with lead representatives of the Council’s Housing Repairs and Maintenance division. This was immediately followed by a four day ‘tour’ of the houses and high rise blocks designated for inclusion within our study.

Further site inspections, that collectively formed an impressionistic survey, were

subsequently conducted throughout November and latterly during July 2006 following an instruction for us to widen our appraisal to encompass a further twenty traditional R.C frame high rise blocks. During this time, meetings were convened with representatives of the various principal suppliers and specialist contractors that we had elected to seek advice from. Each of the companies participant to this appraisal are acknowledged within Appendix I.

Curtins site based studies were finally concluded in August 2006 when we completed

the regime of intrusive investigations set out in Appendix E. These were undertaken to a selected sample of properties in order to verify, or otherwise, our initial opinions.

Upon completion of the above, it was agreed that Curtins would assimilate their data

and present details pertaining to their observations, recommendations and conclusions in the form of an all encompassing report.

3.0 Composition of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock Details pertaining to each of the property types pertinent to this study, their

construction form and respective quantity, are summarised in the table below. This has been complied using the Council’s records which are understood to have been last updated in September 2005. A copy of these are incorporated within Appendix A.

Whilst undertaking our survey work, Curtins discovered a small contingent of

properties that were either incorrectly classified or wrongly identified as being local authority owned. Furthermore, seven of the eight high rise blocks were found to be of a different form of construction to that initially advised. Accordingly, both this table and the more comprehensive register presented within Appendix B, have been duly amended to reflect our findings.


ADDRESS

№ OF UNITS

(Houses)

№ OF UNITS

(Flats)

BISF Type (A1) Houses

Forest Road Middleton Rise Rushlake Road

1 6 9

n/a n/a n/a

Bison (Floor) Blocks

Dartmouth Crescent Fitch Drive

3 Blocks 3 Blocks

14 14

Bison High Rise Blocks

Dudeney Lodge Nettleton Court

1 Block 1 Block

86 82

BRE Type 1-3 Houses

Firle Road

1

n/a

BRS Type 4 Houses

Staplefield Drive

4

n/a

Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey)

Bramble Way Chelwood Close Orchid View Parham Close

3 Blocks 2 Blocks 3 Blocks 2 Blocks

35 24 42 22

Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats (2 Storey)

Hawkhurst Place Thompson Road

1 Block 1 Block

4 4

3.0 Composition of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock (Continued)


ADDRESS

№ OF UNITS

(Houses)

№ OF UNITS

(Flats)

No-Fines Type Flats

Donald Hall Road

4 Blocks

31

Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses

Bexhill Road Cowley Drive Crespin Way Heronsdale Road Laughton Road Netherfield Green Newells Close

159 5 4 6 4

17 8

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks

Clarendon House Conway Court Courtlands Ecclesden Ellen House Essex Place Goldstone House Hereford Court Highleigh Livingstone House Normanhurst Richmond Heights Saxonbury Somerset Point St John’s Mount Theobald House Thornsdale Tyson Place Warwick Mount Wiltshire House

1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block

42 54 36 38 39

100 43 80 33 38 33 34 35 70 69 99 37 62 63 96

Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses

Carden Hill Crabtree Avenue Lyminster Avenue

1 6 1

n/a n/a n/a

3.0 Composition of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock (Continued)


ADDRESS

№ OF UNITS

(Houses)

№ OF UNITS

(Flats)

Unity Type (I) PRC Houses

Bodiam Avenue Walmer Crescent

5 4

n/a n/a

Wates Type PRC Houses

Bamford Close Norwich Close Norwich Drive

7 5

14

n/a n/a n/a

Wates High Rise Blocks

Falcon Court Heron Court Kestrel Court Kingfisher Court Swallow Court St James’ House

1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block 1 Block

54 47 54 41 51

100

SUMMARY OF STOCK MANAGED BY BHCC

Total number of non-traditional houses

267

Total number of non-traditional, medium rise and high rise flats

1,806

4.0 Review of Existing Information/Data As part of the proposed methodology for meeting the requirements of the brief, it was

agreed that Curtins would seek to undertake the following: 1. Interrogate Council staff as part of an exercise designed to tease out anecdotal

information regarding any maintenance and repair issues. 2. Review any historical data that the Council is able to provide with respect to each

of the various property types. It was initially hoped that this would come to include:

Structural reports undertaken by others.

Recent repair/improvement records.

Original construction drawings.

Asbestos register. 4.1 Initial Client Meeting From the outset, some concern was expressed on the Council’s part regarding the

distinct lack of ‘desktop’ material that would be available for our review. Given that this appraisal represents the first instance in which the authority has been called upon to provide historical information, it was instead proposed that the next best option would be for Curtins to meet with some of the senior surveyors who were known to benefit from a broad-based knowledge of the housing stock.

Consequently, a meeting was convened with representatives of the Council’s Housing

Repairs and Maintenance division on 4 November 2005. The session was intended to provide Curtins with an medium through which we could obtain anecdotal information with respect to the following:

Known problems/defects concerning any of the property types.

Maintenance issues that might not be documented elsewhere. Curtins very much endorse this method of gathering information and although the

many of the items brought to our attention were clearly of a non-structural nature it was valuable in helping us to realise the ‘bigger picture’.

4.2 Existing Reports Chief among the historical information subsequently provided for our appraisal were

two reports, these being:

Decent Homes Standards Report on Trusteel Houses (Ref: 65328/E016PF0620) prepared by Dunlop Haywards Ltd in May 2005.

Structural Investigation of High Alumina Cement Floor Beams to Flats at Fitch Drive and Dartmouth Crescent, Brighton (Ref: E407S04) prepared by Ecovert Management Ltd in November 1999.

Taking each report in turn we have summarised their contents as follows.

4.0 Review of Existing Information/Data (Continued) 4.2.1 Decent Homes Standards Report by Dunlop Haywards Ltd In January 2005, Dunlop Haywards were appointed to investigate and thereafter

report on the condition of the Council’s limited stock of Trusteel houses. Specifically, their brief was to:

Inspect for compliance with Decent Homes Standards.

Expose the steel frame and visually assess its condition. The investigations focused on two properties namely, 42 Crabtree Avenue and 99 Lyminster Avenue.

The report which followed firstly identified a number of non-structural issues that were

deemed to require attention. These included refurbishing the outdated kitchen and bathroom suites, installing gas central heating and undertaking periodic NIECIC electrical tests.

Having attended to the first element of the brief, the latter half of the report

concentrated on the condition of the structural steel frame. Intrusive inspections determined that the stanchions had been repaired and that, consequently, their condition was generally thought to be favourable. Being as some minor surface corrosion had been identified at 99 Lyminster Avenue, the report concluded with the recommendation that further periodic inspections be undertaken with a view to monitoring and controlling future deterioration.

4.2.2 Structural Investigation Report by Ecovert Management Ltd In September 1999, Ecovert Management Ltd were appointed to undertake a

structural assessment of the six blocks of flats situated in Dartmouth Crescent and Fitch Drive. Specifically, their brief was to:

Investigate the condition of the pre-cast concrete floor beams in view of their reported high alumina cement (HAC) content.

Identify any other defects arising out of the survey and advise appropriate remedial measures.

The majority of the report which followed sought to address the integrity of the floor

structure. It was determined that the presence of HAC within the floor beams was of little consequence being as they are in a dry/stable environment and as such should not suffer from reinforcement corrosion. Of considerably more concern was the manner in which the intermediate floors offered support to the main wall.

When the buildings were first constructed, it was normal practice to build the edge of

the floor units into the side walls without providing additional ties for stability and robustness. Being as the floors were seen to have cracked slightly under movement, Ecovert suggested that the edge of the floor could no longer be relied upon to provide the necessary lateral restraint to the main walls.

4.0 Review of Existing Information/Data (Continued) In view of the circumstances, Ecovert concluded that it would be necessary to install

some supplementary restraint straps in order to alleviate any concerns for the long term stability of the structure. As part of the remedial works, it was proposed that the condition of the cavity wall ties be established with a view to replacing them as may be necessary.

Whist undertaking the investigations, Ecovert identified a number of comparatively

insignificant defects that were also reportedly of some concern to the residents. These included:

Landing windows which have been insufficiently fixed in position.

Localised damage to wall finishes as a result of the above.

Localised erosion of the mortar joints in brickwork.

Corroded handrails serving access bridges/walkways. In keeping with the requirements of the brief, appropriate remedial works were

proposed and subsequently budgeted for in the report summary. 4.3 Archive Material In addition to the two reports summarised above, Curtins were provided with a

microfilm containing archive material pertaining to a number of projects that were commissioned with respect to some of the Council’s non-traditional housing.

The information we reviewed generally concerned itself with non-structural issues and

was accordingly of little value to our studies. Instead this seemed to focus on external redecoration and refurbishment works such as renewing soffits, fascias and rainwater goods. Window replacement contracts also featured quite heavily amongst the documentation we inspected, the bulk of which appeared to form part of a Better Homes Programme.

We did however come across records relating to some more significant structural

repairs that were undertaken circa 1990 to 179 Reema type houses situated in the North Wooding Dean area. This work reportedly involved underpinning some of the properties, whilst others had a steel framework introduced that was designed to split the load bearing span of the first floor beams.

4.0 Review of Existing Information/Data (Continued) 4.4 Recent Repair/Improvement Records During our impressionistic survey, Curtins came to realise that much of the housing

stock pertinent to this study has been the subject of some significant repair and/or improvement work in the past.

As is discussed in the proceeding elements of this report, this work looks to have

principally involved a variety of over-cladding schemes that have been introduced to seven of the high rise blocks and the majority of the non-traditional house types.

Given that our brief would require us to consider the likely costs in connection with

repairing, maintaining and if necessary, renewing existing cladding systems, Curtins were naturally keen to assemble whatever information they could regarding their origins. This includes details pertaining to the design, manufacturer, age and where possible installation cost. This information is useful in determining what maintenance is required over the long term, being as this will be somewhat dependant on the type and quality of the system used.

Despite having sought to collate this information at our request, the Council were

regretfully unable to provide any details in respect of that discussed above. Accordingly, it was hoped that we would establish answers to some of our queries through the intrusive investigation work that was subsequently undertaken.

Notwithstanding the above, Curtins were fortunate enough to receive some limited

cost data in connection with the over-cladding and re-roofing work that has more recently been completed at Heron Court and Kingfisher Court respectively.

4.5 Original Construction Drawings Although some attempt was made, the Council were unable to retrieve any archive

drawings in relation to either the Bison or Wates high rise blocks. These are usually of value, not merely in helping to determine the exact form of construction, but because they can often be utilised to establish accurate quantities that might be required when calculating budget cost estimates.

Original construction drawings with respect to the non-traditional ‘system built’ houses

are generally unavailable and in any case are not required being as reference can easily be made to any of the Building Research Establishment (BRE) reports that have been published to provide guidance to consultants and building owner’s alike. Whilst our knowledge and experience of ‘system built’ dwellings is extensive, we have sought to make reference to these documents where necessary and accordingly have afforded them mention within the bibliography of this report.

4.0 Review of Existing Information/Data (Continued) 4.6 Asbestos Registers Whilst it is not a requirement of our brief to either inspect, test for or report on the

condition of any asbestos containing materials (ACMs) that are thought or found to be present in any of the properties, Curtins nevertheless require that a copy of the Landlord’s asbestos register is provided for our perusal.

Although this information is not directly used to determine what structural elements are

inspected as part of our intrusive survey work and accepting the fact we are unlikely to disturb any ACMs during these investigations, it is important that we have the means to identify suspect components were these are encountered.

Upon receiving the aforementioned, a copy was passed onto Kier Building

Maintenance who had been appointed to assist us with our studies.

5.0 Investigation Strategy The purpose of this investigation is to establish the structural condition of the non-

traditional and high rise housing and to advise on the extent and associated cost of any repair/refurbishment works that will seek to ensure a minimum future life of 30 years.

As previously discussed under Section 4, very little ‘desk top’ information was

available concerning the construction, history, maintenance and repair particular to the various property types. Due to the distinct lack of background information Curtins have accordingly based this report on their visual and intrusive investigations.

Initially, Curtins undertook a general assessment or ‘impressionistic’ survey of the

housing stock in order to establish the most appropriate sampling and inspection regime, details of which can be found within Section 7. Based upon this information an initial assessment of the likelihood of each construction type achieving a further minimum 30 year life was made.

The purpose of the detailed survey is to verify and augment the findings of the initial

assessment by undertaking visual and intrusive investigations and associated laboratory analysis.

5.1 Scope of the Investigations The extent of the investigation has been largely influenced by Curtin’s impressionistic

survey together with our experience and knowledge of the potential defects that can occur in these types of buildings. The work may be categorized as follows:

Visual inspections.

Exploratory (intrusive) investigations.

Laboratory testing. Information obtained during the impressionistic surveys that were undertaken on 4, 14,

16 and 17 November 2005 and latterly on 11, 12 and 13 July 2006 (see notes incorporated within Appendix D) has been used to determine the scope of the investigation work, namely:

Extent and location of inspections.

Number and type of site tests.

Number and type of samples for laboratory analysis, where required. The number of properties that are selected for inspection and subsequent

investigation will vary depending upon the total number of units within that construction type and their vulnerability to defects, based on Curtins knowledge.

Whilst property addresses were chosen partly at random, the units selected where

detailed testing occurred (see schedule incorporated within Appendix E) are considered to be representative of the overall stock.

5.0 Investigation Strategy (Continued) This report is based upon visual inspections, discussions with representatives of the

Council and detailed intrusive investigations. It is not feasible when undertaking this type of survey to inspect every property. Therefore, a sampling regime has been adopted that is considered to be representative of the stock as a whole.

The visual inspections have largely been confined to a brief overview of the external

elevations which are visible from the curtilage of a property as it is viewed from the public right-of-way. Inspecting rear elevations from adjoining or neighbouring gardens has not been undertaken in the majority of instances.

The sampling regime adopted is such that where components are visible, a

representative sample of those elements either noticeably suffering from or most likely to suffer from degradation are tested. Where the components are not visible, testing has been undertaken in areas considered to be most vulnerable to degradation. The results obtained are used as the basis of the recommendations and are given as being representative of the stock as a whole. However, as the entire structural fabric of every building cannot be inspected, there is no guarantee that the worst or most aggressive areas of degradation have been identified.

This assessment is confined to consideration of the principal structural elements

particular to each construction type. The condition of doors, windows, outbuildings and external fixtures and fittings, together with gas, water and electrical services, central heating, flues, bathroom and kitchen fittings and internal decorations are all excluded from consideration and should be the subject of a separate condition survey that is being undertaken by Messrs Savills as part of an ‘overall’ appraisal of the Council’s housing stock.

Subsoil investigations were excluded from the survey although evidence of structural

movement associated with foundation instability was recorded during the visual inspections, if indeed it was evident. Whilst many of the foundation solutions adopted at the time of construction would not comply with current standards, it is most likely that any settlement due to inadequate foundation size or depth would have already occurred. However, this does not exclude the potential risk of future movement, for example, as a result of flooding or drainage failure.

The structural risk assessments exclude items of a geotechnical and environmental

nature. The assessment of potential foundation problems is confined to a review of any information provided on historic problems as well as observations made on site.

Information provided for review has not been substantiated or validated by

independent research or inspection or investigation. Curtins cannot be held responsible for any errors, discrepancies or inaccuracies in the information provided by the Council or its representatives.

No testing for asbestos has been carried out during the preparation of this report.

6.0 Assessment of Potential Defects The investigations sought to determine the presence of the following defects, all of

which have a direct influence on the long-term durability and performance of the principal structural elements.

6.1 Reinforced Concrete Elements Deterioration of the reinforced concrete elements is caused by corrosion of the steel

reinforcement and degradation of the concrete matrix, either independently or as a result of steel corrosion. Concrete is inherently alkaline and this alkalinity protects the encased steel reinforcement from corrosion. However, the protection can be reduced by the action of acidic gases present in the air (such as carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide). This process is called carbonation. If the depth of carbonation is greater than the concrete cover surrounding the reinforcement steel, the risk of reinforcement corrosion increases, reducing the integrity of the concrete and leading to a reduction in structural capacity.

Corrosion can increase or be more severe in the presence of high levels of chloride ion within the concrete; common if chloride based admixtures were used in the concrete during the construction process (normal practice up to the late 1960’s). Therefore, the following characteristics need to be assessed in order to determine the structural condition and future durability of the concrete:

Chloride ion content.

Carbonation depth.

Cover to reinforcement.

Quality of workmanship during construction. 6.2 Chloride Ion Content Chloride attack on reinforcement is aggressive and can occur despite the alkalinity of

the surrounding concrete. It sets up an electrolytic cell, which encourages the migration of chloride ions from surrounding areas to the site of the attack. This results in localised deep pits in the reinforcement, which decreases its cross sectional area significantly before sufficient rust has formed to crack the concrete to the surface. As this form of reinforcement attack is hidden from view, it is potentially a serious cause of weakness to reinforced concrete and it can progress undetected. Consequently, it is important that the level of chloride in the concrete is established.

Concrete samples are taken, either by drilling holes and collecting the debris or by

chipping pieces of concrete from the corners of components.

6.0 Assessment of Potential Defects (Continued) 6.3 Carbonation Depth There are four basic factors that contribute towards the resistance of concrete to

carbonation. These are as follows:

The type and proportions of the materials used in the concrete mix.

The compaction achieved during casting.

The curing regime to which the concrete has been subjected.

The environment in which the concrete is located. The depth of carbonation is a good indicator of the quality of the concrete; the degree

to which the concrete has suffered from weathering and the approximate time scale before the reinforcement is affected by the environment.

The depth of carbonation in concrete is determined by spraying the surface of the

drilled hole with liquid Phenolphthalein indicator. This clear liquid turns un-carbonated concrete purple. The colourless zone can be measured as the carbonation depth.

6.4 Cover to Reinforcement Measurement of depth of cover is necessary to establish the potential vulnerability of

corrosion occurring in the reinforcement. It is of importance that reinforcement is afforded adequate protection from the carbonation process in order for it to remain effective within the concrete section; too little cover can lead to premature corrosion resulting in cracking and spalling of the concrete face and ultimately, failure of the component.

Reinforcement cover was established using an electronic cover meter. 6.5 Quality of Concrete Construction Poor quality can arise as a result of deficiencies in the original mix specification or bad

workmanship on site during the compaction and curing of the concrete. It often leads to one or more of the following problems:

Weathering and frost attack of the concrete surface leading to cracking, spalling and loose concrete, often due to low cement content reducing durability, or poor compaction.

Porous concrete which allows deeper penetration of moisture and corrosion of the reinforcement.

Where the concrete components are cast in thin sections, resulting in little or no cover.

Lack of fit between components at joints due to poorly formed connections.

6.0 Assessment of Potential Defects (Continued) 6.5 Steelwork Problems with steel frame structures relate to the potential breakdown of the

protective coating system, which can lead to corrosion of the steel elements. Finishes, panels and coverings should be removed to facilitate a visual inspection of

the steel frame. The bottom ends of steel posts, or other members partially built into an outer wall or a similar damp location, are vulnerable to corrosion that can serve to reduce their structural capacity.

