Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 171

Thread: Housing Mistakes

  1. #106
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    CDS have done a good job, our properties are now receiving regular maintenance, no complaints there. The previous landlord LCC, let the properties decline
    The Pinehurst estate looks great now since it got done up.
    I know every inch of it - went to Pinehurst infants and juniors, then in later years walked every inch of it every day with my dogs

  2. #107
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    72
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    It does look nice, Lindylou. The community is great, too. There are some problems but nothing like TV portrays ( "Shameless" for instance). Some people's stance on social housing is incomprehensible to me. Still, it takes all sorts to make up this little world.
    Regards,
    Chas

  3. #108
    Senior Member gregs dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    kirkby
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    Where is Kirby estate Peter? ,If you mean Kirkby, Knowsley council demolished the badly designed flats on Tower Hill, and then after so many years, the second phase houses on the estate have since been turned around so the front of the houses became the back, They look like houses now instead of barracks.
    Was this not the architect`s fault ?
    THE BEST VITAMIN FOR MAKING FRIENDS ? B.1

    My Flickr site: www.flickr.com/photos/exacta2a/

    http://flickrhivemind.net/User/exacta2a

  4. #109
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    It does look nice, Lindylou. The community is great, too. There are some problems but nothing like TV portrays ( "Shameless" for instance). Some people's stance on social housing is incomprehensible to me. Still, it takes all sorts to make up this little world.
    Regards,
    Chas
    When I was going to school throughout 1960s, I remember walking along tidy roads with the nicely kept gardens with lilac trees, etc, I always remember the roads being peaceful and quiet, and I don't recall seeing any 'scruffy' gardens. People may have had more pride in their homes and the estate was quiet and 'respectable' in those days .. there was certainly no gangs of 'scalls' in those days!
    In later years - probably late 80s 1990s' era would you say? ..a few troublesome families had moved in and spoiled the estate somewhat. (but best not to go into too much detail about that!)
    But now things are much improved and Pinehurst estate is looking smart again. I've always loved the avenue with the trees - it's ones of the nicest roads in the district along with tree lined Utting ave, and always a pleasure to stroll down there and see lovely kept gardens and houses.

    The question is, why are some council estates pleasant and yet others are frankly just awful!?
    Is it the type of people who are housed that make or break a place ?
    I've seen small council estates in north Wales, some around Lancashire, and some I've visited in Cheshire, - all pleasant and respectable places to live. I have family who have lived since the 1950s in Maghull's council belt - it is still a nice enough area - not saying it's Utopia perfection - but nothing too drastic to make you want to avoid the place! I don't see tinned up houses, burned out cars or filthy grot spots there.
    What is the difference with these estates? If you were choosing a place to live why would we choose some areas yet avoid others like the plague? It's because some places are perfectly acceptable civilised places to live, yet others are like hell holes you wouldn't put your dog to live in.

    ps, Chas, I know there is a good community on the Pinehurst estate I know quite a few people from there.

  5. #110
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    Hi Peter,
    I honestly can't find your answer to the Boswell before Sunday's post. If it was posted I do apologize for bringing it up again,
    I've said before that I'm no expert. When I asked what an architects responsibilities were it was a genuine query.
    I'd assume that our estate was conceived by an architect, why were half the houses Boswell structures? I wouldn't expect the architect to specify every little detail, and the Boswell built houses only showed structural flaws after WW11. Was this just a "cost" cut that went wrong. My reference to learning from the mistakes of the past still stands.
    I already know the problems of Boswell housing (too well). CDS have done a good job, our properties are now receiving regular maintenance, no complaints there. The previous landlord LCC, let the properties decline, how can the tenants take the blame for the problems that came with Boswell houses? I can itemize a lot of these from personal experiences, but to what point?. I'm quite happy to leave Boswell out of the discussion from now on.
    Your thread is called "Housing Mistakes" - I feel that I may have be taking it too literally. I've read each post and there are lots you say that I agree with, but.....there are a lot I don't.
    Your views on the Radcliffe estate are totally beyond belief. Serious question. Were you involved at all with the estate's construction?
    I'll bring up the problems of the other estates in separate posts if you agree, I'm not knocking and running away.
    Chas
    Well ‘A. I’m not on staff here you know. You'll have to take it as you get it I’m afraid. I do have a living to get. You asked about Boswell. I answered within half an hour of getting in. You asked what an architect does and I answered as succinctly as I could. I could take up a book with it. Many have.

    ***

    I don’t even know which houses you’re talking about. I assume it’s the Boot Estate. All I’ve got is a load of unsubstantiated accusations.

    And no one is obliged to use an architect in this country. Why would you assume that the estate was conceived by an architect and if it was, why would you assume that he chose to have only half the houses done one way?

    Are you telling me that you thought about buying a house and you didn’t know who had put it together or whether it passed building regulations or even whether it had planning permission or even, whether there were any other problems? You live there for chrissake.