6.6 Timber Defects associated with timber frame properties are mainly in connection with the

breakdown of external finishes allowing water penetration, thus leading to damage of the structural components.

In addition, poor construction and detailing can give rise to potential problems. Finishes, panels and coverings need to be removed to enable a visual inspection of

the structural frame. Sole plates and lower sections of timber studs/panels located in potential damp locations are vulnerable to decay that can serve to reduce their structural capacity.

7.0 Details of the Investigations 7.1 External Visual Inspections Visual inspections were undertaken primarily to assess the extent of the potential

problems and verify or augment the information obtained during the impressionistic survey.

The inspections focused on the following:

Signs of cracking, spalling, loose bricks, loose render and similar defects requiring short term repairs.

Signs of frost damage, soluble salts, lichen growth, porous bricks.

Signs of misalignments, out of plumb, bowing or bulging.

Eroded mortar joints, cracking due to sulphate attack or cavity tie corrosion.

Condition of the roofs, whether pitched or flat.

Signs of defects in exposed reinforced concrete, cracking, spalling, corrosion staining, dampness, porous concrete and cover to reinforcement.

7.2 Intrusive (Exploratory) Investigations These investigations comprised the localised opening up of the external building

envelope to confirm the form of construction, assess any visual defects to the structural elements and obtain concrete samples for chloride ion analysis, undertake reinforcement cover and concrete carbonation depth measurements.

Given that the majority of the non-traditional houses and high rise blocks have been

over-clad it was not always possible to visually access the condition of the underlying structural components such as external wall panels, columns and beams. Consequently, the intrusive work was further elevated in terms of its significance and it came to involve removing isolated sections of cladding such that specific components could be tested in the manner described below.

7.3 Test Programme Our intrusive inspection regimes and the properties to which they were systematically

applied are comprehensively detailed within the schedule incorporated under Appendix E. For the benefit of this section of the report, these may be summarised as follows:

7.3.1 BISF Type (A1) Houses Expose a minimum of 2 № steel stanchions such that their condition can be assessed.

7.0 Details of the Investigations (Continued) 7.3.2 Bison (Floor) Blocks Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Elevated walkways

Communal stairs

Communal landing floor Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls

Parapet wall at roof level 7.3.3 Bison High Rise Blocks Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Pre-cast wall panels (Exposed front and rear elevations only)

In-situ wall panels at ground/basement level 7.3.4 BRE Type 1-3 Houses Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls 7.3.5 BRS Type 4 Houses Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Ring beams

Roof slab 7.3.6 Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

External wall columns

Ring beams Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls (Between PRC wall components and brick cladding)

7.0 Details of the Investigations (Continued) 7.3.7 Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats (2 Storey) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:


Ring beams Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls (Gable elevations only) 7.3.8 No-Fines Type Flats Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Balcony slabs at 1st floor

Balcony slabs at 2nd floor

Balcony floor beams at 2nd floor 7.3.9 Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:


Floor beams at 1st floor 7.3.10 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant A) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Columns at ground floor

Downstand floor beams at 1st floor Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls (Brick infill panels) 7.3.11 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant B) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:


Balcony slabs at 2nd floor Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls (Brick infill panels)

7.0 Details of the Investigations (Continued) 7.3.12 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant C) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:


Downstand floor beams at 1st floor



External walls (Brick infill panels) 7.3.13 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant D) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:





Tie beams at roof level Undertake endoscope inspections of the wall cavity at the following locations:

External walls (Brick infill panels) 7.3.14 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant E) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Raking columns at ground floor




External walls (Brick infill panels) 7.3.15 Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses Expose a minimum of 2 № steel stanchions such that their condition can be assessed.

7.0 Details of the Investigations (Continued) 7.3.16 Unity Type (I) PRC Houses Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

External wall panels

External wall columns 7.3.17 Wates Type PRC Houses Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

External wall panels

Ring beams 7.3.18 Wates High Rise Blocks (Variant A) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:


Floor beams at 1st floor



Pre-cast wall panels (Kingfisher Court) 7.3.19 Wates High Rise Block (Variant B) Extract concrete samples from the following locations for laboratory analysis:

Pre-cast wall panels (Exposed front and rear elevations only)

8.0 Property Type Descriptions 8.1 Background to Non-Traditional Building Systems Up to the outbreak of war in 1914, despite the advances made in engineering and

technology generally, the building trades had remained practically untouched. Building was almost entirely in the hands of masters who had risen from the ranks of skilled craftsmen and who employed a small number of men of their own type. Since the work they turned out was mainly of good quality and the prices were low compared with more highly finished engineering products, there was no urge to alter this structure. Homes could be provided much more economically using relatively simply processed raw materials and small units assembled in situ than by the introduction of more complicated sub-assembly processes. It required the sudden impact of post-war conditions and the sudden realisation of near disaster to the social structure to question the adequacy of such a well entrenched industry to meet any demands that could be made on it.

Few of the unconventional methods at that time embodied a high degree of

prefabrication. Immediately after the war the primary objective was to find alternatives to bricklaying, hence the interest in various forms of concrete construction. It was only in the field of steel housing, in certain types of imported timber houses and in one type of concrete house (the Waller system) that true prefabrication was really attempted.

Encouragement for the use of non-traditional forms of construction continued during

times when craftsmen skilled in traditional building materials were in short supply. Never was this more evident than immediately after the Second World War.

Were housing was concerned, non-traditional forms generally came to embody the

use of prefabricated frames and infill panels, mainly in reinforced concrete, but steelwork and other metals together with timber were also used.

The decay mechanism of reinforced concrete was poorly understood until the 1970’s

and no assessment of the likely life of non-traditional dwellings was ever made at the time of design and construction.

The foundations to most properties are trench fill or strip footings in the vast majority of

cases and investigation of the footings would, therefore, usually only be undertaken where signs of settlement cracking were noted.

The typical structural arrangements relating to each of the various property types

pertinent to this study are addressed within the proceeding pages. More detailed information is contained within the published BRE reports that are referred to in Appendix H.

Where our investigations of the stock have identified variations to the generic

descriptions given below, these have been noted.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2 Non-Traditional Houses and Flats 8.2.1 BISF Type (A1) Houses

The use of the British Iron and Steel Federation (BISF) house type is widespread

across the UK. Although nearly all identical in their appearance, they are known to exhibit minor variations in construction detail they share.

It is understood that approximately 35,000 houses of this type were known to have

been built between 1944 and 1950. Published information describes the system as follows: The lightweight frame of the two storey semi-detached house was designed for rapid

construction and consists of vertical channels (76 x 38mm) at approximately 1000mm centres in the front and back walls which carry horizontal angles (100 x 76mm) at first floor level. These in turn carry steel floor joists that are given intermediary support by steel columns concealed within the internal partitions.

The external wall is of two sections. The ground floor wall consists of a cement render

on ribbed metal lath that was in turn fixed to the vertical channels. The upper section of walling was constructed of steel corrugated sheeting panels fixed to rails that were bolted to the vertical channels. This steel sheeting panel can suffer from corrosion resulting in loss of section and the steel lath to the lower concrete panels can corrode, leading to spalling of the render face.

Party walls are constructed in either masonry or lightweight concrete block. The

internal partitions are built of timber studwork and are normally lined with plasterboard at ground floor and fibreboard at first floor level.

The ground floor is typically of solid in-situ construction whilst the first floor is built off

suspended timber joists.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) Foundations are generally in the form of concrete plinths of varying dimensions formed

at the buildings’ perimeter. Variants to this occurred when brick walls were built off concrete strip foundations to within 50-75mm of the finished ground level in order to create a seating for the concrete plinth. Alternatively, brick walls were continued up to the underside of the concrete floor slab.

The pitched roof is formed with tubular steel trusses with angle purlins and ceiling

joists spanning between them. Steel cross members within the wall construction provided bracing of the structure.

The pitched roofs were originally covered with profiled asbestos cement sheets. Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally

consistent with the description given above, although it is acknowledged that the Council’s stock have been both over-clad and re-roofed.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.2 BRE Type 1-3 Houses

A single property designated for inclusion within this study, namely 16 Firle Road, has

been classified by the Council as being a BRE Type 1-3 house. Having thoroughly reviewed a summary of the reference material currently available

from the Building Research Establishment we are not aware of any reports or advisory documents that seek to identify, much less describe, this particular construction form.

In view of this and the fact that its general appearance does not appear to directly

accord with any known non-traditional house type, we are currently somewhat reluctant to conclude that the advised classification is indeed correct.

Notwithstanding the above, we would describe the form of construction as follows: It is assumed the foundations take the form of conventional strip footings. The external walls appear to be constructed in a traditional manner with of two skins of

brickwork incorporating a cavity. There are no distinctive external features that suggest the walls contain any form of structural frame, steel or otherwise.

Both the ground and first floors are understood to be of conventional suspended

timber construction. The pitched roof construction comprises timber rafters and purlins, sarking felt, battens

and concrete tiles.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.3 BRS Type 4 Houses

Designed by the Building Research Station, it is understood that a little over 60 houses

of this type were known to have been built on just five sites throughout England between 1953 and 1956.

Published information describes the system as follows: The foundations take the form of a mass concrete ground floor slab. The external walls, which are of no-fines concrete, are typically 200mm thick and are

cast between reusable external shuttering and permanent internal shuttering of prefabricated timber framing clad with plasterboard.

The first floor and roof loads are partially carried by cast-in-situ reinforced spine

beams located in the heads of partitions which run parallel with flank walls. The party walls are similarly constructed using no-fines concrete and are typically

150mm thick and dry-lined with plasterboard. The internal partitions are of timber studwork.

The first floor is of reinforced in-situ concrete construction, as is the roof slab which

varies in thickness from 115-140mm to create the necessary falls for rainwater drainage. The latter is then usually covered with wood-wool slabs finished with three layers of bituminous roofing felt.

The external walls are finished with cement/sand render. Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally

consistent with the description given above, although it is acknowledged that the Council’s stock have been over-clad with a proprietary insulation and render system.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.4 Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats

Classified as being ‘Defective’ by the Secretary of State under Part XVI of the

Housing Act 1985 Manufactured by Central Cornwall Concrete & Artificial Stone Co, it is understood that

approximately 30,000 houses (Types I and II) were known to have been built between 1946 and 1965.

Published information describes the system as follows: These properties, houses and flats alike, comprise pre-cast reinforced concrete (PRC)

plinths, ring beams and columns at approximately 900mm centres with un-reinforced concrete panels stack bonded to form the external facades.

The traditional Cornish Type (I) house is a two storey dwelling, with only the ground

floor construction of columns and panels as described above. The external walls at first floor level usually take the form of a mansard roof and are accordingly felted, battened and clad with vertical tile hanging. The three storey flats encountered in this instance are essentially no different, the construction of the ground floor merely being replicated again at first floor level.

Unlike the houses, which incorporate suspended timber floors, the first and second

floors comprise of either pre-cast concrete joists infilled with in-situ concrete or solid in-situ concrete slabs.

Cornish type properties have the potential to suffer significant structural deterioration

due to the presence of chloride based admixtures that were introduced to the cement during the original construction process. Of primary concern are the external wall columns. These often suffer from low concrete cover which, when coupled with high levels of carbonation, can actively promote corrosion of the steel reinforcement.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally

consistent with the description given above, although it is acknowledged that the Council’s stock have over-clad with brick, in compliance with what is understood to be an NTHAS (Category 3) scheme.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.5 Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats


Housing Act 1985 Manufactured by Central Cornwall Concrete & Artificial Stone Co, it is understood that

approximately 30,000 houses (Types I and II) were known to have been built between 1954 and 1965.

Published information describes the system as follows: Unlike the traditional Cornish Type (I) system discussed under 8.2.4, Type (II)

properties utilise pre-cast reinforced concrete (PRC) components in both the ground and first floor elevations and incorporate a traditional pitched roof.

The cladding panels used in the external wall construction taper in thickness from

25mm at the top to approximately 38mm at the bottom. The top and bottom edges are rebated for dry lap-jointing of the units when erected as weatherboarding between the columns. The lower storey PRC columns are tenoned and cement grouted into splayed mortices within the plinth units. These plinths carry on their upstands small starter units on which the lower storey internal wall lining of Paramount partitioning is positioned. Steel rods that are used to link lower storey columns together are located in grooves on the underside of a course of lintel units, which break vertical joints with a surmounting course of special string course units. Lintel and string course units are so shaped as to rebate these two courses together, whilst also locking between them the specially notched ends of the timber joists forming the first floor construction. The string course units match the plinth units as to provide splayed mortices into which are cement grouted the tenons of the upper storey PRC columns, which rise to support four courses of cladding panels in the same manner the lower storey columns do. The section of the top end of each column is reduced to form a shoulder on which sits, fixed by two bolts, a continuous timber eaves runner serving as a wall plate and a lintel over the first floor windows.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) Party walls are generally of 225mm solid masonry, reducing in thickness within the

roof space. Internal load bearing partitions are usually 100mm masonry whilst non load bearing walls are built of 100mm clinker block or timber studwork.

The gable walls surveyed in this instance appear to have adopted one of the more

commonly encountered variations which sees the PRC components replaced with two skins of reconstituted stone block separated by a cavity.

The pitched roof construction comprises timber rafters and purlins, sarking felt, battens

and concrete tiles. In keeping the Cornish Type (I) properties, these units have the potential to suffer

significant structural deterioration due to the presence of chloride based admixtures that were introduced to the cement during the original construction process. Again, of primary concern are the external wall columns. These often suffer from low concrete cover which, when coupled with high levels of carbonation, can actively promote corrosion of the steel reinforcement.

Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally

consistent with the description given above.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.6 No-Fines Type Flats

No-Fines dwellings were built by several companies, the most well known being

George Wimpey & Co who is understood to have been responsible for building somewhere in the region of 300,000 houses alone between the 1940s and 1970s.

Published information describes the system as follows: No-Fines properties of this type are generally built off concrete strip foundations and

have 255-305mm thick external walls made of coarse aggregate and cement with no sand used in the mix. The external walls are finished with roughcast render and internally with plaster. Although not applicable in this instance, variants can include flank walls of brickwork. The party walls are constructed likewise and are finished both sides with plaster whilst internal partitions can be of masonry, clinker block or timber studwork.

The same form of construction was used to build bungalows, houses, medium rise and

high-rise flats, except that the high-rise structures contain dense cast-in-situ concrete frames to support the greater loads involved.

The ground and upper floors within flats are typically of solid in-situ construction.

Within two storey houses these are more commonly built off suspended timber joists. The pitched roof construction comprises timber rafters and purlins, sarking felt, battens

and concrete tiles. Potentially there is a problem with these properties where water penetration and/or

interstitial condensation can promote corrosion of the reinforcement within the lintels. Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally


8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.7 Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses


Housing Act 1985 Manufactured by Reema Ltd, it is understood that approximately 17,600 houses of this

type were known to have been built between 1945 and 1966. Published information describes the system as follows: The Reema Hollow Panel system comprises storey height panels of lightly reinforced

concrete. The panels are linked together with reinforced in-situ columns and tied together at first floor and eaves level by reinforced in-situ ring beams.

The reinforcement within the panels was of a light gauge steel and was used primarily

to control shrinkage cracking and handling/erection stresses. Corrosion of this reinforcement is unlikely to have any effect on the overall structural integrity of the panels or dwellings.

The potential for structural failure is more significant in the in-situ wall columns and

ring beams and pre-cast floor beams. The beams in particular were often made using high concentrations of chloride based admixtures, thus increasing their potential vulnerability to corrosion. The proximity of the reinforced in-situ columns to driving rain at the panel joints also increases the risk of corrosion of steel if the concrete in these components is not dense.

Party walls consist of hollow panel units, similar in design to those for the external

walls. Load bearing internal partitions are formed using 100mm thick pre-cast panels, otherwise these are usually built of timber studwork.


hollow pre-cast concrete beams.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) The pitched roof construction comprises timber rafters and purlins, sarking felt, battens

and concrete tiles. Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally


8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.8 Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses

The Trusteel Corporation (Universal) Ltd was registered in 1945. Interestingly it was

not a building company, its function being to provide a comprehensive design and technical service for its clients and to supply the steel frames. Trusteel provided all drawings necessary for obtaining planning consent and building regulations approval, drawings for site use such as steelwork erection drawings and joinery details. The company also provided site supervisors to oversee the assembly of the steel framing in relation to the first few houses that were constructed.

The designation MkI or MkII as applied to the lattice frame system has not been seen

on any Trusteel literature or drawings. However, many articles describing the system use these terms and the designation has become common usage. MkI may refer only to the prototype design and MkII to later modified frames. For the purpose of this report, MkII is used as a generic term to denote the lattice frame system as distinct from the latter ‘3M’ steel frame which was introduced in 1966.

The Trusteel Corporation are understood to have supplied over 20,000 MkII type

properties between 1946 and the mid 1960s to both the public and private sectors. Published information describes the system as follows: The houses structure is based around a framework of steel sections made of thin

gauge steel strip lattice components to form columns, floor beams and roof trusses. The properties are all clad in conventional brickwork and give the appearance of traditionally constructed houses of the post-war period. There are no distinctive external features that can be used to identify them as clearly containing a steel frame. However, the cavity of the wall is 150mm wide to accommodate the columns and this increased overall wall thickness can offer an indication of the construction.

The internal leaf of the wall is generally made from wood-wool slabs. The steel frame

was commonly protected from contact with the brickwork by using a layer of bituminous tape along the outer face of the stanchions.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) Due to the construction detailing, there is a risk of cold bridging through the steel

frame and condensation forming behind the brickwork, placing the steel frame at an increased risk of corrosion.

Party walls consist of two leaves of lightweight concrete block separated by a cavity.

The internal partitions are usually built of the same. The ground floor is typically of solid in-situ construction whilst the first floor, as

discussed, is built off steel joists which span between the stanchions located in the front and rear external walls.

The pitched roof construction comprises steel lattice roof trusses, sarking felt, battens

and concrete tiles. Curtins’ investigations concluded that the properties inspected were generally

consistent with the description given above, although it is acknowledged that the Council’s stock have had localised repairs undertaken to the steel frame.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.9 Unity Type (I) PRC Houses


Housing Act 1985 Manufactured by Unity Structures Ltd, it is understood that approximately 19,000

houses (Types I and II) were known to have been built during the 1950s. Published information describes the system as follows: The structure comprises a framework of storey height pre-cast reinforced concrete

(PRC) columns at approximately 900mm centres, which form the basis of the external walls, together with pressed steel plate or lattice beams at first floor and eaves levels. Wind bracing is provided in the form of steel cross straps which are fixed diagonally between adjoining columns, more particularly at the corner junctions.

The external walls consist of two leaves of concrete spanning between columns

separated by a 150mm cavity. The outer skin takes the form of pre-cast panels whilst the inner is usually constructed of lightweight block. These are secured together using hardened copper ties which, when tightened during construction, bed the outer panels against a vertical damp proof strip attached to the column in order to prohibit moisture ingress through the vertical joints. The horizontal edges of the panels are also shaped to form lapped joints all of which are pointed with cement mortar.

Party walls consist of two leaves of lightweight concrete block separated by a cavity.

The internal partitions are formed using storey height reinforced plaster panels, prefabricated for quick and dry assembly.


small section timber joists which span between steel beams. The pitched roof construction comprises timber rafters connected to column heads via

steel fixing plates, sarking felt, battens and concrete tiles.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) Unity type properties have the potential to suffer significant structural deterioration due

to the presence of chloride based admixtures that were introduced to the cement during the original construction process. Of primary concern are the external wall columns. These historically suffer from low concrete cover which, when coupled with high levels of carbonation, can actively promote corrosion of the steel reinforcement.



8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.2.10 Wates Type PRC Houses


Housing Act 1985 Manufactured by Wates Ltd, it is understood that approximately 22,000 houses of this

type were known to have been built between 1947 and 1956. Published information describes the system as follows: The structure comprises pre-cast reinforced concrete (PRC) load bearing panels,

which form the basis of the external walls, together with string bonding units at first floor and eaves level. The units are erected against a specially designed jig which ensures accuracy in positioning and is used for supporting scaffolding.

The system is claimed to be applicable to almost any plan; the component parts being

factory-produced and designed to reduce the amount of site and skilled labour to a minimum.

The external walls consist of storey height panels which are prefabricated in a number

of standard widths. These components are designed such that when the vertical joints between adjoining units are filled with dense concrete, they form monolithic columns. The panels are also tray shaped, the web being strengthened by a reinforced flange around its perimeter edge. The tray is formed so that is can be filled with a lightweight aggregate concrete. Lengths of steel reinforcement are placed within both the columns and the horizontal joints between the panels and the string bonding units.

Party walls consist of panel units, similar in design to those for the external walls, filled

with lightweight concrete. Internal partitions can be of masonry, clinker block or timber studwork.


timber joists which span between either steel or concrete beams.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) The pitched roof construction comprises timber trussed rafters, sarking felt, battens

and concrete tiles. Wates type properties have the potential to suffer significant structural deterioration

due to the presence of chloride based admixtures that were introduced to the cement during the original construction process. Of primary concern is reinforcement corrosion within the in-situ structural concrete between adjoining PRC components.



8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.3 Medium and High Rise Blocks of Flats 8.3.1 Bison (Floor) Blocks Applies to the following properties:

26-40, 42-56 & 58-72 Dartmouth Crescent

33-47, 49-63 & 65-79 Fitch Drive

The six blocks situated on Dartmouth Crescent and Fitch Drive are identical in both

their construction form and configuration, albeit the flats occupying the latter of these two sites incorporate basement level garages.

These properties, which are understood to have been built circa 1965, each

accommodate a total of 8 self-contained flats spread over four storeys. The floors themselves are constructed using what is understood to be a Harrison Concrete ‘Harcon’ block and beam system, topped with an in-situ concrete screed. This would perhaps explain why the Council has historically referred to these properties as being ‘Bison Floor Blocks’. Bison manufacture their own very extensive range of pre-cast concrete floor components and are widely considered to be at the forefront of this market. Certainly they are best known which is why similar systems, like Harrison’s, are often inadvertently ‘branded’ this way.

The external walls are of traditional load-bearing masonry construction and the flat

roof timber covered with felt. The local topography is such that the blocks also accessed via an elevated walkway

constructed of cast-in-situ concrete.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.3.2 Bison High Rise Blocks Applies to the following properties:

Dudeney Lodge and Nettleton Court

The two 15 storey blocks situated off Upper Hollingdean Road are identical in their

construction form and configuration. Both have also been partially over-clad with a back ventilated rain-screen system.

Information initially supplied by the Council sought to classify these two properties as

being of Wates type construction. However, subsequent investigations later determined that these are in fact typical of the Bison ‘Wall Frame’ system and were built by Messrs Walter Llewellyn & Sons. Curtins conclusions in this regard are further supported by the information (historical records) presented within Appendix C, which has been sourced from official gazetteer listings.

Bison large panel systems came into being the most commonly used in the UK with

somewhere in the region of 23,000 flats having being built. They produced three basic systems namely Preferred Dimension, Crosswall and Wall Frame, the latter of which is thought to apply in this instance. All were evolved and developed over a period of some years and accordingly Bison buildings can differ significantly from each other in terms of both their construction and external appearance.

The Wall Frame system was developed in the early 1960s. Based upon Scandinavian

designs at that time, it was designed for houses, flats and maisonettes up to 24 storeys in height. In common with other large panel systems of the day its form was based upon the use of storey height pre-cast reinforced concrete (PRC) panels. The edge details of the panels and floor units form cavities which are filled with in-situ concrete. These in-situ joints are provided with reinforcement to tie the PRC panels together and give a degree of continuity to the structure.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.3.3 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks Applies to the following properties:

Clarendon House, Conway Court, Ellen House, Goldstone House and Livingstone House (Variant A)

Courtlands , Ecclesden, Highleigh, Normanhurst, Richmond Heights, Saxonbury and Thorndale (Variant B)

Somerset Point, St John’s Mount, Tyson Place and Warwick Mount (Variant C)

Essex Place, Hereford Court and Wiltshire House (Variant D)

Theobald House (Variant E)

The twenty high rise blocks identified above are all representative of traditional

reinforced concrete frame construction, comprising cast in-situ column, beam and slab components erected from the ground upwards in a conventional style. The external walls, which are built of two leaves of masonry separated by a clear cavity, take the form of storey height infill panels that extend between respective floors.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) Although their basic structural form is broadly the same we have, for the purposes of

this report, categorised the blocks according to their size and configuration. Variant ‘A’ Blocks The five 10 storey blocks situated on Clarendon Road are virtually identical albeit

Conway Court and Livingstone House are somewhat larger, the additional access requirements being supplemented by two external deck access walkways on the 3rd and 7th floors.

It is understood that the construction work at Conway Court, which commenced in

1965, formed the first phase of a 3 year scheme which saw the site at Clarendon Road comprehensively redeveloped.

Variant ‘B’ Blocks The seven 12 storey blocks situated on or around Ashton Rise and Grove Hill

collectively form the basis of what is commonly referred to as the Albion Hill estate. Built by the established local contractor Messrs Rice & Sons between 1961 and 1967, the properties were erected as part of a wider multi-stage development.

Each block accommodates approximately 45 self-contained flats (leasehold units

included) accessed via communal landing areas, all of which benefit from their own private balcony.

Variant ‘C’ Blocks The two neighbouring 14 storey blocks situated on Somerset Street and Montague

Street were the first of four virtually identical towers built by Messrs Rice & Sons between 1964 and 1967. These and the two blocks occupying the site at Mount Pleasant, namely St John’s Mount and Tyson Place, are broadly of the same configuration as the Albion Hill properties described above.

Variant ‘D’ Blocks The three 17 storey blocks namely, Essex House, Hereford Court and Wiltshire House

comprised Stages I and II of what became known as the Somerset Street ‘Comprehensive Development Area’ (CDA). Erected by Messrs Rice & Sons between 1969 and 1970 these represent the largest of the Council’s twenty high rise properties, together accounting for some 320 flats (leasehold units included) in total.

Variant ‘E’ Blocks The single 20 storey block situated on Blackman Street is the tallest of the high rise

properties investigated as part of this appraisal. Completed in 1966, it occupies a confined city centre site and is built directly over a split level car park that is currently owned/operated by NCP.

8.0 Property Type Descriptions (Continued) 8.3.4 Wates High Rise Blocks Applies to the following properties:

Falcon Crt, Heron Crt, Kestrel Crt, Kingfisher Crt, Swallow Crt (Variant A)

St James’ House (Variant B)

Varying in height between 9 and 11 storeys, the five blocks situated on or around

Swanborough Place are identical, albeit four have them have recently been over-clad with a back ventilated rain-screen cladding system. The single 16 storey block known as St James’ House is markedly different in its appearance, although it shares the same basic principles of construction.

Information initially supplied by the Council sought to classify the Swanborough Place

blocks as all being of Bison type construction. However, subsequent investigations later determined that these are in fact typical of the Wates system. Curtins conclusions in this regard are further supported by the information (historical records) presented within Appendix C, which has been sourced from official gazetteer listings.

Second only to Bison, Wates large panel systems were used extensively throughout

the UK with somewhere in the region of 16,000 flats having being built. The Wates system comprises pre-cast floors and internal walls with pre-cast sandwich

panels forming the outer envelope, the latter of which usually serve to support the floors at the load-bearing peripheral walls of the building. An air filled cavity separates the outer panel from the inner wall on which internal plasterboard finishes are fixed.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations 9.1 Non-Traditional Houses and Flats 9.1.1 BISF Type (A1) Houses It is understood that the Council’s stock of BISF type houses were the subject of a

significant refurbishment scheme undertaken approximately 15 years ago. The work appears to have principally involved removal of the metal lathing and render

which forms the external walls at ground floor in favour of this being re-clad with a phenolic based insulation and render system. The walls at first floor level have been clad with horizontal PVCu shiplap boarding.

The original asbestos roof coverings have been stripped and replaced with a

lightweight synthetic tile, such as those manufactured by Decra. The windows, soffits, fascias and rainwater goods have all been replaced with PVCu

components, whilst the original steel front entrance canopies have been retained. Curtins investigations have targeted the examination of the structural frame at its more

vulnerable locations by exposing the steel stanchions at their bases. This was achieved by cutting out a section of plasterboard adjacent to the front door so as to access the frame from the inside.

Our inspections revealed the stanchions to be in remarkably good order, suffering only

from a mild amount of surface corrosion which appeared to be confined to the flange edges. Certainly there were no signs of any appreciable loss of section. Fortunately, the condition of the steelwork within the roof space was found to be likewise. The party walls, which are constructed in block, were thought to be structurally sound where their inspection was feasible.

The external wall cladding at ground floor level was generally considered to be in

reasonable condition, although some isolated damage to the render was noted. This tended to arise where either corner beads or base trims had become detached through poor fixing, mechanical damage or vandalism.

Based on our findings we would first propose that some localised repairs are

undertaken to the damaged areas of cladding identified above. Cracked and/or de-bonded render could result in water penetration and thereafter promote corrosion of the steel frame. Accordingly, we have recommended these minor defects are attended to within years 1-5.

Given its age, the existing cladding should continue to perform adequately for another

15-20 years. After this time, it is likely to progressively deteriorate to a stage where it needs replacing or in the very least re-rendering. With this in mind, we would suggest that the ground floor elevations are stripped and re-clad during years 16-20. This work will involve exposing the underlying steel frame at which time it should be treated with protective paint.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) If, by the time this work is undertaken, it becomes apparent that the existing frame has

corroded such that it requires more extensive repair, it will be possible to replace individual sections by cutting out them out and splicing in new steel members. However, given the frames current condition we do not envisage this degree of maintenance being necessary.

We understand that the roof coverings were replaced concurrent with the cladding

works. This being the case, the existing synthetic tiles should continue to perform satisfactorily for at least another 20 years. An allowance has, therefore, been made for these to be cleaned and subsequently treated with an appropriate flexible waterproof coating during years 26-30.

Being as the flat roof serving the outbuilding is thought to have been covered with a

conventional three-layer felt system, we anticipate this will need renewing twice over the next 30 years.

Although commonly thought as being maintenance free, the PVCu soffits, fascias and

rainwater goods will habitually deteriorate over time with seasonal variations in temperature and UV degradation. Whilst somewhat secondary in terms of their importance, these components should not be overlooked as their condition and consequent function will influence the longevity of the structural fabric. In view of this and in consideration of their current condition we have proposed that these are renewed concurrent with the roof repairs scheduled for years 26-30.

The condition of the existing steel entrance canopies is such that we feel these are

unlikely to serve a further 30 years. Accepting they represent a non-structural element, we would nevertheless suggest that some thought is given to replacing them with a suitable GRP fitting during years 6-10.

Finally, whilst there was no evidence to suggest that any movement had occurred as a

result of foundation instability, it is important to consider the future potential risks associated with flooding and/or drainage failure. As a precautionary measure, we have therefore made a suitable allowance for periodically undertaking repairs to the substructure.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.2 BRE Type 1-3 Houses The single property situated in Firle Road, namely № 16, does not appear to have

been the subject of any significant repair work during the course of its pre and post war history.

Being as comparatively little is known about this particular house type, we have been

unable to accurately date the property. However, its appearance is such that we would estimate it being at least 60-70 years old. Certainly its current condition represents the product of neglect, although we understand that the windows have just recently been replaced with PVCu units.

Our initial observations suggested that this property differed little from what most

would conceive to be a traditional form of construction. Our intrusive investigations, which involved undertaking endoscope inspections of the external walls, further supported this notion. We were also fortunate enough to benefit from inspecting a further privately owned property, namely 27 Firle Road, which was undergoing some extensive remedial work at the time.

Outwardly, the face brickwork is currently in a poor state of repair and would benefit

from being comprehensively raked out and re-pointed in its entirety. Some cracking around the window openings on the rear elevation was noted, although minor in its nature and accordingly unlikely to be conducive of any significant structural movement.

The endoscope inspections which followed, combined with what we witnessed at 27

Firle Road, revealed the cavities to suffer from a distinct lack of wall ties. Those visible were severely corroded and would accordingly now offer little restraint. Furthermore, the walls have been injected with what appears to be a phenolic based insulant, which will have served to prohibit airflow within the cavity. The sustained damp conditions will have prevented the insulation from ever drying out properly and in doing so will have facilitated the corrosion of the wall ties. This also goes some way to explain why the tenant has complained that the external walls often feels damp, although we did not see any evidence of mould growth during our visual survey.

An inspection of the roof space failed to identify any significant structural inadequacies

concerning the timber rafters or purlins, however, the coverings (felt, battens and tiles) have undoubtedly surpassed their anticipated design life. Certainly, the hip and ridge tiles appear as if they will soon need to removed and re-bed.

The timber soffit and fascia boards, which are not thought to have ever been replaced,

are exhibiting signs of decay and therefore slowly falling into a state of disrepair. Based on our findings we would firstly recommend that some appropriate remedial

measures are taken to redress the poor condition of the external walls and to deal with the cavity fill insulation that continues to cause problems for this element of the structure.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Our proposals, which are twofold, should preferably be instigated within the next 5

years. The first approach would be to adopt the same repair regime that appears to have been applied to some of the privately owned properties in Firle Road, more recently at № 27. The procedure may be summarised as follows: 1. Demolish the existing outer skin of brickwork. 2. Remove existing full fill cavity insulation and defective wall ties. 3. Insert new galvanised remedial wall ties. 4. Fix new rigid insulation board to provide for an unobstructed cavity. 5. Rebuild outer skin of brickwork incorporating new wall ties.

The alternative approach would be to adopt item 3 above and thereafter over-clad the

external elevations with a proprietary insulation and render system. This would need to be introduced in such a way as to create a cavity between the brickwork and the cladding which would enable the existing wall construction to dry out.

From an aesthetic viewpoint, the first option will serve to retain the properties original

appearance. The cladding option, which should notably improve thermal efficiency, will provide for a variety of finishes including ‘brick effect’ render.

Given the current condition of the roof coverings and the fact that these will soon be

approaching the end of their anticipated service life, we have duly allowed for these to be renewed during years 1-5. The decaying soffits and fascias boards, along with the rainwater goods, have been similarly designated for replacement.

Non-structural enhancements are limited to providing a suitable GRP door canopy

over the side entrance. Finally, whilst there was no evidence to suggest that any movement had occurred as a


9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.3 BRS Type 4 Houses It is understood that the Council’s stock of BRS Type 4 houses were the subject of a

significant refurbishment scheme undertaken 10-15 years ago. The work appears to have principally involved over-cladding the external no-fines

concrete walls with a phenolic based insulation and render system. The condition of the cladding itself was generally considered to be reasonable, although some isolated damage to the render was noted. This tended to arise where either corner beads or base trims had become detached through poor fixing, mechanical damage or vandalism.

The windows, soffits, fascias and rainwater goods have all been replaced with PVCu

components, whilst the original pre-cast concrete front entrance canopies have been retained.

Although it was not possible to scrutinize the condition of the flat roofs at close range,

the felt coverings at least looked to have been reasonably well maintained. Being chiefly of no-fines construction, these properties are largely built of un-

reinforced concrete. As such, corrosion is not generally considered to be an issue that might serve to compromise structural integrity. However, reinforcement is present within the ring beams and is therefore liable to deteriorate if water is able to penetrate the relatively porous nature of the no-fines concrete.

Given that these properties have been over-clad, the chances of water ingress through

to the underlying structure will have been significantly minimised. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components including the ring beams and roof slab. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.

An analysis of the results incorporated with Appendix G indicate an average chloride

ion content (quantified by mass of cement) of 0.02%. Being as the carbonation depth did not coincide with or exceed the depth of cover, this figure can be taken to represent a low risk of corrosion.


undertaken to the damaged areas of cladding identified above. Cracked and/or de-bonded render could result in water penetrating the more permeable no-fines concrete walls and thereafter promote damp conditions internally. Accordingly, we have recommended these minor defects are attended to within years 1-5.


15-20 years. After this time, it is likely to progressively deteriorate to a stage where it needs replacing or in the very least re-rendering. Provided it is routinely maintained, we would suggest that the latter is allowed for during years 16-20. This way it will hopefully remain weather-tight and thus continue to safeguard the underlying structure from further deterioration.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Being as the flat roof is thought to have been covered with a conventional three-layer

felt system, we anticipate this will need renewing twice over the next 30 years. Whilst attending to these repairs it would be prudent to examine the chimney stacks with a view to having any defective render repaired.

The condition of the existing pre-cast concrete entrance canopies is such that we feel

these are unlikely to serve a further 30 years. Accepting they represent a non-structural element, we would nevertheless suggest that some thought is given to replacing them with a suitable GRP fitting during years 6-10.



9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.4 Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats It is understood that the Council’s stock of Cornish type (I) flats were the subject of a

significant refurbishment scheme undertaken approximately 10 years ago. The works appear to have principally involved over-cladding the external pre-cast

reinforced concrete (PRC) wall components with a single skin of brickwork built of an extension to the original footing, in accordance with what is thought to be an NTHAS (Category 3) repair scheme.

Outwardly, the appearance of the brick cladding suggested that the external walls

were free from any defects. Certainly, no significant cracking was identified and the expansion joints were found to be in similarly good standing. Our intrusive investigations, which included undertaking endoscope inspections of the external walls, further supported this notion. These revealed there to be a good number of sufficiently spaced galvanised wall ties, thus alleviating any concerns that the cladding might be inadequately restrained.

Whilst conducting our interrogation of the external walls, we were also pleased to note

the cavity insulation appears to have been properly secured and that furthermore, prior to encapsulation, the PRC wall components were treated with a proprietary concrete corrosion inhibitor.