    And who said the corrosion was the tenants’ fault? No-one. Read it back.

    Nevertheless if the corrosion was the only problem (which I believe it was - if it wasn’t, you tell me different), it’s been fixed (as I said) and people are happy with them and the fixing of them. Do you want to disagree?

    Then you’re sliding off in to accusing LCC of bad management. Was that the architect’s fault as well? Give me a break. You might be happy to leave Boswell out of it, but I’m not. Too easy mate - way too easy. That is knock and run. Come on, substantiate your claims.

    Let’s have your personal experiences of how some callous architect did you so wrong.

    ***

    Similarly with the Radcliffe. Why would I have to be involved to defend it? (Again, I think I was about 10 when they were built).

    All I’ve heard here is that it was cr*p and it’s the architect’s fault. No-one’s said why. Not really - one person has mentioned parking being a hundred yards away, oh dear. And someone else mentioned rat runs. So?

    I’ve told you what the view of the problems were reported to be at the time and you say that’s ‘totally beyond belief’. Why? You tell me why. You’re the one slinging the mud!

    What actually were the problems? I’m sorry but you’re going to have to put up if you want any hope of answers. You can’t just throw place names out and say bah! Was it even designed by an architect?

    So, let’s hear it. After all that is the point of the thread. That’s why I started it - to learn something if something was to be learned!

    ***

    And since we’re having a go - I don’t understand why you should accept only half of what I say. Both halves come from the same point of view.

    Do I have to assume that you agree when I have a go at government and the banks and you disagree when I say tenants should be just as responsible as landlords?



    ---------- Post added at 11:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by gregs dad View Post
    Where is Kirby estate Peter? ,If you mean Kirkby, Knowsley council demolished the badly designed flats on Tower Hill, and then after so many years, the second phase houses on the estate have since been turned around so the front of the houses became the back, They look like houses now instead of barracks.
    Was this not the architect`s fault ?
    I've no idea mate. It was one that Chasevans listed.

    But do tell about Tower Hill. What was the problem there (apart from prettiness)? Why would you call them "badly designed"?




    ---------- Post added at 11:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by lindylou View Post
    When I was going to school throughout 1960s, I remember walking along tidy roads with the nicely kept gardens with lilac trees, etc, I always remember the roads being peaceful and quiet, and I don't recall seeing any 'scruffy' gardens. People may have had more pride in their homes and the estate was quiet and 'respectable' in those days .. there was certainly no gangs of 'scalls' in those days!
    In later years - probably late 80s 1990s' era would you say? ..a few troublesome families had moved in and spoiled the estate somewhat. (but best not to go into too much detail about that!)
    But now things are much improved and Pinehurst estate is looking smart again. I've always loved the avenue with the trees - it's ones of the nicest roads in the district along with tree lined Utting ave, and always a pleasure to stroll down there and see lovely kept gardens and houses.

    The question is, why are some council estates pleasant and yet others are frankly just awful!?
    Is it the type of people who are housed that make or break a place ?
    I've seen small council estates in north Wales, some around Lancashire, and some I've visited in Cheshire, - all pleasant and respectable places to live. I have family who have lived since the 1950s in Maghull's council belt - it is still a nice enough area - not saying it's Utopia perfection - but nothing too drastic to make you want to avoid the place! I don't see tinned up houses, burned out cars or filthy grot spots there.
    What is the difference with these estates? If you were choosing a place to live why would we choose some areas yet avoid others like the plague? It's because some places are perfectly acceptable civilised places to live, yet others are like hell holes you wouldn't put your dog to live in.

    ps, Chas, I know there is a good community on the Pinehurst estate I know quite a few people from there.
    All good questions.

    This is weird. Someone kicking Kirkby and praising it at the same time...

  6. #111
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    72
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Peter, You were the person who said you'd live on the Radcliffe estate, I stated a personal view that there were damp~mold problems from the start. You had previously had a go at the tenants of "trouble" estates. I took the opportunity to stick up for them.
    I am blaming architects for the concept that you can plant a "Cornish village" on any piece of "wasteland". The estate may have looked red hot **** on some architects drawing board but it was just a cold, dark turd in reality.
    If you reply to this post, remember, a pit bull locks indefinitely.
    Chas

    • Not as weird as following your posts.



    ---------- Post added at 01:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 AM ----------

    Memories of Stanley Park and Toxteth?

  7. #112

    Default

    In the sixties we were offered a corporation house in Macketts Lane or Cantril Farm because of Slum Clearance in Liverpool 5. My parents went and had a look and decided they didn't want to live in either place ( You were given a choice of three places at the time ) They had a look at houses for sale and chose one in West Derby. The house was three thousand pounds with a four hundred pound deposit and fifteen pounds a month for twenty five years.
    After paying a pound a week it was a big increase and just a bit more than the corporation rent would have been down Macketts Lane.They stayed in the house paid off the mortgage and houses in the road are selling for between 160 to 190 thousand pounds now. The neighbour who went to Halewood is still paying rent.