Whilst the original mansard roof coverings have been retained, the soffits, fascias and

rainwater goods have all been replaced with PVCu components. The windows, which have also been renewed, sit in their original concrete linings. There is some evidence to suggest that these too have been repaired, albeit locally and although they currently look to devoid of any visible defects it is anticipated that some remedial work will be required in the future. This we have scheduled for years 11-15.


to the underlying structure will have been significantly minimised. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components including the columns and ring beams. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.


ion content (quantified by mass of cement) ranging from 0.04% to 0.21%. Being as the carbonation depth did not coincide with or exceed the depth of cover, these figures can be taken to represent a low risk of corrosion.

Based on our findings we have concluded that these properties are unlikely to require

any significant repair work for at least another 10 years. Of course, this is not to imply they could afford to endure some degree of neglect. On the contrary, routine maintenance responsibilities will still need to be attended to.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Given the age and present condition of the existing over-cladding, we have proposed

that a provisional allowance is made for undertaking some localised repairs to the brickwork during years 11-15 and 26-30. These will almost certainly be confined to some re-pointing as well as renewing the expansion joints.


concerning the timber rafters or purlins, however, the coverings (felt, battens and tiles) will soon be approaching the end of their anticipated service life. Accordingly, we would suggest that these are renewed during years 16-20 at which time it would be prudent to examine the chimney stacks with a view to having the mortar joints and lead flashings re-pointed.


rainwater goods will habitually deteriorate over time with seasonal variations in temperature and UV degradation. Whilst somewhat secondary in terms of their importance, these components should not be overlooked as their condition and consequent function will influence the longevity of the structural fabric. In view of this and in consideration of their current condition we have proposed that these are renewed concurrent with the roof repairs that are scheduled for years 16-20.

Whilst there was no evidence to suggest that any movement had occurred as a result

of foundation instability, it is important to consider the future potential risks associated with flooding and/or drainage failure. As a precautionary measure, we have therefore made a suitable allowance for periodically undertaking repairs to the substructure.

Although these properties are classified as being defective under Part XVI of the

Housing Act 1985, we have refrained from recommending that a PRC Homes Ltd licensed repair is adopted for the reasons set out in Section 10 of this report.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.5 Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats The two terraced blocks of Cornish type (II) flats situated in Hawkhurst Place and

Thompson Road do not appear to have been the subject of any significant repair work during the course of their post war history.

Notwithstanding the crittall windows, which have since been replaced with PVCu units,

these properties have retained their original appearance. Our initial observations suggested that the exposed pre-cast reinforced concrete

(PRC) column and ring beam components, which collectively form the basis of the external wall construction, were in remarkably good outward condition. Certainly there was no evidence of any concrete which had either cracked or spalled as a consequence of reinforcement corrosion. Endoscope inspections subsequently determined that the ties used to secure the wall panels were largely in good condition and that the cavities were devoid of any insulation. The intrusive investigations which followed again sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.



Although the laboratory analysis has served to support our initial thoughts regarding

the present condition of the PRC columns and ring beams, it is nevertheless considered that an increasing number of instances will arise where cracking and spalling occurs as a direct result of reinforcement corrosion. It is therefore recommended that these external wall components are afforded a degree of protection from further carbonation.

Traditionally, the easiest way to achieve this would be to patch repair any defective

concrete and immediately thereafter treat the exposed walls with an anti-carbonation paint system. This process will need to be repeated every 10-15 years depending on the level of environmental exposure and as such it is deemed to represent a ‘periodic’ repair. Although this will serve to prolong the life of these dwellings, we have instead recommended that they are over-clad with a proprietary insulation and render system. This we believe to be a more cost effective approach as it will ensure that the vulnerable concrete components remain in a dry, stable environment from the outset and in doing so negate the need for ongoing repairs by virtue of the manner in which the cladding will safeguard the structure against further deterioration. Furthermore, this solution will offer the potential to notably improve the properties thermal efficiency as well as greatly enhance their aesthetic appeal.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) An inspection of the roof space failed to identify any significant structural inadequacies


The soffits, fascias and rainwater goods, which are not thought to have ever been

replaced, are exhibiting signs of decay and therefore slowly falling into a state of disrepair. Whilst somewhat secondary in terms of their importance, these components should not be overlooked as their condition and consequent function will influence the longevity of the structural fabric. In view of this and in consideration of their current condition we have proposed that these are renewed concurrent with the cladding work that is scheduled for years 1-5.



These properties are classified as being defective under Part XVI of the Housing Act

1985 and as such will not be regarded as mortgageable in their current condition. If reputable lenders are to consider these properties favourably it will be necessary to repair them in accordance with a PRC Homes licensed scheme. Accordingly, we have proposed this option as an enhancement over the basic level of repair. However, one should note that this philosophy does not similarly apply to Cornish type flats, as is explained in Section 10 of this report.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.6 No-Fines Type Flats The four terraced blocks of flats situated in Donald Road do not appear to have been

the subject of any significant repair work during the course of their post war history. The windows, soffits, fascias and rainwater goods have all been replaced with PVCu

components, otherwise these properties have retained their original appearance. Being chiefly of no-fines construction, these properties are largely built of un-

reinforced concrete. As such, corrosion is not generally considered to be an issue that might serve to compromise structural integrity. However, reinforcement is present within the lintels, balcony slabs and floor beams, all of which is liable to deteriorate being as these elements are exposed.

Although there is little if anything intrinsically faulty or likely to weaken the structure of

no-fines type dwellings, Curtins investigations sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.



The lintels were discovered to be in good order with no cracking or spalling evident. It

is nevertheless recommended that these are treated with an appropriate corrosion inhibitor as to protect against any future deterioration. This will involve implanting a sacrificial anode, which provides corrosion control to reinforcement located within contaminated concrete.

The external render finish generally appeared to be in reasonable condition however,

it is thought that it will become increasingly weathered with time. Indeed, although there was little evidence of the render having cracked or de-bonded it is clear from its ‘tired’ appearance that the coastal weather conditions are taking their toll. The continued deterioration of the render could result in water penetrating the more permeable no-fines concrete and thereafter promote damp conditions internally. It may also come to compromise the integrity of load bearing elements such as the lintels.

Having inspected the flats internally, we noted some isolated instances were

persistent mould growth, emanating from damp conditions, appears to be problem. Based on our findings we would we would firstly propose that some appropriate

remedial measures are taken to redress the condition of the external wall render. This can be achieved in two ways.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) As a minimum precaution we would recommend that the render be patch repaired and

immediately thereafter treated with an appropriate breathable paint system. This process, which should be undertaken during years 1-5, will need to be repeated every 10-15 years depending on the level of environmental exposure and as such it is deemed to represent a ‘periodic’ repair.

Whilst this approach would suffice for the purpose of securing a further 30 year life, a

markedly better or enhanced option would be to over-clad the external elevations with a proprietary insulation and render system. This we believe to be a more cost effective approach as it will ensure that the relatively porous no-fines concrete walls remain in a dry and stable environment from the outset and in doing so negate the need for ongoing repairs by virtue of the manner in which the cladding will safeguard the structure against further deterioration. Furthermore, this solution will offer the potential to notably improve the properties thermal efficiency (whilst relieving any problems of damp internally) as well as greatly enhance their aesthetic appeal.

Being as the laboratory analysis has determined that the balcony structures are

currently not at risk, we are satisfied that these elements can easily be maintained. This will involve undertaking some minor concrete repairs in addition to renewing the existing deck coverings, both of which should ideally be attended to within years 1-5.







9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.7 Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses It is understood that the Council’s stock of Reema type houses were the subject of a


reinforced concrete (PRC) wall components with a phenolic based insulation and render system. The condition of the cladding itself was generally considered to be reasonable, although some isolated damage to the render was noted. This tended to arise where either corner beads or base trims had become detached through poor fixing, mechanical damage or vandalism.


components. Furthermore, it is understood that the roof coverings (felt, battens and tiles) were renewed as part of a wider package of remedial works which included introducing some supplementary timbers with a view to strengthening the original roof structure. The necessity for this work became apparent whilst conducting our initial visual surveys during which time we noticed that some of the roofs were exhibiting a minor amount of deflection.

Having inspected some of the houses internally, we note that a few of the properties

appear to have had a steel framework introduced. Taking the form of a ‘goalpost’ arrangement, we understand this was installed to relieve problems concerning excessive deflection within the first floor beams.

As discussed under Section 8 of this report, the risk of reinforcement corrosion within

the wall columns, rings beams and floor beams is significant, owing largely to the high concentrations of chloride based admixtures that were often used in their construction. The external wall panels on the other hand tend to be inherently robust and do not commonly exhibit signs of serious deterioration.


to the underlying structure will have been significantly minimised. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.


ion content (quantified by mass of cement) ranging from 0.08% to 0.32%. Whereas in the case of the wall columns, the carbonation depth did not coincide with or exceed the depth of cover, these figures can be taken to represent a low risk of corrosion.

The maximum chloride ion content found within the floor beams was 0.32%. With

carbonation depths generally exceeding the depth of cover, this figure represents a high risk of corrosion. However, in order for deterioration to occur there must be sufficient moisture present to promote the requisite chemical reaction.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Perhaps not surprisingly, all of the floor beams that inspected were dry. There was no

evidence of water ingress and in a warm, sheltered internal environment, corrosion would not usually be expected.


undertaken to the damaged areas of cladding identified above. Cracked and/or de-bonded render could result in water penetration and thereafter promote corrosion of the reinforcement within the wall columns and ring beams. Accordingly, we have recommended these minor defects are attended to within years 1-5.


15-20 years. After this time, it is likely to progressively deteriorate to a stage where it needs replacing or in the very least re-rendering. Provided it is routinely maintained, we would suggest that the latter is allowed for during years 16-20. This way it will hopefully remain weather-tight and thus continue to safeguard the underlying structure from further deterioration.

It is thought that approximately 30% of the properties already benefit from the works

undertaken to strengthen the first floor structure. Whilst the floor beams should continue to perform adequately for a further 30 years, we would suggest that the Council makes a provisional allowance to implement identical measures to the remainder of its stock mid term. Unfortunately, we have not been able to establish the original costs in connection with this work and have accordingly proposed a figure of £7,000 per unit.

Being as it is understood that the roof coverings have been renewed and the rafters

reinforced to prohibit further deflection, we do not anticipate any further repairs being required to this element of the structure. This will of course exclude routine maintenance which should look to ensure that any broken and/or missing tiles are replaced. We would also consider it prudent to examine the chimney stacks sometime during years 16-20, with a view to having any defective render repaired.





Although these properties are classified as being defective under Part XVI of the

Housing Act 1985, we have refrained from recommending that a PRC Homes Ltd licensed repair is adopted for the reasons set out in Section 10 of this report.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.8 Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses It is understood that the Council’s stock of Trusteel type houses were the subject of

some extensive repairs undertaken approximately 6 years ago. The work appears to have principally involved removing the outer skin of brickwork

between DPC and window cill level for the full perimeter of the property in order to facilitate repairs to the lower extremities of the steel stanchions that are positioned within the cavity. The effected brickwork was subsequently rebuilt to match the existing.


components, whilst the original pre-cast concrete front entrance canopies have generally been retained.

Outwardly, the appearance of the brick cladding suggested that the external walls

were free from any significant defects. Some minor cracking was noted although this was considered to be of little consequence to the overall integrity of the walls.

Curtins investigations have targeted the examination of the structural frame at its more

vulnerable locations by exposing the steel stanchions at their bases. Access was achieved by locally removing the brickwork adjacent to the front and rear corner column positions.

As suspected, our inspection of the columns revealed them to be in good order;

certainly there were no signs of any appreciable loss of section. The repair work that was undertaken circa 2000, would appear to have allowed for cleaning the steel and thereafter treating it with a zinc chromate primer so as to guard against corrosion. Furthermore, the Denso tape that is normally applied to the column in order to protect it from the damp face of the brickwork had been replaced with a vertical DPM.

Whilst all the cavities examined were found to be reasonably dry, the presence of

blown fibre insulation is considered to present a risk as far as the longevity of the steelwork is concerned. Any moisture entering the cavity will not evaporate as it would have ordinarily done had the cavities remained unobstructed. As such, there is a concern that sustained damp conditions will promote corrosion of the stanchions, more particularly where they are in contact with wet insulation material.

The steel roof trusses were noted to be in a similarly sound state of repair. Although

these do not appear to have been treated in the same way the stanchions have, they suffer only from mild surface corrosion which appears to be confined to the flange edges. The party walls within the roof space, which are constructed in block, were thought to be structurally sound.


any significant repair work for at least another 10 years.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) In order to ensure that the steel stanchions do not corrode at an accelerated rate, it

will be important to ensure that rainwater is not free to penetrate the structure through the face brickwork, specifically the mortar. We have therefore proposed that a provisional allowance is made for locally raking out and re-pointing defective brick joints during years 16-20. However, given the porous nature of the external walls, the life of these houses could be enhanced considerably if the existing cavity insulation was removed and the elevations over-clad with a proprietary insulation and render system. This option would also notably improve thermal efficiency and could be tailored to provide for a ‘brick effect’ rendered finish that would serve to retain the properties original appearance.

Although an inspection of the roof space failed to identify any significant structural

inadequacies, it is thought that the coverings (felt, battens and tiles) will soon be approaching the end of the anticipated service life. Accordingly, we would suggest that these are renewed during years 16-20. Whilst attending to these repairs it would be prudent to re-examine the steel roof trusses with a view to having these cleaned and treated with a suitable anti-corrosive paint. If, by the time this work is undertaken, it becomes apparent that the trusses have corroded such that they require more extensive repair, it will be possible to replace individual sections by cutting out them out and splicing in new steel members. However, given their current condition we do not envisage this degree of maintenance being necessary.

Being as the flat roof serving the outbuilding is thought to have been covered with a

conventional three-layer felt system, we anticipate this will need renewing twice over the next 30 years.



The condition of the pre-cast concrete slabs used to form the entrance canopies is

such that we feel these are unlikely to serve a further 30 years. Indeed, some have already been removed, possibly in response to them being deemed unsafe or just uneconomic to repair. Consequently, we would suggest these are replaced with a suitable GRP fitting during years 1-5.



9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.9 Unity Type (I) PRC Houses The Council’s stock of Unity type (I) houses do not appear to have been the subject of

any significant repair work during the course of their post war history. The windows, soffits, fascias and rainwater goods have all been replaced with PVCu

components, whilst the original pre-cast concrete front entrance canopies have been retained.

During our initial observations we noticed that some of the exposed concrete wall

panels, more particularly those at the corners, have been re-pointed in order to seal cracks that have developed along the joints between adjoining panels. This would suggest that rainwater will have been free to penetrate the structure and thereafter promote corrosion within the underlying pre-cast reinforced concrete (PRC) columns, which form the basis of the external wall construction. The intrusive investigations which followed therefore sought to target an examination of these more vulnerable components. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.

An analysis of the results incorporated in Appendix G indicate an average chloride ion

content (quantified by mass of cement) of 0.02%. Being as the carbonation depth did not coincide with or exceed the depth of cover, this figure can be taken to represent a low risk of corrosion.


the present condition of the PRC columns, it is nevertheless considered that an increasing number of instances will arise where cracking and spalling occurs as a direct result of reinforcement corrosion. It is therefore recommended that these external wall components are afforded a degree of protection from further carbonation.

We believe the most cost effective approach would be to over-clad the external walls

with a proprietary insulation and render system. This will ensure that the vulnerable concrete components remain in a dry, stable environment from the outset and in doing so negate the need for ongoing repairs by virtue of the manner in which the cladding will safeguard the structure against further deterioration. Furthermore, this solution will offer the potential to notably improve the properties thermal efficiency as well as greatly enhance their aesthetic appeal.



9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Although commonly thought as being maintenance free, the PVCu soffits, fascias and


The condition of the existing pre-cast concrete entrance canopies is such that we feel

these are unlikely to serve a further 30 years. Accepting they represent a non-structural element, we would nevertheless suggest that some thought is given to replacing them with a suitable GRP fitting during years 1-5.




1985 and as such will not be regarded as mortgageable in their current condition. If reputable lenders are to consider these properties favourably it will be necessary to repair them in accordance with a PRC Homes licensed scheme. Accordingly, we have proposed this option as an enhancement over the basic level of repair.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.1.10 Wates Type PRC Houses It is understood that the Council’s stock of Wates type houses were the subject of a


reinforced concrete (PRC) wall components with a phenolic based insulation and render system. The condition of the cladding itself was generally considered to be reasonable, although some isolated damage to the render was noted. This tended to arise where either corner beads or base trims had become detached through poor fixing, mechanical damage or vandalism.


components. Given that these properties have been over-clad, the chances of water ingress through

to the underlying structure will have been significantly minimised. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components including the wall panels and ring beams. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.




undertaken to the damaged areas of cladding identified above. Cracked and/or de-bonded render could result in water penetration and thereafter promote corrosion of the reinforcement within the wall panels and ring beams. Accordingly, we have recommended these minor defects are attended to within years 1-5.

Given its age, the existing cladding should continue to perform satisfactorily for

another 15-20 years. After this time, it is likely to progressively deteriorate to a stage where it needs replacing or in the very least re-rendering. Provided it is routinely maintained, we would suggest that the latter is allowed for during years 16-20. This way it will hopefully remain weather-tight and thus continue to safeguard the underlying structure from further deterioration.


concerning the timber rafters or purlins, however, the coverings (felt, battens and tiles) will soon be approaching the end of their anticipated service life. Accordingly, we would suggest that these are renewed during years 16-20 at which time it would be prudent to examine the chimney stacks with a view to having any defective render repaired.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Being as the flat roofs serving the porch, bay window and outbuilding are thought to

have been covered with a conventional three-layer felt system, we anticipate these will need renewing twice over the next 30 years.






1985 and as such will not be regarded as mortgageable in their current condition. If reputable lenders are to consider these properties favourably it will be necessary to repair them in accordance with a PRC Homes licensed scheme. Accordingly, we have proposed this option as an enhancement over the basic level of repair.

In view of its present condition, we would suggest that the existing cladding is

maintained until years 16-20 at which time it would be appropriate to decide whether to retain it or remove it in favour of undertaking a licensed repair.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.2 Medium and High Rise Blocks of Flats 9.2.1 Bison (Floor) Blocks Applies to the following properties:

26-40, 42-56 & 58-72 Dartmouth Crescent

33-47, 49-63 & 65-79 Fitch Drive The six blocks situated on Dartmouth Crescent and Fitch Drive do not appear to have

been the subject of any significant repair work in recent years, although in 1999 the Council appointed an external consultant (Ecovert Management Ltd) to undertake an appraisal of their condition and specifically investigate concerns for the integrity of the block and beam floor construction. A report was subsequently published, the contents of which we have reviewed under Section 4 of this study.

Notwithstanding the above, there is little intrinsically faulty or likely to weaken the

structure of these buildings. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components including the floor slabs, stair units and the externally sited access bridges/walkways. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.

An analysis of the results incorporated within Appendix G indicate an average chloride


The appearance of the external walls, which are of traditional load bearing masonry

construction, suggests they are free of any severe structural inadequacies. No significant cracking was noted and there were no clear visible signs of any appreciable frost damage, lateral movement or bulging. However, it is thought that some re-pointing will be required in order to redress some localised erosion of the mortar joints. Our intrusive investigations, which also included us undertaking endoscope inspections of the cavities, further supported this notion. These determined that the galvanised wall ties used were largely in good condition and present in sufficient number, thus alleviating some concern for the integrity of the inner and outer leaves

It is understood that the remedial measures prescribed in relation to providing

improved lateral restraint between the floors and external walls are yet to be adopted. Having reviewed the initial recommendations, we would firstly suggest that the Council seeks to implement Ecovert’s proposals and have accordingly budgeted for this work to be undertaken within years 1-5. During this time, we have also made provision for some localised concrete repair work to the exposed edge of the first floor slab in addition to the access walkways.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) Having inspected the flat roofs we note that the coverings have been patch repaired

and are ideally in need of treating with a solar reflective paint. Provided these are routinely maintained they should continue to perform satisfactorily, although it is anticipated they will need renewing no later than years 16-20.

Whilst not exactly integral to the main structure, the access walkways should not be

overlooked. In order to ensure these remain in a safe state of repair for those using them it is recommended that the corroded balustrade rails are renewed and the surface coverings lifted and re-laid.

As an optional enhancement, we have suggested that consideration be given to over-

cladding these blocks. Although not essential from a structural viewpoint, this work offers the potential to notably improve thermal efficiency as well as enhance their aesthetic appeal.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.2.2 Bison High Rise Blocks Applies to the following properties:

Dudeney Lodge and Nettleton Court It is understood that the two high rise blocks situated off Upper Hollingdean Road were

the subject of a significant refurbishment scheme undertaken 5-10 years ago. The works appears to have principally involved over-cladding the two side elevations

with what appears to be a back ventilated insulated rain-screen system. Unfortunately, the Council were unable to provide us with any details relating to the manufacturer and/or installer although its appearance is somewhat indicative of systems supplied by the likes of Trespa.

The front and rear aspects of the buildings retain their original appearance although

the windows look to have been recently replaced, possibly at the same time the cladding was installed.

Outwardly, the condition of the rain-screen was generally considered to be very good.

Indeed, given their relatively exposed position, one might have expected these blocks to have taken on a slightly more weathered appearance.

At present our chief concern would be for the composition of the underlying secondary

frame from which the cladding boards take their support. Our investigations were sadly unable to determine the material used in the construction of the rails, although the fact that the boards look to have been nail fixed suggests that these could be timber. Should this transpire to be the case then we would anticipate there being some potential for these particular components to decay and thereby slowly compromise the secure fixing of the claddings panels. If, as we suspect, the existing system is no more than 5-10 years old, we would envisage any maintenance issues arising in this regard for at least another 20 years. As such, we have adopted a slightly less cynical approach in our budget forecast although we would recommend that the Council instigates further investigations with the system supplier once this is established.

Our inspection of the exposed pre-cast external wall panels suggested that these

components remain in a robust and stable condition. There was evidence of some minor concrete repair work having been undertaken. Furthermore, it is also thought the mastic joints between adjoining panels have been comprehensively renewed.

The chances of water ingress through to the underlying structure will have been

significantly minimised where these buildings have been part over-clad. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components (pre-cast and in-situ wall panels) where these remain exposed. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) An analysis of the results incorporated within Appendix G indicate an average chloride



any significant repair work for at least another 10 years. Of course, this is not to imply they could afford to endure some degree of neglect. On the contrary, routine maintenance responsibilities will still need to be attended to.


the present condition of the external wall components, it is nevertheless considered that an increasing number of instances will arise where cracking and spalling occurs as a direct result of reinforcement corrosion. In view of this we have proposed that the front and rear elevations are re-inspected with a view to some concrete repair work being undertaken during years 11-15 at which time it would be prudent to see that the structure is afforded a degree of protection from further carbonation.

Traditionally, the easiest way to achieve this would be to treat the exposed walls with

an anti-carbonation paint system. This process will need to be repeated every 10-15 years depending on the level of environmental exposure and as such it is deemed to represent a ‘periodic’ repair. Whilst this approach would suffice for the purpose of securing a further 30 year life, a markedly better or enhanced option would be to introduce a similar if not identical rain-screen cladding system to the front and rear elevations. This we believe to be a more cost effective approach as it will ensure that the vulnerable concrete components remain in a dry, stable environment from the outset and in doing so negate the need for ongoing repairs by virtue of the manner in which the cladding will safeguard the structure against further deterioration.

Having inspected the flat roofs we are satisfied that the existing felt coverings will,

provided they are routinely maintained, continue to perform satisfactorily for a further 10-15 years. Indeed, our observations gave us cause to believe that they have not long been replaced. Accordingly, we do not anticipate they will need renewing again until years 16-20.

Finally, as these blocks are in excess of 5 storeys their structural design must resist

the forces created in the event of a (gas) explosion (Building Regulations Part A Section A3 and A4). In our experience, virtually all in-situ concrete framed structures have adequate reserves of strength to resist such forces. Whilst we would be surprised to discover that these buildings did not meet the requirements to resist disproportionate collapse in the event of an explosion, we have not undertaken specific calculations or tests that would verify their resistance to such an event. If they have not already done so, the Council would be well advised to instigate further investigations on this basis.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.2.3 Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks Applies to the following properties:

Clarendon House, Conway Court, Ellen House, Goldstone House and Livingstone House (Variant A)

Courtlands , Ecclesden, Highleigh, Normanhurst, Richmond Heights, Saxonbury and Thorndale (Variant B)

Somerset Point, St John’s Mount, Tyson Place and Warwick Mount (Variant C)

Essex Place, Hereford Court and Wiltshire House (Variant D)

Theobald House (Variant E) It is understood that all of the twenty blocks situated in and around the city centre have

required some element of repair in the past. Historically, remedial measures appear to have focused on rectifying localised defects

associated with the brickwork such as re-pointing and renewing damaged cavity trays in addition to a limited amount of concrete repair. Whilst much of this work appears to have been undertaken on a piecemeal basis, some of the blocks, more notably Theobald House, have clearly benefited from comparatively extensive refurbishment schemes which have encompassed replacing major elements of the building fabric including curtain walling.

During our inspections we noticed that many of the blocks have more recently had

some repairs undertaken to the edge face of the floor slabs. Excluding the twelve properties forming the Clarendon Road and Albion Hill sites (Variants A & B), we understand there has been a widespread concern for the integrity of the brick slips. In order to alleviate any fears of them becoming displaced through either poor adhesion or differential thermal movement, these have been systematically removed and replaced with pre-cast concrete cover strips which serve to perform the same function. Crucially, these appear to have been secured to the slab edge with mechanical fixings.

Notwithstanding the above, the appearance of the external walls, which are of

traditional masonry construction, suggests these are free from any severe structural inadequacies. No significant cracking was noted and there were no clear visible signs of any appreciable frost damage, lateral movement or bulging. Our intrusive investigations, which included us undertaking endoscope inspections of the cavities, further supported this notion. These determined that the galvanised wall ties used were largely in good condition and present in sufficient number. Furthermore, we established that three of the blocks types (Variants C, D & E) have seen remedial wall ties installed.

We are aware that the mortar is believed to be low in cement content and whilst we

accept that some limited re-pointing has already been undertaken, we would propose that a further allowance is made to comprehensively rake out and re-point defective areas of brickwork that were not addressed previously or which will come to require repair in the future.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) The sealant applied to the movement joints inspected was widely considered to be in

relatively good order, particularly in view of its anticipated age and exposure. Nevertheless, this will continue to break down allowing moisture to penetrate the cavity and thereafter promote corrosion of the wall ties. Accordingly, it is recommended that all joints are raked out and resealed under the provisions we have designated for brickwork repairs.

All of the blocks, irrespective of their size and configuration, incorporate some form of

private balcony arrangement within their construction. More often than not, these project beyond the façade of the building as opposed to being recessed. Our observations suggest that the exposed floor slabs are largely free from any significant defects, although there were a few recorded instances where concrete was noted to have cracked and/or spalled as a likely consequence of reinforcement corrosion.

Although there is little intrinsically faulty or likely to weaken the structure of these

buildings, Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components including the columns, floor beams and balcony slabs. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.





9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) 9.2.4 Wates High Rise Blocks Applies to the following properties:

Falcon Crt, Heron Crt, Kestrel Crt, Kingfisher Crt, Swallow Crt (Variant A)

St James’ House (Variant B) With the exception of Kingfisher Court, it is understood that the five high rise blocks

situated on or around Swanborough Place were the subject of a significant refurbishment scheme undertaken approximately 5 years ago.

The works appears to have principally involved over-cladding the external elevations

with what appears to be a back ventilated insulated rain-screen system. Unfortunately, the Council were unable to provide us with any details relating to the manufacturer and/or installer although its appearance is somewhat indicative of systems supplied by the likes of Trespa.

St James’ House has been similarly refurbished, albeit to a lesser extent. Here the

work appears to have been confined to over-cladding the side aspects of the building. The front and rear elevations therefore retain their original appearance, although the PVCu window units look like they could have been installed as part of the same package of works.

Outwardly, the condition of the rain-screen was generally considered to be very good.

Indeed, given their relatively exposed position, one might have expected these blocks to have taken on a slightly more weathered appearance.

At present our chief concern would be for the composition of the underlying secondary

frame from which the cladding boards take their support. Our investigations were sadly unable to determine the material used in the construction of the rails, although the fact that the boards look to have been nail fixed suggests that these could be timber. Should this transpire to be the case then we would anticipate there being some potential for these particular components to decay and thereby slowly compromise the secure fixing of the claddings panels. If, as we suspect, the existing system is no more than 5-10 years old, we would envisage any maintenance issues arising in this regard for at least another 20 years. As such, we have adopted a slightly less cynical approach in our budget forecast although we would recommend that the Council instigates further investigations with the system supplier once this is established.

Our inspection of the exposed pre-cast external wall panels, specifically at Kingfisher

Court and St James’ House, suggested that these components remain in a relatively robust and stable condition. There was evidence of some minor repair work having been undertaken, more particularly to the corner of the panels although there were no visible signs of any concrete having spalled as a result of corrosion occurring within the reinforcement.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) The five blocks situated at Swanborough Place are configured quite differently from St

James’ House in as much as these all incorporate an open balcony arrangement. Our observations suggest that the exposed floor slabs are free from any significant defects; certainly there was no visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a consequence of reinforcement corrosion. Their relatively ‘fresh’ appearance also suggested that these elements have, in recent years, been repaired and thereafter treated with a protective paint system. The same could be said of the perimeter columns at ground floor level which have been finished with what appears to be a rendered firing coat.

The chances of water ingress through to the underlying structure will have been

significantly minimised where these buildings have been over-clad. Curtins investigations nevertheless sought to target an examination of the more vulnerable reinforced components (columns, floor beams, balcony slabs and wall panels) where these remain exposed. Concrete samples were extracted for laboratory analysis and at each location measurements taken to establish the depth of carbonation in relation to reinforcement cover.



Based on our findings we have concluded that these properties, excluding Kingfisher

Court that is, are unlikely to require any significant repair work for at least another 10 years. Of course, this is not to imply they could afford to endure some degree of neglect. On the contrary, routine maintenance responsibilities will still need to be attended to.


the present condition of the exposed concrete elements, it is nevertheless considered that an increasing number of instances will arise where cracking and spalling occurs as a direct result of reinforcement corrosion. In view of this we have proposed that the buildings are re-inspected with a view to some concrete repair work being undertaken during years 11-15. This should come to include treating all of the affected areas with a protective paint system that will help guard against further carbonation.

Where Kingfisher Court is concerned, we would ultimately recommend that this is

over-clad with a similar if not identical system to that used on the four neighbouring blocks. Provided this proposal is adopted within the short-term it will be possible to retain the structure in its current condition. The cladding will also obviate the need for an ongoing high level of maintenance as well as certain cyclical repairs such as external redecoration.

9.0 Investigations: Findings, Discussions and Recommendations (Continued) As an optional enhancement, we have proposed that consideration is given to

enclosing the exposed balconies. This will see an end to the cosmetic and hygiene problems associated with the birds which habitually seek shelter in these areas. It could also serve to improve amenity values being as a number of the tenants currently appear unable or unwilling to utilise this space in a positive way.

In the event the Council decide to maintain the existing balcony arrangement it will, in

any case, be necessary to allow for some cyclical repairs. This will include refurbishing the steel balcony rails and replacing the glazed balustrade panels, the latter of which are particularly susceptible to damage. Finally, we have also proposed that the deck coverings are renewed. This work we have collectively scheduled for years 11-15.

Having inspected the flat roofs we are satisfied that the existing felt coverings will,

provided they are routinely maintained, continue to perform satisfactorily for a further 10-15 years. Accordingly, we do not anticipate these will need renewing again until years 16-20. That is with the exception of Kingfisher Court, which we note is currently being serviced in this regard.



10.0 Refurbishment Options and Mortgageability Issues 10.1 Background to Mortgageability Restrictions In the early 1980’s an investigation undertaken to two fire damaged Airey houses

revealed cracking of the structural pre-cast reinforced concrete (PRC) columns caused by corrosion of the embedded steel reinforcement in association with chemical changes to the surrounding concrete.

On the 8 February 1983, the Minister for Housing and Construction announced

(House of Commons Official Report: 893) that he had asked the Building Research Establishment (BRE) to gather data in order to provide technical information and guidance regarding possible deterioration of structural reinforced concrete in prefabricated houses built between the wars and in the 1940’s and 1950’s.

Subsequent investigations by the BRE showed that a number of other house types

built in the immediate post-war period exhibited, or were susceptible to similar defects, which could lead to widespread deterioration and eventually structural failure.

Accordingly, in 1984 the Government brought forward legislation to compensate

owners who had bought, in good faith, houses from the public sector with serious structural defects which could not have been known about, or discovered on survey, at the time of purchase. The Housing Defects Legislation (now Part XVI of the Housing Act 1985) allowed the Secretary of State to designate particular dwelling types as inherently defective and empowered local authorities to operate a ‘Scheme of Assistance’ for eligible owners, either by way of repurchase or by way of reinstatement (repair).

Most ‘repairs’ were carried out using systems of reinstatement licensed, inspected

and certified by PRC Homes Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of the NHBC. Not all the owners pursued this route and in addition some local authorities carried out ‘partial repairs’ their own stock which did not serve to remove all of the defective PRC structural elements from the dwelling.

The legislation did not allow for any ‘betterment’ during reinstatement and therefore

while superficially the appearance of a reinstated property may have changed dramatically, key identification characteristics such as window/door openings and roof pitch remain unchanged.

Thirty non-traditional property types were eventually designated as inherently

defective under separate legislation in England Wales Scotland and Northern Ireland. The subsequent BRE research programme into all non-traditional housing revealed no further archetypes which met the Government’s criteria for designation.

Properties that came into being classified as ‘Defective’ were no longer accepted by

lending authorities as a sound investment for mortgage purposes PRC Homes Ltd was eventually wound up in 1996. After that, houses repaired under

licensed schemes, such as those developed by Curtins, were generally accepted for mortgage purposes.

10.0 Refurbishment Options and Mortgageability Issues (Continued) Curtins investigations indicate that both the non-traditional and high rise housing is in

a sound structural condition and will accordingly continue to perform satisfactorily for a further 30 years and in some cases well beyond, subject to the recommendations made in this report being adopted and routine maintenance.

10.2 Non-Traditional Houses and Flats Applies to the following properties:

BISF Type (A1) Houses

BRE Type 1-3 Houses

BRS Type 4 Houses

Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats *

Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats *

No-Fines Type Flats

Reema Type PRC Houses *

Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses

Unity Type (I) PRC Houses *

Wates Type PRC Houses * * Denotes ‘Designated Defective’

The Cornish, Reema, Unity and Wates dwellings are the only properties within the

non-traditional stock that are designated ‘Defective’ under Part XVI of the Housing Act 1985. Most lenders would therefore be unwilling to offer a mortgage on these under normal circumstances. Some institutions will provide for properties that have been repaired using recognised over-cladding systems such as those approved by Norwich Union or more notably NTHAS. However, the most widely accepted forms of reinstatement for mortgage purposes are those that comply with a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme. These generally involve the complete removal of the concrete wall and where applicable floor components in favour of these being replaced with traditional materials and construction forms i.e. brick/block cavity walls.

Being as none of the other dwellings are classified in this regard, there will be no

recognised restrictions on mortgageability. Mortgages should therefore be readily available, subject to the individual status of the applicant and condition/marketability of the property.

10.2.1 Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats Given that these properties have already been over-clad with brick, in compliance with

what is thought to be an NTHAS (Category 3) scheme, it is likely that some lenders would provide limited mortgageability (i.e. terms not exceeding 30 years). However, we have refrained from recommending that a PRC Homes licensed scheme is used for two reasons.

Firstly, the nature of the repairs, which are understood to have been undertaken just

10 years ago, are such that they should easily serve to safeguard the structural life of these dwellings for at least another 30 years.

10.0 Refurbishment Options and Mortgageability Issues (Continued) Secondly, even if a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme were adopted, it would not

serve to provide a fully mortgageable solution in this instance. The reasons for this are historical and concern the fact that these schemes were only ever intended to deal with single and two storey houses. Flats were effectively excluded from consideration at the time and are accordingly still approached with some caution by lenders today.

10.2.2 Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats Unlike the Cornish type (I) flats, these properties exist in their original state and

accordingly could easily be repaired using either one of the two options discussed under 10.2. Accepting that it is likely only limited mortgageability could be achieved, we would nevertheless recommend that a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme is used in this instance. Pursuing this option will almost certainly be more attractive to prospective lenders and will in any case offer an anticipated service life of at least 50 years, as opposed to the minimum 30 year period required by the Council.

10.2.3 Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses These properties have already been over-clad with a proprietary insulation and render

system which, if routinely maintained, should see them fulfil the requisite 30 year service life. It is also likely that the current level of repair will satisfy some lenders criteria for providing limited mortgageability. If full mortgageable status is of the essence then further consideration will need to given to implementing a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme.

As discussed under Section 9 of this report, the system of repair for a typical Reema

type PRC house requires that both the existing walls and floors are replaced. However, the costs in connection with this approach could be sufficiently high enough to warrant redeveloping the existing site(s) to accommodate an increased number of new, traditionally built, properties.

10.2.4 Unity Type (I) PRC Houses A limited mortgage could probably be achieved by employing one of several

lightweight insulation and render systems cladding underwritten with an insurance backed guarantee. However, if full mortgageability is required we would refrain from endorsing this route unless it was deemed to be a ‘last resort’. Instead we would ultimately recommend that nothing other than a PRC Homes Ltd licensed scheme is utilised.

10.2.5 Wates Type PRC Houses Our recommendations with respect to these properties accord directly with that

prescribed for the Unity houses.

10.0 Refurbishment Options and Mortgageability Issues (Continued) 10.3 Medium and High Rise Blocks of Flats Applies to the following properties:

Bison Floor Blocks

Bison High Rise Blocks

Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks

Wates High Rise Blocks Whilst lenders can be reluctant to provide mortgages for these dwellings, the fact that

some individual units are understood to be in private ownership (leasehold) may suggest that mortgageability has already been established locally.

11.0 Budget Costs As part of a wider review of its own housing stock, it is understood that the Council will

be looking to prepare forward budgets in recognition of the repair and maintenance work that is deemed necessary to safeguard the structural integrity of their non-traditional and high rise housing over the next 30 years. These projections may be used, in conjunction with other detailed information, to produce a maintenance strategy for each classification or type of property that will be of value to their overall business plan.

In order to assist the Council with the task of formulating credible budget forecasts,

Curtins have sought to establish an ‘estimate of cost’ in recognition of both the repair and improvement works prescribed within the preceding sections of is report.

As to avoid any ambiguity, we have prepared individual schedules for each of the

property types pertinent to this study. In accordance the requirements of the brief, the various works and their associated costs have been allocated within predetermined timescales (i.e. years 1-5, 6-10 etc) depending on when it is recommended these are undertaken. It is important to remember that the ‘right’ time to execute repairs from a structural viewpoint does not always coincide with the ‘best’ time where economics are concerned, as is explained under 11.2.3.

It should be noted that the predicted costs, specifically that of the structural/fabric

repairs, are based on the current anticipated condition of the properties and the estimated rate of deterioration of the building fabric. By and large, it is inherently difficult to estimate the rate of deterioration effectively beyond year 15. As such, it may be necessary to undertake a further cost analysis at this time in order to access the accuracy of the costs for the remainder of buildings life.

11.1 Budget Formulation Methodology The costs incorporated within the spreadsheets that are presented on the proceeding

pages are based on rates derived from recent refurbishment projects that Curtins have managed as well as ‘live’ budget estimates obtained through our discussions with principal suppliers and specialist subcontractors alike. These include, but are not limited to, the following:

Exterior paint systems such as those manufactured by Keim.

Roof and deck covering systems such as those manufactured by Ruberoid.

Rain-screen cladding and curtain walling systems such as those developed by CAP and Trespa.

Insulation and render cladding systems such as those developed by Structherm.

Scaffold access provisions such as those provided by Austins Cradles Ltd. Where some of the more specific repairs are concerned, such as those required to

strengthen the pre-cast concrete floors within the blocks at Fitch Drive and Dartmouth Crescent, we have proposed what we believe to be appropriate budgets formulated around our assessment of some of the repairs identified within the report produced by Ecovert Management Ltd in November 1999.

11.0 Budget Costs (Continued) 11.2 Interpreting the Budget Cost Spreadsheets 11.2.1 Budget Inclusions The prescribed works have been subdivided into two categories, these being:

Minimum basic structural/fabric repairs.

Optional enhancement works. The proposed budget costs with respect to these categories are subject to the

following percentage additions:

Main contractor’s preliminaries at 20%.

General contingency at 15%. Taken individually, these rates will of course be subject to a degree of variation dependant on the nature of the work and the contractual arrangement, however we are of the opinion that that the 35% aggregate represents an appropriate allowance. Furthermore, whilst some might consider this figure to be excessive, we are conscious of the increasing trend for local authorities and registered social landlords alike to enter into partnering arrangements which, in our experience, have come to attract comparatively high preliminary costs.

11.2.2 Budget Exclusions It is important to bear in mind that the costs make no allowance for the following:

VAT at 17.5%.

Professional fees incurred to design, specify and detail the remedial works.

Statutory fees associated with planning and building control applications.

Asbestos disposal costs.

Compensatory costs that may be offered to tenants for disruption, which may come to include decanting.

11.2.3 Designating Timescales As previously discussed, much of the stock pertinent to this study has been the

subject of some significant repair and/or improvement work in the past. This looks to have principally involved a variety of over-cladding schemes that have been introduced to seven of the high rise blocks and the majority of the non-traditional house types. In recognition of this, the majority of the repairs have been designated for completion within years 11-15 and 16-20. By and large, these works are confined to maintenance provisions such as renewing roof coverings, repairing cladding, re-pointing brickwork and applying protective treatments to exposed concrete elements or structural steelwork.

11.0 Budget Costs (Continued) As regards those properties which remain in an ‘un-repaired’ state, most notably the

Cornish type (II) flats, the No-Fines flats and the Unity houses, one will note that the bulk of the prescribed works and their associated cost have been allocated within the 1-5 year timeframe. The basic philosophy in support of this approach is that in an ideal world the structural defects, particularly those involving concrete repair, should be attended to within the next 5 years. In reality, individual components will probably continue to deteriorate for several years beyond this milestone without themselves becoming a serious concern. However, the longer one waits the more extensive and indeed expensive the repairs are likely to become. In keeping with this philosophy, we have recommended that the properties referred to above are, in the very least, over-clad within this same timescale. In addition to enhancing their appearance, this work will usefully negate the need for ongoing repairs by virtue of the manner in which the cladding will safeguard the structure against further deterioration. Naturally we anticipate that some ‘smoothing’ of timescales will occur, with some properties being repaired in advance of others. Within reason this is a practical approach to adopt.

One will also note that there are some isolated instances where optional enhancement

works have been scheduled alongside routine maintenance repairs. This has been proposed on the basis that if a significant amount of money is to be spent on access (scaffold etc), it would be prudent to capitalise on its use by undertaking any non-essential improvements at the same time.

Finally, it is perhaps only appropriate that some thought is also given to the Council’s

obligations under Decent Homes Standards. Whilst Curtins have not been privy to any information regarding current levels of compliancy, we have sought to timetable some of the repair liabilities such that their attendance within years 1-5 will hopefully assist the Council to meet or even exceed its 2010 targets.

11.3 Interpreting the Budget Cost Summary Presented within the executive summary (Section 1) of this report are two tables, both

of which serve to assimilate the budget cost data that is detailed on the proceeding spreadsheets.

Table 1 provides a summary of the costs in connection with what have been

prescribed as minimum basic structural/fabric repairs, i.e. those required to ensure the stock continues to perform satisfactorily for at least a further 30 years.

Table 2 repeats the exercise with consideration for the enhanced repairs that have

also been proposed. When interpreting this second set of figures, reference should be made to the footnotes which have been applied to some of the budget cost schedules presented overleaf. Some of these ‘optional’ works will, if adopted, negate the need to undertake certain other repairs. Examples of this include where a fully mortgageable repair scheme is required as opposed to an over-cladding solution that has already been prescribed under the category of minimum basic repairs. Where such instances arise we have omitted the associated value of any work that would no longer be required as a consequence.

APPENDIX A

BHCC NON-TRADITIONAL AND HIGH RISE PROPERTY LISTINGS

(SEPTEMBER 2005)

APPENDIX B

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES

Brighton & Hove City Council Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES The following schedule seeks to group identical properties together according to their construction type. BISF Type (A1) Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: Forest Road (1№), Middleton Rise (6№) and Rushlake Road (9№) Total Number: 16 houses Bison (Floor) Blocks: Property Description: 4 storey block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Dartmouth Crescent (26-40), (42-56) & (58-72) and Fitch Drive (33-47), (49-63) & (65-79) Total Number: 6 blocks Bison High Rise Blocks: Property Description: 15 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Dudeney Lodge and Nettleton Court Total Number: 2 blocks BRE Type 1-3 Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Property Location: Firle Road (1№) Total Number: 1 house

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES (Continued) BRS Type 4 Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating flat slab roof Property Location: Staplefield Drive (4№) Total Number: 4 houses Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey): Property Description: 3 storey (terraced) block of flats incorporating mansard roof Property Location: Bramble Way (1-23) (25-47) & (49-71), Chelwood Close (5-27) & (29-51), Orchid View (1-23), (2-24) & (26-60) and Parham Close (1-12) & (13-24) Total Number: 10 blocks Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats (2 Storey): Property Description: 2 storey (terraced) block of flats incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: Hawkhurst Place (1-4) and Thompson Road (2, 4, 10, 12) Total Number: 2 blocks No-Fines Type Flats: Property Description: 3 storey (terraced) block of flats incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: Donald Hall Road (1-11), (13-35), (50-72) & (122-144) Total Number: 4 blocks Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached and terraced) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: Bexhill Road (159№), Cowley Drive (5№), Crespin Way (4№), Heronsdale Road (6№), Laughton Road (4№), Netherfield Green (17№) and Newells Close (8№) Total Number: 203 houses

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES (Continued) Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant A): Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Clarendon House, Conway Court, Ellen House, Goldstone House and Livingstone House Total Number: 5 blocks Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant B): Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Courtlands, Ecclesden, Highleigh, Normanhurst, Richmond Heights, Saxonbury and Thornsdale Total Number: 7 blocks Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant C): Property Description: 14 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Somerset Point, St John’s Mount, Tyson Place and Warwick Mount Total Number: 4 blocks Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant D): Property Description: 17 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Essex Place, Hereford Court and Wiltshire House Total Number: 3 blocks Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Block (Variant E): Property Description: 20 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Theobald House Total Number: 1 block

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY ADDRESSES AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES (Continued) Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Property Location: Carden Hill (1№), Crabtree Avenue (6№) and Lyminster Avenue (1№) Total Number: 8 houses Unity Type (I) PRC Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Property Location: Bodiam Avenue (5№) and Walmer Crescent (4№) Total Number: 9 houses Wates Type PRC Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched gable or hipped roof Property Location: Bamford Close (7№), Norwich Close (5№) and Norwich Drive (14№) Total Number: 26 houses Wates High Rise Blocks (Variant A): Property Description: 9-11 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: Falcon Court, Heron Court, Kestrel Court, Kingfisher Court and Swallow Court Total Number: 5 blocks Wates High Rise Block (Variant B): Property Description: 16 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: St James’ House Total Number: 1 block

APPENDIX C

HISTORICAL INFORMATION

Brighton & Hove City Council Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock HISTORICAL INFORMATION The following summary has been compiled using information extracted from gazetteer listings noted in the book ‘Tower Block - Modern Public Housing in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland’ by Glendinning and Muthesius, published in 1994. The advised ‘build dates’ refer to either (a) when planning approval was granted by the local authority or (s) when construction work commenced on site. Block Name Contractor Built Clarendon House Rice & Sons 1966 (s) Conway Court Rice & Sons 1965 (s) Courtlands Rice & Sons 1961 (a) Dudeney Lodge W. Llewellyn (Bison) 1964 (a) Ecclesden Rice & Sons 1958 (a) Ellen House Rice & Sons 1967 (s) Essex Place Rice & Sons 1965 (a) Falcon Court Wates 1964 (a) Goldstone House Rice & Sons 1967 (s) Hereford Court Rice & Sons 1967 (a) Heron Court Wates 1964 (a) Highleigh Rice & Sons 1958 (a) Kestrel Court Wates 1964 (a) Kingfisher Court Wates 1964 (a) Livingstone House H. J. Paris 1968 (s) Nettleton Court W. Llewellyn (Bison) 1964 (a) Normanhurst Rice & Sons 1958 (a)

HISTORICAL INFORMATION (Continued) Block Name Contractor Built Richmond Heights Rice & Sons 1965 (a) Saxonbury Rice & Sons 1961 (a) Somerset Point Rice & Sons 1962 (a) St James’ House Wates 1964 (a) St John’s Mount Rice & Sons 1967 (s) Swallow Court Wates 1964 (a) Theobald House Rice & Sons 1964 (a) Thornsdale Rice & Sons 1958 (a) Tyson Place Rice & Sons 1967 (s) Warwick Mount Rice & Sons 1962 (a) Wiltshire House Rice & Sons 1967 (a)

APPENDIX D

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES

Brighton & Hove City Council Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES The following observations were noted during an initial visual survey of the various sites conducted by Curtins on 4, 14, 16 and 17 November 2005 and latterly on the 11, 12 and 13 July 2006 following an instruction for us to widen our appraisal to encompass a further twenty traditional R.C frame high rise blocks. Referring to each of the addresses identified within the client’s property schedule, these are listed alphabetically as follows: Bamford Close Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Wates’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable or hipped roof Number of Units: 7 Photographic Record: None Site Observations: As noted below

The houses appear to have been extensively repaired/refurbished in recent years; the tenants questioned suggested circa 1990.

The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external walls with an insulation and render system.

Some local repairs are required to the cladding system, specifically the base bead /trim, where it has become detached either through poor fixing or damage.

The windows, which have been replaced with double glazed PVCu units, appear to be in a serviceable condition.

The soffits, fascias and rainwater goods, which have been renewed in PVCu, appear to be in reasonable condition.

Outwardly, the roofs appear free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident. Some of the flat roofs serving the front entrance porch and bay window will likely need repairing in the near future.

The houses are located in a relatively exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Bexhill Road Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached and terraced) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 159 Photographic Record: None Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Heronsdale Road Bodiam Avenue Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Unity’ type (I) PRC houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of units: 5 Photographic Record: Refer to images 139-141 Site Observations: As noted below

The houses do not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

Some of the neighbouring properties, which are thought to be in private ownership, appear to have been over-clad.

There is evidence to suggest that some of the external pre-cast wall panels, more particularly those at the corners, have been re-pointed to rectify cracking in the vertical panel joints.



Outwardly, the roofs appear free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident.

The houses are located in a comparatively sheltered position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Bramble Way Property Description: 3 storey ‘Cornish’ type (I) PRC flats incorporating mansard roof Number of Units: 3 blocks (1-23, 25-47 & 49-71) Photographic Record: Refer to images 1-8 Site Observations: As noted below

The flats appear to have been extensively repaired/refurbished in recent years; the tenants questioned suggested circa 1995.

The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external walls in a single brick skin built off an extension to the existing footing.

Outwardly, the external walls appear free from any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed and the expansion joints to appear to be in very good order.

The windows, which have been replaced with double glazed PVCu units, appear to be in a serviceable condition. The hardwood communal entrance doors are noted to be likewise.


There is some evidence of repairs having already been undertaken to the original concrete window linings. Consequently, they currently appear to be free from any visible defects.

Outwardly, the roofs appear free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident. Some of the leadwork around the mansard dormer windows could do to be re-dressed in places.

The retaining walls located to the rear of the blocks, which are constructed of dense concrete block, appear to have been retrospectively reinforced with brick piers, although the extent to which they look to be rotating would suggest that some further remedial work will be necessary so as to ensure they do not fail over the long term.

The flats are located in a very exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Carden Hill Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Trusteel’ (MkII) type houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of Units: 1 (№ 97) Photographic Record: Refer to images 21-25 Site Observations: As noted below

The house appears to have been the subject of some repairs in recent years; the tenants questioned suggested circa 2000.

The works look to have principally involved removing the outer skin of brick from ground to cill level for the full perimeter of the property in order to facilitate repairs (surface treatments) to the base of the steel columns that are located within the cavity. The effected brickwork was subsequently re-built to match the existing.

Outwardly, the external walls appear free from any visible structural defects; certainly no significant cracking was noted.



Outwardly, the roof appears free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident. Whilst sound the chimney stack will likely need re-pointing in the near future.

The original pre-cast concrete slab used to form the front door canopy has been retained (some of the other properties have seen these removed). This is in need of some repair work and as such it may be better served being replaced altogether.

The house is located in a relatively exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Chelwood Close Property Description: 3 storey ‘Cornish’ type (I) PRC flats incorporating mansard roof Number of Units: 2 blocks (5-27 & 29-51) 2 blocks not identified on client’s archetype list (6-28 & 30-52) Photographic Record: Refer to images 16-20 Site Observations: As noted below and for flats situated in Bramble Way

The retaining walls located to the rear of the blocks are notably shorter and do not appear to be suffering to the same extent as noted for Bramble Way.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Clarendon House (Clarendon Road) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 42 Photographic Record: Refer to images 147-165 Site Observations: As noted below

The block does not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free from any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed, although there are some areas of brickwork that would benefit from being re-pointed. The movement joints (mastic) appear to be in good order, possibly having been renewed in recent years.

There is evidence to suggest that some minor concrete repair work may be required to the downstand face of the floor slabs. Whilst there were no visible signs of any exposed reinforcement, some isolated instances of cracking were noted where these components are likely suffering from low cover.

The soffits of the balcony slabs appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement, although the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond in places.

Unusually, the mosaic tile cladding that has been applied to the side elevations does not appear to be showing any signs of de-bonding from its parent substrate.


The initial inspection was not able to ascertain whether any repairs have recently been undertaken to the flat roof.

The block is located in a comparatively sheltered position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Conway Court (Clarendon Road) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 54 Photographic Record: Refer to images 147-165 Site Observations: As noted below and for Clarendon House

Both this block and Livingstone House incorporate external deck access walkways on the 3rd and 7th floors. By and large the condition of the surface coverings (asphalt) is good, although it is anticipated these will need to be renewed at some point over the next 30 years. The steel guard/balustrade rails appeared free from any appreciable corrosion and as such should require little more than routine maintenance.

The brickwork within the three communal stairways is currently in a poor state of repair and would benefit from being comprehensively raked out and re-pointed in its entirety.

Courtlands (Ashton Rise) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 36 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted for Saxonbury Cowley Drive Property Description: 2 storey (terraced) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 5 Photographic Record: Refer to images 65-66 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Heronsdale Road

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Crabtree Avenue Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Trusteel’ (MkII) type houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of Units: 6 Photographic Record: Refer to images 26-33 Site Observations: As noted for single house (№ 97) situated in Carden Hill Crespin Way Property Description: 2 storey (terraced) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 4 Photographic Record: None Site Observations: As noted below


The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external walls with an insulation and render system. Unlike the properties situated in Cowley Drive, Heronsdale Road and Netherfield Green, there was no evidence of any superficial damage to the cladding.

Additionally, the dwellings now benefit from new front entrance porches.

It is understood that the windows, soffits, fascias and rainwater goods, were all renewed as part of the refurbishment works.

The roofs have retained their original coverings although it is understood that one of the properties, namely № 22, has more recently been stripped and re-felted. In any case, no missing or damaged tiles were evident.

The houses are located in a relatively exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Dartmouth Crescent Property Description: 4 storey ‘Bison Floor’ type block of flats incorporating flat roof Number of units: 3 blocks (26-40, 42-56 & 58-72) Photographic Record: Refer to images 144-145 Site Observations: As noted below

The blocks do not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free from any visible structural defects; certainly no significant cracking was noted.

The exposed concrete elements appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there is no visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement.

The asphalt coverings to the external elevated walkways appear to be reasonably sound. These and the steel balustrade rails, the latter of which are corroding in places, will need to be renewed in due course.


The initial inspection was unable to ascertain whether any repairs have recently been undertaken to the flat roofs.

The blocks are located in a relatively exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Donald Hall Road Property Description: 3 storey ‘No-Fines’ type flats incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 7 blocks (1-11, 13-35, 37-47, 49-59, 50-72, 122-144, 194-204) Photographic Record: Refer to images 103-117 Site Observations: As noted below

It should firstly be pointed out that flats 37-47, 49-59 and 194-204, do not bear any resemblance of ‘No-Fines’ construction. Contrary to the information supplied by the client, these three blocks take on the appearance of a more traditional brick built form of construction. In each case they have quite obviously been reasonably well maintained; the doors, windows, soffits, fascias and rainwater goods all having been replaced in recent years. More importantly, the principal structural elements (walls, roof, etc.) all looked to be void of any structural defects.

The four remaining blocks (1-11, 13-35, 50-72 & 122-144) do not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

The external elevations are not exhibiting any signs of distress although it is quite evident that their exposed hilltop location has led to an increased weathering of the surface aggregate.

There is evidence to suggest that some minor concrete repair work may be required to the balcony slabs, specifically the soffits. A closer inspection will determine whether the concrete is beginning to crack and/or spall where the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond.


There is some evidence of repairs having already been undertaken to the concrete window linings. Consequently, they currently appear to be free from any visible defects.


Outwardly, the roofs appear free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident.

The properties are located in a very exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Dudeney Lodge (Upper Hollingdean Road) Property Description: 15 storey high rise block of flats (Bison Large Panel System) Number of Units: 86 Photographic Record: Refer to images 121-127 Site Observations: As noted below

The block appears to have been extensively repaired/refurbished in recent years.

The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external elevations (side walls only) with what appears to be a back ventilated insulated rain-screen cladding system. The overall condition of the cladding would suggest it was installed within the last 5-10 years.

An analysis of the front and rear elevations, which maintain their original appearance, would suggest that the underlying side walls consist of storey height pre-cast concrete panels with an exposed aggregate finish.

The half height pre-cast wall panels forming the front and rear façades appear free from any significant defects; certainly there is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled or that the panels are suffering from defective fixings that may either be inadequately spaced or weakened through corrosion. The movement joints (mastic) between these panels were similarly in good order, possibly having been renewed as part of the over-cladding work.

It is thought that the windows, which are double glazed PVCu units, were replaced at the same time and accordingly appear to be in a serviceable condition.

The initial inspection was unable to ascertain whether any repairs have recently been undertaken to the flat roof.

The block is located in a relatively exposed position. Ecclesden (Grove Hill) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 38 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted for Saxonbury

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Ellen House (Clarendon Road) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 39 Photographic Record: Refer to images 147-165 Site Observations: As noted for Clarendon House

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Essex Place (Montague Street) Property Description: 17 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 100 Photographic Record: Refer to images 239-256 Site Observations: As noted below

The block appears to have been the subject of some repairs in recent years.

The works look to have principally involved removing the two courses of brickwork (possibly slips) which correspond with the position of the floor slabs and replacing these with what look to be pre-cast units that have been mechanically fixed back to the slab face.

Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free from any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed, indeed there is evidence to suggest that much of the brickwork has been re-pointed and in places rebuilt, particularly where it corresponds with the position of the floor slabs. Furthermore, it is thought that remedial wall ties have been introduced.

The exposed R.C columns at ground floor level appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement. The same can be said of the balcony slabs, although some of the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond in places.

Many of the coping stones to the balconies walls look to have been replaced where these were either loose or damaged.

The aluminium curtain walling enclosing the communal stairway was not originally manufactured with a protective finish. As such it has oxidised over the years, otherwise it appears to have sustained relatively little damage.


Rainwater is ponding on the flat roof serving the rear entrance lobby thereby promoting deterioration of the felt coverings.

The initial site inspection was not able to ascertain whether any repairs have recently been undertaken to the flat roof.

The block is situated in a very exposed position close to the sea front.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Falcon Court (Swanborough Place) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Wates Large Panel System) Number of Units: 54 Photographic Record: Refer to images 99-100 Site Observations: As noted for Swallow Court Firle Road Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘BRE Type 1-3’ house incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of Units: 1 (№ 16) Photographic Record: Refer to images 118-119 Site Observations: As noted below

The house does not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

The face brickwork is currently in a poor state of repair and would benefit from being comprehensively raked and re-pointed in its entirety. Some cracking around the windows on the rear elevation was noted, although minor in its nature and accordingly unlikely to be conducive of significant settlement issues.

It is understood that the windows, which are double glazed PVCu units, have just recently been replaced.

The timber soffits, fascias and rainwater goods are collectively in a poor state of repair and will require renewing.

Outwardly, the roof appears free from any visible structural defects. Although, no missing or damaged tiles were evident the hip tiles will undoubtedly require re-bedding in the near future.

The house is located in a relatively exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Fitch Drive Property Description: 4 storey ‘Bison Floor’ type block of flats incorporating flat roof Number of units: 3 blocks (33-47, 49-63 & 65-79) Photographic Record: Refer to images 142-143 Site Observations: As noted for blocks situated in Dartmouth Crescent Forest Road Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘BISF’ type (A1) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 1 (№ 4) Photographic Record: Refer to image 45 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Rushlake Road Goldstone House (Clarendon Road) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 43 Photographic Record: Refer to images 147-165 Site Observations: As noted for Clarendon House

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Hawkhurst Place Property Description: 2 storey ‘Cornish’ type (II) PRC flats incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 1 block (1-4) Photographic Record: Refer to images 47-54 Site Observations: As noted below

The flats do not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

The PRC external wall panels and columns all appear to be in good outward condition; certainly there was little visible evidence of any concrete columns having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement.

The gable end walls and chimney stacks have been constructed, as opposed to clad, in what appears to be reconstituted stone block.

The exposed leading edge of the steel window lintel on the gable elevation is showing signs of mild corrosion.


The timber soffits and fascias have deteriorated such that they will soon need replacing. The same could be said of the rainwater goods, which appear to be the original cast iron/asbestos fittings.

Outwardly, the roof appears free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident.

The flats are located in a very exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Hereford Court (Hereford Street) Property Description: 17 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 80 Photographic Record: Refer to images 204-215 Site Observations: As noted below


Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free from any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed, indeed there is evidence to suggest that much of the brickwork has been re-pointed and in places rebuilt, particularly where it corresponds with the position of the floor slabs. Furthermore, it is thought that remedial wall ties have been introduced.

The soffits of the balcony slabs appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement, although some of the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond in places.



Rainwater is ponding on the flat roof serving the front entrance lobby thereby promoting deterioration of the felt coverings.


The block is situated in a very exposed position close to the sea front. Heron Court (Swanborough Place) Property Description: 9 storey high rise block of flats (Wates Large Panel System) Number of Units: 47 Photographic Record: Refer to images 101-102 Site Observations: As noted for Swallow Court

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Heronsdale Road Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 6 Photographic Record: Refer to images 57-64 Site Observations: As noted below



Some local repairs are required to the cladding system, specifically the base bead /trim, where it has become detached either through poor fixing or damage.



Outwardly, the roof appears free from any visible structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident, although a minor amount of deflection was noted suggesting that the rafters and/or purlins have sustained some overstressing over the years. It is understood that some supplementary roof bracing has been introduced to tackle this problem.

The houses are located in a very exposed position. Highleigh (Grove Hill) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 33 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted for Saxonbury

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Kestrel Court (Swanborough Place) Property Description: 11 storey high rise block of flats (Wates Large Panel System) Number of Units: 54 Photographic Record: Refer to images 95-98 Site Observations: As noted for Swallow Court Kingfisher Court (Albourne Close) Property Description: 9 storey high rise block of flats (Wates Large Panel System) Number of Units: 41 Photographic Record: Refer to images 85-94 Site Observations: As noted below


The external walls are presented in their original form, i.e. storey height pre-cast concrete panels with an exposed aggregate finish. By and large their condition appears sound although it is apparent that some of the panels have been repaired, more often than not at the corners.

The windows, which appear to be PVCu as opposed to powder coated aluminium units, look to be in a serviceable condition.

The soffits of the balcony slabs appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement, although some of the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond in places.

The steel balcony handrails appear sound although these are loosing their painted coatings. A small number of the georgian wire glass balustrade panels are cracked and in need of replacement.

During the inspection it was noted that scaffold is currently being erected to facilitate operations in connection with renewing the flat roof and removing defective parapet railings.

The block is located in a very exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Laughton Road Property Description: 2 storey (terraced) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of units: 4 Photographic Record: Refer to image 146 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Heronsdale Road Livingstone House (Clarendon Road) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 38 Photographic Record: Refer to images 147-165 Site Observations: As noted for Clarendon House and Conway Court Lyminster Avenue Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Trusteel’ (MkII) type houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of Units: 1 (№ 99) Photographic Record: Refer to images 55-56 Site Observations: As noted for single house (№ 97) situated in Carden Hill Middleton Rise Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘BISF’ type (A1) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 6 Photographic Record: Refer to image 46 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Rushlake Road

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Netherfield Green Property Description: 2 storey (terraced) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 17 Photographic Record: Refer to images 67-74 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Heronsdale Road Nettleton Court (Upper Hollingdean Road) Property Description: 15 storey high rise block of flats (Bison Large Panel System) Number of Units: 82 Photographic Record: Refer to images 121-127 Site Observations: As noted for Dudeney Lodge Newells Close Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Reema Hollow Panel’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of units: 8 Photographic Record: None Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Heronsdale Road Normanhurst (Grove Hill) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 33 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted for Saxonbury

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Norwich Close Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Wates’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of units: 5 Photographic Record: Refer to image 137 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Bamford Close Norwich Drive Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Wates’ type PRC houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of units: 14 Photographic Record: Refer to image 138 Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Bamford Close Orchid View Property Description: 3 storey ‘Cornish’ type (I) PRC flats incorporating mansard roof Number of Units: 3 blocks (1-23, 2-24 & 26-60) Photographic Record: Refer to images 9-15 Site Observations: As noted below and for flats situated in Bramble Way

The retaining walls located to the rear of the blocks are notably shorter and do not appear to be suffering to the same extent as noted for Bramble Way.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Parham Close Property Description: 3 storey ‘Cornish’ type (I) PRC flats incorporating mansard roof Number of Units: 2 blocks (1-12 & 13-24) Photographic Record: Refer to image 120 Site Observations: As noted below and for flats situated in Bramble Way

The flats are located in a comparatively sheltered position. Richmond Heights (John Street) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 34 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted for Saxonbury

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Rushlake Road Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘BISF’ type (A1) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 9 Photographic Record: Refer to images 34-44 Site Observations: As noted below


The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external walls (ground floor only) with an insulation and render system. The walls at first floor level have been faced with PVCu shiplap cladding panels.

The original roof coverings have been stripped in favour of them being replaced with a lightweight Decra tile.



What looks to be the original front door canopy has been retained.

The houses are located in a comparatively sheltered position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Saxonbury (Ashton Rise) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 35 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted below


Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free of any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed, although there are some areas of brickwork, more particularly at ground floor level, that would benefit from being re-pointed.

It would appear that the two courses of brickwork (possibly slips), which correspond with the position of the floor slabs, have been removed and rebuilt. At three of the neighbouring blocks, namely Ecclesden, Richmond Heights and Thornsdale, the brickwork directly over the windows has been removed and replaced with what look to be pre-cast units that have been mechanically fixed back to the slab face.

There is evidence to suggest that some concrete repair work will be required to the balcony slabs, specifically where some isolated instances of exposed reinforcement were noted.

The balcony balustrade panels look like they have been renewed in the past, although many of the timber handrails are rotten or warped and will require replacement.


The windows, which have been replaced with double glazed PVCu units, appear to be in serviceable condition.




IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Somerset Point (Somerset Street) Property Description: 14 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 70 Photographic Record: Refer to images 216-238 Site Observations: As noted for St John’s Mount Staplefield Drive Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘BRS Type 4’ houses incorporating flat slab roof Number of units: 4 Photographic Record: Refer to images 131-136 Site Observations: As noted below

The houses appear to have been extensively repaired/refurbished in recent years.


The majority of the neighbouring properties, which are thought to be in private ownership, are present in their original construction form i.e. the rendered no fines external walls remain exposed.


The initial inspection was unable to ascertain whether any repairs have recently been undertaken to the flat roof.

The houses are situated in a comparatively sheltered location.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) St James’ House (High Street) Property Description: 16 storey high rise block of flats (Wates Large Panel System) Number of Units: 100 Photographic Record: Refer to images 130 Site Observations: As noted below

The block appears to have been extensively repaired/refurbished in recent years.

The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external elevations (side walls only) with what appears to be a back ventilated insulated rain-screen cladding system. The overall condition of the cladding would suggest it was installed within the last 5-10 years.

An analysis of the front and rear elevations, which maintain their original appearance, would suggest the underlying side walls consist of storey height pre-cast panels with an exposed aggregate finish.

The storey height pre-cast panels forming the front and rear façades also serve as a frame or lining for the PVCu window units, the latter of which look to have been replaced as part of the refurbishment work.

There is some evidence of these panels having been repaired. Consequently they appear free from any significant defects, certainly there were no visible signs of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled or that the panels are suffering from defective fixings which may either be inadequately spaced or weakened through corrosion.

The mastic joints between these panels appear to be in similarly good order, possibly having been renewed when the cladding work was undertaken.


The block is located in a very exposed position close to the sea front.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) St John’s Mount (Mount Pleasant) Property Description: 14 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 69 Photographic Record: Refer to images 185-203 Site Observations: As noted below

We understand that the access scaffold currently in place has been erected to facilitate operations in connection with the renewal of the existing aluminium curtain walling which encloses the communal stairway.

Notwithstanding the above, the block appears to have been the subject of some repairs in recent years.

The works look to have principally involved removing the two courses of brickwork (possibly slips) which correspond with the position of the floor slabs and replacing these with what look to be pre-cast units that have been mechanically fixed back to the slab face. It would appear that, as part of these repairs, it was necessary to rebuild 4-5 courses of brickwork immediately above and below slab level.

Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free from any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed, indeed there is evidence to suggest that much of the brickwork has been re-pointed and that remedial wall ties have been introduced.

The exposed concrete elements at ground level (columns, floor beams and slab soffits) appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement. The same can be said of the balcony slabs, although some of the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond in places.





IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Swallow Court (Swanborough Rise) Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats (Wates Large Panel System) Number of Units: 51 Photographic Record: Refer to images 75-84 Site Observations: As noted below

The block appears to have been extensively repaired/refurbished in recent years; the tenants questioned suggested circa 2002.

The works look to have principally involved over-cladding the external elevations with what appears to be a back ventilated insulated rain-screen cladding system. Despite being located in a very exposed position, the outward condition of the cladding appears entirely indicative of its age. An analysis of the adjoining block (Kingfisher Court), which is identical albeit present in its original form, would suggest the underlying wall consists of storey height pre-cast concrete panels with an exposed aggregate finish.

It would appear that some concrete repair work has been undertaken to a number of the perimeter columns at ground level as these have been finished with what looks to be a rendered firing coat.

The windows, which appear to be PVCu as opposed to powder coated aluminium, look to be in a serviceable condition. It is thought that their age significantly pre-dates that of the cladding.

The soffits of the balcony slabs appear to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there is little visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement. It is thought that these areas were treated with an anti-carbonation coating as part of the recent repair works.

The steel balcony handrails appear sound although these are loosing their painted coatings. A small number of the georgian wire glass balustrade panels are cracked and in need of replacement.


The block is located in a very exposed position.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Theobald House (Blackman Street) Property Description: 20 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 99 Photographic Record: Refer to images 257-280 Site Observations: As noted below


The works look to have principally involved removing the two courses of brickwork (possibly slips) which correspond with the position of the floor slabs and replacing these with what look to be pre-cast units that have been mechanically fixed back to the slab face.

Outwardly, the external walls (masonry) appear free from any visible structural defects. No significant cracking was observed, indeed there is evidence to suggest that much of the brickwork has been re-pointed and that remedial wall ties have been introduced.

It would appear that some concrete repair work has been undertaken to the raking columns at ground level as these have been finished with what looks to be a rendered firing coat.

The soffits of the balcony slabs appeared to be largely free from any potential defects; certainly there was no visible evidence of any concrete having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement, although some of the protective surface coatings (paint) have begun to de-bond in places.

The original curtain walling, which encloses the communal stairway, has recently been renewed with a new timber and alloy system manufactured by Velfac.



The block is situated in a very exposed position. It is built over a car park that is currently owned and/or operated by NCP.

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Thompson Road Property Description: 2 storey ‘Cornish’ type (II) PRC flats incorporating pitched gable roof Number of Units: 1 block (Flats 2, 4, 10 & 12) Photographic Record: Refer to images 128-129 Site Observations: As noted below

The flats do not appear to have been the subject of any extensive repair and/or refurbishment works.

The PRC external wall panels and columns all appear to be in good outward condition; certainly there was no visible evidence of any concrete columns having cracked and/or spalled as a result of corroded reinforcement.

The gable end walls have been constructed, as opposed to clad, in what appears to be reconstituted stone block.


At flats 10 and 12, the soffits and fascias, which appeared like they may be asbestos, have deteriorated such that they will soon need replacing. The same elements at flats 2 and 4 have been renewed in PVCu.

Outwardly, the roof appears free from any structural defects. No missing or damaged tiles were evident.

The flats are located in a relatively exposed position. Thornsdale (Albion Hill) Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 37 Photographic Record: Refer to images 166-184 Site Observations: As noted for Saxonbury

IMPRESSIONISTIC SURVEY NOTES (Continued) Tyson Place (Grosvenor Street) Property Description: 14 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 62 Photographic Record: Refer to images 185-203 Site Observations: As noted below and for St John’s Mount

Unlike St John’s Mount, the existing aluminium curtain walling system which encloses the communal stairway has not been renewed.

Walmer Crescent Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) ‘Unity’ type (I) PRC houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Number of units: 4 Photographic Record: None Site Observations: As noted for houses situated in Bodiam Avenue Warwick Mount (Montague Street) Property Description: 14 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 63 Photographic Record: Refer to images 216-238 Site Observations: As noted for St John’s Mount Wiltshire House (Lavender Street) Property Description: 17 storey high rise block of flats (Traditional R.C Frame) Number of Units: 96 Photographic Record: Refer to images 204-215 Site Observations: As noted for Hereford Court

APPENDIX E

SCHEDULE OF INSTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS

Brighton & Hove City Council Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS The following information seeks to define the extent of the intrusive or ‘opening up’ work that will undertaken to each of the various property types. Intrusive investigations shall comprise of opening up the building envelope to confirm the form of construction, access any visual defects to the structural elements and obtain concrete samples for chloride ion analysis and where appropriate cement content. Where concrete samples are extracted, measurements will be taken to record reinforcement cover and depth of carbonation. BISF Type (A1) Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: 16 units at Forest Road, Middleton Rise and Rushlake Road Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 3 units (4 Forest Road, 17 Middleton Rise, 72 Rushlake Road) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These houses have all been over-clad

Using a 200mm diameter core drill, carefully cut through the cladding close to DPC level in order to expose the lower sections of the underlying steel frame, preferably at the corners of the property. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 2 № stanchions (bases), which are positioned at approximately 1000mm centres, can be assessed.

Depending on the condition of internal decorative finishes, it may be possible to access the steel frame internally which shall involve cutting out a section of plasterboard.

Access the roof space in order to assess the condition of the steel trusses and the party wall.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Bison (Floor) Blocks: Property Description: 4 storey block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 6 blocks at Dartmouth Crescent and Fitch Drive Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 6 blocks (26-40, 42-56, 58-72 Dartmouth Crescent and 33-47, 49-63, 65-79 Fitch Drive) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These blocks are present in their original construction form

Using a 25mm diameter drill, extract a concrete dust sample from each of the following locations:

4 № from elevated walkways 3 № from communal stairs (1st, 2nd and 3rd Floors) 3 № from communal landing floor (1st, 2nd and 3rd Floors)

Drill a 15mm diameter pilot hole through the face brickwork at 10 № locations (approximately 1000mm above ground level) on one elevation so as to enable an endoscope inspection of the cavities (ties etc).

Drill a 15mm diameter pilot hole through the face of the parapet wall above roof level at 10 № locations on one elevation (whichever is deemed to be the most exposed) so as to enable an endoscope inspection of the cavities (ties etc).

Access the flat roof in order to assess the condition of the coverings.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Bison High Rise Blocks: Property Description: 15 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 2 blocks at Dudeney Lodge and Nettleton Court Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 2 blocks (As identified above) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These blocks have both been partially over-clad


3 № pre-cast wall panels on front and rear elevations 10 № cast in-situ wall panels at ground/basement level

Access the flat roof deck in order to assess the condition of the coverings.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) BRE Type 1-3 Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Property Location: 1 unit at Firle Road Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 unit (17 Firle Road) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: This house is present in its original construction form

Drill a 15mm diameter pilot hole through the face brickwork at 5 № locations on each elevation so as to enable an endoscope inspection of the cavities (ties etc).

Inspect internally for signs of dampness and mould growth.

Access the roof space in order to assess the condition of the principal roof timbers (rafters and purlins) and the party wall.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) BRS Type 4 Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating flat slab roof Property Location: 4 units at Staplefield Drive Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 unit (27 Staplefield Drive) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These houses have all been over-clad


2 № ring beams on front, rear and side elevations 3 № from roof slab


SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey): Property Description: 3 storey (terraced) block of flats incorporating mansard roof Property Location: 10 blocks at Bramble Way, Chelwood Close, Orchid View and Parham Road Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 4 blocks (25-47 Bramble Way, 29-51 Chelwood Close, 2-12 Orchid View, 13-24 Parham Road) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These flats have all been over-clad

Carefully remove face brickwork to form a 450 x 215mm opening in order to expose the underlying wall columns, which are positioned at approximately 900mm centres. Upon exposing the column, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 2 № wall columns on each elevation can be assessed.

Carefully remove face brickwork to form a 450 x 215mm opening at first floor level in order to expose the underlying ring beam. Upon exposing the beam, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 1 № section of ring beam on each elevation can be assessed.

Drill a 15mm diameter pilot hole through the face brickwork at 5 № locations along each elevation so as to enable an endoscope inspection of the cavities (ties etc).

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats (2 Storey): Property Description: 2 storey (terraced) block of flats incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: 2 blocks at Hawkhurst Place and Thompson Road Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (1-4 Hawkhurst Place) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These flats are present in their original construction form


3 № external wall columns on front and rear elevations 2 № ring beam sections at 1st floor level on front and rear elevations

Drill a 15mm diameter pilot hole through the stone blockwork at 5 № locations along each gable end wall so as to enable an endoscope inspection of the cavities (ties etc).


SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) No-Fines Type Flats: Property Description: 3 storey (terraced) block of flats incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: 4 blocks at Donald Hall Road Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (13-35 Donald Hall Road) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These flats are present in their original construction form


2 № balcony slabs at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 2nd floor level 2 № balcony floor beams at 2nd floor level



SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached and terraced) houses incorporating pitched gable roof Property Location: 203 units at Bexhill Road, Cowley Drive, Crespin Way, Heronsdale Road, Laughton Road, Netherfield Green and Newells Close Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 15 units (191, 227, 231, 294, 309 Bexhill Road), (304, 306 Cowley Drive), (4, 6 Heronsdale Road), (1, 7 Laughton Road), (1, 15 Netherfield Green), (2, 8 Newells Close) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These houses have all been over-clad

Using a 200mm diameter core drill carefully cut through the cladding in order to expose the underlying external wall columns. Upon exposing the column, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 2 № columns on each elevation can be assessed.

Carefully lift the floorboards (or cut out a section of ceiling-board if deemed to be easier) in order to expose the concrete beams at first floor level. Upon exposing the beam, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to repeated such that the condition of 3 № floor beams can be assessed.


SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant A): Property Description: 10 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 5 blocks at Clarendon House, Conway Court, Ellen House, Goldstone House and Livingstone House Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (Conway Court) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These blocks are present in their original construction form


6 № columns at ground floor level 6 № downstand floor beams at 1st floor level

Drill a 15mm diameter pilot hole through the face brickwork at 15 № locations (approximately 500mm above floor slab level) so as to enable an endoscope inspection of the cavities (ties etc).


SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant B): Property Description: 12 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 7 blocks at Courtlands, Ecclesden, Highleigh, Normanhurst, Richmond Heights, Saxonbury and Thornsdale Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (Saxonbury) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These blocks are present in their original construction form


3 № balcony slabs at 1st floor level 3 № balcony slabs at 2nd floor level



SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant C): Property Description: 14 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 4 blocks at Somerset Point, St John’s Mount, Tyson Place and Warwick Mount Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (St John’s Mount) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These blocks are present in their original construction form


6 № columns at ground floor level 6 № downstand floor beams at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 2nd floor level



SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant D): Property Description: 17 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 3 blocks at Essex Place, Hereford Court and Wiltshire House Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (Essex Place) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These blocks are present in their original construction form


6 № columns at ground floor level 6 № downstand floor beams at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 2nd floor level 6 № tie beams at roof level



SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Blocks (Variant E): Property Description: 20 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 1 block at Theobald House Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (As identified above) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: This block is present in its original construction form


6 № raking columns at ground floor level 6 № downstand floor beams at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 2nd floor level



SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Trusteel (MkII) Type Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Property Location: 8 units at Carden Hill, Crabtree Avenue and Lyminster Avenue Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 unit (97 Carden Hill) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These houses are present in their original construction form

Carefully remove face brickwork to form a 450 x 215mm opening close to DPC level in order to expose the lower sections of the underlying steel stanchions, preferably at the corners of the property. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 1 № stanchion (base) on each elevation, which are positioned at approximately 900mm centres, can be assessed.

Access the roof space in order to assess the condition of the steel roof members (trusses and cross braces) and the party wall.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Unity Type (I) PRC Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched hipped roof Property Location: 9 units at Bodiam Avenue and Walmer Crescent Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 2 units (8 Bodiam Avenue, 17 Walmer Crescent) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These houses are present in their original construction form

Using a 200mm diameter core drill carefully cut through the cladding in order to expose the underlying external wall panels (which span between columns at approximately 900mm centres) where they abut one another. Upon exposing the panel, extract a single concrete dust sample. At the same location, using a 50mm diameter core drill, cut through the joint in two adjoining panels in order to expose the underlying wall column. Upon exposing the column, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 2 № wall panels and 2 № wall columns on each elevation can be assessed.

Access to the roof space in order to assess the condition of the principal roof timbers (rafters and purlins) and the party wall.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Wates Type PRC Houses: Property Description: 2 storey (semi-detached) houses incorporating pitched gable or hipped roof Property Location: 26 units at Bamford Close, Norwich Close and Norwich Drive Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 3 units (1 Bamford Close, 3 Norwich Close, 127 Norwich Drive) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: These houses have all been over-clad

Using a 200mm diameter core drill carefully cut through the cladding in order to expose the underlying external wall panels where they abut one another. Upon exposing the panel, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 2 № wall panels on each elevation can be assessed.

Using a 200mm diameter core drill carefully cut through the cladding at first floor level in order to expose the underlying ring beam. Upon exposing the ring beam, extract a single concrete dust sample. This exercise needs to be repeated such that the condition of 2 № sections of ring beam on each elevation can be assessed.

Access to the roof space in order to assess the condition of the principal roof timbers (rafters and purlins) and the party wall.

SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Wates High Rise Blocks (Variant A): Property Description: 9-11 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 5 blocks at Falcon Court, Heron Court, Kestrel Court, Kingfisher Court and Swallow Court Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 5 blocks (As identified above) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: With the exception of Kingfisher Court, these blocks have all been over-clad


6 № columns at ground floor level 6 № floor beams at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 1st floor level 2 № balcony slabs at 2nd floor level

At Kingfisher Court only, using a 25mm diameter drill, also extract a concrete dust sample from each of the following locations:

4 № pre-cast wall panels on each elevation


SCHEDULE OF INTRUSIVE INVESTIGATIONS (Continued) Wates High Rise Blocks (Variant B): Property Description: 16 storey high rise block of flats incorporating flat roof Property Location: 1 block at St James’ House Properties designated for ‘opening up’: 1 block (As identified above) Scope of Work: As defined below Special Note: This block has been partially over-clad


8 № pre-cast wall panels on front and rear elevations


APPENDIX F

CONCRETE COVER AND CARBONATION RESULTS

SECTION 1

BISON (FLOOR) BLOCKS OF FLATS

Brighton & Hove City Council Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock

CONCRETE COVER AND CARBONATION TEST RESULTS

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Bison (Floor) Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Dartmouth Crescent (Block 26-40)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 Elevated Walkway Slab 71 1 37




S5 Communal Stairs (1st Floor) 74 10 64

S6 Communal Stairs (2nd Floor) 70 12 42

S7 Communal Stairs (3rd Floor) 47 12 51

S8 Landing Floor Slab (1st Floor) 66 9 34

S9 Landing Floor Slab (2nd Floor) 65 22 30

S10 Landing Floor Slab (3rd Floor) 70 15 38

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

S1-S10 Average depth of carbonation (mm) 8.2

S1-S10 Average depth of concrete cover to reinforcement (mm) 41.3

Brighton & Hove City Council Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise Housing Stock CONCRETE COVER AND CARBONATION TEST RESULTS


Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)











SUMMARY OF RESULTS






Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)











SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Bison (Floor) Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Fitch Drive (Block 33-47)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)











SUMMARY OF RESULTS






Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)











SUMMARY OF RESULTS





Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)











SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 2

BISON HIGH RISE BLOCKS OF FLATS


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Bison High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Dudeney Lodge (Upper Hollingdean Road)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 Precast Wall Panel (Front) 38 15 37



S4 Precast Wall Panel (Rear) 32 15 37



S7 Cast Insitu Wall Panel (End) 41 4 67










CONCRETE COVER AND CARBONATION TEST RESULTS (Continued)

SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Bison High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Nettleton Court (Upper Hollingdean Road)

Sample

No

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 3

BRS TYPE 4 HOUSES


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: BRS Type 4 House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 27 Staplefield Drive

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 Ring Beam (Front) 97 19 71


S3 Ring Beam (Side) 87 24 73


S5 Ring Beam (Rear) 100 13 60


S7 Roof Slab 51 16 23



SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 4

CORNISH TYPE (I) PRC FLATS (3 STOREY)



PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey) PROPERTY ADDRESS: Bramble Way (Block 25-47)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 External Wall Column (Front) 35 1 33


S3 External Wall Column (End) 41 1 31


S5 External Wall Column (Rear) 35 2 34





S10 Ring Beam (End) 47 1 38



SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey) PROPERTY ADDRESS: Chelwood Close (Block 29-51)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)













SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey) PROPERTY ADDRESS: Orchid View (Block 2-12)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)













SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Cornish Type (I) PRC Flats (3 Storey) PROPERTY ADDRESS: Parham Road (Block 13-24)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)













SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 5

CORNISH TYPE (II) PRC FLATS (2 STOREY)


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Cornish Type (II) PRC Flats (2 Storey) PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1-4 Hawkhurst Place

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)











SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 6

NO-FINES TYPE FLATS


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: No-Fines Type Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Donald Hall Road (Block 13-35)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 Balcony Slab (1st Floor) 65 2 28


S3 Balcony Slab (2nd Floor) 89 4 30


S5 Balcony Floor Beam (2nd Floor) 76 9 21

S6 Balcony Floor Beam (2nd Floor) 39 8 34

SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 7

REEMA (HOLLOW PANEL) TYPE PRC HOUSES


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 191 Bexhill Road

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)



S3 External Wall Column (Side) 94 1 64




S7 Floor Beam (1st Floor) 55 55 26



SUMMARY OF RESULTS





Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS






Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 304 Cowley Drive

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 306 Cowley Drive

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4 Heronsdale Road

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 6 Heronsdale Road

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1 Laughton Road

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)









S9 Floor Beam (1st Floor) 53 53+ 14

SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 7 Laughton Road

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1 Netherfield Green

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 15 Netherfield Green

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2 Newells Close

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Reema (Hollow Panel) Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 8 Newells Close

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)










SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 8

TRADITIONAL R.C FRAME HIGH RISE BLOCKS OF FLATS


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Conway Court (Clarendon Road)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 Perimeter Column (Ground Floor) 56 1 38






S7 Downstand Floor Beam (1st Floor) 57 1 29






SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Essex Place (Montague Street)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

















S17 Tie Beam (Roof Level) 55 2 31







SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Saxonbury (Ashton Rise)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)







SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: St John’s Mount (Mount Pleasant)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Traditional R.C Frame High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Theobald House (Blackman Street)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 Raking Column (Ground Floor) 62 3 53

















SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 9

UNITY TYPE (I) PRC HOUSES



PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Unity Type (I) PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 8 Bodiam Avenue

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 External Wall Panel (Front) 45 - -


S3 External Wall Panel (Side) 43 - -


S5 External Wall Panel (Rear) 45 - -








SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Unity Type (I) PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 17 Walmer Crescent

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)













SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 10

WATES TYPE PRC HOUSES



PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1 Bamford Close

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S1 External Wall Panel (Front) 91 1 50


S3 External Wall Panel (Side) 99 2 45


S5 External Wall Panel (Rear) 89 7 45








SUMMARY OF RESULTS





PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 3 Norwich Close

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)













SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates Type PRC House PROPERTY ADDRESS: 127 Norwich Drive

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)













SUMMARY OF RESULTS



SECTION 11

WATES HIGH RISE BLOCKS OF FLATS


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Falcon Court (Swanborough Place)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Heron Court (Swanborough Place)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Kestrel Court (Swanborough Place)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Kingfisher Court (Albourne Close)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)






















PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Kingfisher Court (Albourne Close)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)

S21 Precast Wall Panel (End) 33 0 47












SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: Swallow Court (Swanborough Rise)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS




PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Wates High Rise Block of Flats PROPERTY ADDRESS: St James’ House (High Street)

Sample

№

Element/Location

Depth of

Hole (mm)

Depth of

Carbonation (mm)

Depth of

Cover (mm)


















SUMMARY OF RESULTS



APPENDIX G

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS AND CERTIFICATES

SECTION 1

BISON (FLOOR) BLOCKS OF FLATS

SECTION 2

BISON HIGH RISE BLOCKS OF FLATS

SECTION 3

BRS TYPE 4 HOUSES

SECTION 4

CORNISH TYPE (I) PRC FLATS (3 STOREY)

SECTION 5

CORNISH TYPE (II) PRC FLATS (2 STOREY)

SECTION 6

NO-FINES TYPE FLATS

SECTION 7

REEMA (HOLLOW PANEL) TYPE PRC HOUSES

SECTION 8

TRADITIONAL R.C FRAME HIGH RISE BLOCKS OF FLATS

SECTION 9

UNITY TYPE (I) PRC HOUSES

SECTION 10

WATES TYPE PRC HOUSES

SECTION 11

WATES HIGH RISE BLOCKS OF FLATS

APPENDIX H

BIBLIOGRAPHY

References

BRE Digest 405 – Carbonation of concrete and its effects on durability Building Research Establishment (1995)

BRE Report 35 – The structural condition of Cornish unit houses Building Research Establishment (1983)

BRE Report 38 – The structural condition of Unity houses Building Research Establishment (1983)

BRE Report 39 – The structural condition of Wates houses Building Research Establishment (1983)

BRE Report 53 – The structural condition of Reema hollow panel system houses Building Research Establishment (1984)

BRE Report 77 – The British Iron & Steel Federation steel framed house Building Research Establishment (1986)

BRE Report 107 – The structural adequacy of large panel system dwellings Building Research Establishment (1987)

BRE Report 116 – Reema large panel system dwellings: constructional details Building Research Establishment (1987)

BRE Report 118 – Bison large panel system dwellings: constructional details Building Research Establishment (1988)

BRE Report 146 – Trusteel Mk II steel framed houses Building Research Establishment (1989)

BRE Report 153 – The structural condition of Wimpey No-Fines low rise dwellings Building Research Establishment (1989)

BRE Report 160 – No Fines houses Building Research Establishment (1989)

BRE Report 161 – BRS Type 4 houses Building Research Establishment (1989)

BRE Report 275 – The structural condition of early cast-in-situ low rise dwellings Building Research Establishment (1996)

Industrialised Building 2 – 50 International Methods R.M.E Diamant in collaboration with The Architect & Building News (1965)

References (Continued)

Non-Traditional Houses – Identifying Non-Traditional Houses in the UK 1918-1975 Building Research Establishment (2004)

The Comprehensive Industrialised Building Systems Annual – 1966 A.F.L Deeson (1966)

The Comprehensive Industrialised Building Systems Annual – 1967 A.F.L Deeson (1967)

Tower Block – Modern Public Housing in England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland Glendinning and Mathesius (1994)

APPENDIX I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Acknowledgements Curtins Consulting Engineers would like to thank the following principal suppliers and

specialist contractors, more particularly their representatives, for the assistance they have each willingly afforded in attending to our enquiries. Their technical input is of considerable importance to a study of this nature. Accordingly their contribution, both in terms of time and expertise, is very much valued by ourselves.

Austins Cradles Ltd Unit 7, Sussex House Business Park, 270 Old Shoreham Road, Hove, BN3 7DX Contact: Mr Tim Austin

CAP Aluminium Systems Ltd Systems House, Spon Lane, West Bromwich, West Midlands, B70 6AA Contact: Mr Andrew Humphries

Keim Mineral Paints Ltd Muckley Cross, Moreville, Near Bridgenorth, Shropshire, WV16 4RR Contact: Mr Stuart Ford

Makers (UK) Ltd Building 3, Rye Hill Office Park, Birmingham Road, Allesley, Coventry, CV5 9AB Contact: Mr Rob Bowman

Ruberoid Building Products Apply Lane North, Apply Bridge, Wigan, Lancashire, WN6 9AB Contact: Mr Steve Biggs

Structherm Building Systems Bent Ley Road, Meltham, Holmfirth, West Yorkshire, HD9 4AP Contact: Mr Julian Taylor

Trespa International BV Grosvenor House, Hollinswood Road, Central Park, Telford, Shropshire, TF2 9TW Contact: Mr Maurice Davies

Documents

Structural Appraisal of Non-Traditional and High Rise