  8. #113
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    Peter, You were the person who said you'd live on the Radcliffe estate, I stated a personal view that there were damp~mold problems from the start. You had previously had a go at the tenants of "trouble" estates. I took the opportunity to stick up for them.
    I am blaming architects for the concept that you can plant a "Cornish village" on any piece of "wasteland". The estate may have looked red hot **** on some architects drawing board but it was just a cold, dark turd in reality.
    If you reply to this post, remember, a pit bull locks indefinitely.
    Chas

    • Not as weird as following your posts.



    ---------- Post added at 01:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 AM ----------

    As I said and from what I've seen of the Radcliffe Estate, I would have lived on in it. I'm asking what was wrong with it. In fact I lived somewhere very similar at one time (not in Liverpool... or Cornwall) and it was fine.

    You have a 'personal view' about mould. Is that what you've heard or can you substantiate it? Was it widespread or just one house? Was it fixable? Was it fixed?

    Who knows what it looked like on 'some architects' drawing board but it doesn't help to just call it a cold, dark turd and run off again.

    Again, what is it that's 'weird' about following the posts? What use is it to sit there just barking (like a pit bull)?


    ---------- Post added at 07:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:33 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Doris Mousdale View Post
    In the sixties we were offered a corporation house in Macketts Lane or Cantril Farm because of Slum Clearance in Liverpool 5. My parents went and had a look and decided they didn't want to live in either place ( You were given a choice of three places at the time ) They had a look at houses for sale and chose one in West Derby. The house was three thousand pounds with a four hundred pound deposit and fifteen pounds a month for twenty five years.
    After paying a pound a week it was a big increase and just a bit more than the corporation rent would have been down Macketts Lane.They stayed in the house paid off the mortgage and houses in the road are selling for between 160 to 190 thousand pounds now. The neighbour who went to Halewood is still paying rent.
    So your parents paid a total of £4,500 (plus maintenance and rates) for a house that's now worth £160k to £190k. The question is, is that a good thing or a bad thing?

    They couldn't get hold of that 'wealth' while they lived in it. It didn't make them any richer in fact.

    And today, it would probably need a deposit of £50,000 and a mortgage of about a £1000 a month or even £60,000 and £1200 to buy it. £1200 would be about 60% of a gross average wage! Take off tax an NI and that would leave about £70 a week for everything else!

    And that money wouldn't make the new owners much 'wealthier' either. 60% of at least one wage (don't have kids whatever you do!) would go to the bank. Yum yum they say. And then there's that £50k to £60k to find...

    And any changes in those lending 'rules', just makes it more possible for people to pay more money to banks!

    Meanwhile, anyone new moving into a similar council house (maybe on Macketts lane) would be paying about what on average? £64 a week (Office of National Statistics)?

  9. #114
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    72
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    As I said and from what I've seen of the Radcliffe Estate, I would have lived on in it. I'm asking what was wrong with it. In fact I lived somewhere very similar at one time (not in Liverpool... or Cornwall) and it was fine.



    You have a 'personal view' about mould. Is that what you've heard or can you substantiate it? Was it widespread or just one house? Was it fixable? Was it fixed?

    Who knows what it looked like on 'some architects' drawing board but it doesn't help to just call it a cold, dark turd and run off again.

    Again, what is it that's 'weird' about following the posts? What use is it to sit there just barking (like a pit bull)?

    Hi Peter,
    I'll try to put it as simply as I can.
    I only knew one family who lived there, a young married couple and one child. The dampness and creeping mold were there while the estate was new. I believe there were other neighbours experiencing the same problems.
    I'm not qualified to say if it was fixable and I accept that new builds have teething problems, I can tell you the damp started from the roof "area" in my friend's house. General impressions were that the design of the houses was at fault.
    My impression of the estate - At night the "higglety pigglety" ill lit narrow streets resembled the dark courts of the Everton area. This estate stood in an area of dereliction, no local shopping facilities (unless you count a couple of petrol stations), no schools, youth clubs or anything that binds communities together. The estate became known locally as a muggers paradise - I think this was a little bit of Liverpool wit. I don't recall any muggings or crimes at all in my visits to the estate. Another case of give a dog a bad name and it sticks?
    I said your posts. I don't know you, but your posts ramble on. "Empty vessels make the most sound."
    Chas

  10. #115

    Default

    I wonder if in the future the architects who were responsible for designing poorly thought through housing estates that had a negative psychological impact on the people who had little choice but to live in them, will be seen in the same light as we now see psychiatrists who medicated political prisoners in the gulags: just concerned about getting their pay-check rather than the consequences of what they were dishing out?

    Extreme, I know, but I went to see the Florrie over the weekend and just round the corner is an extremely badly designed block of flats that on top of it all has been badly maintained by the council or housing association - soul destroying.

  11. #116
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doris Mousdale View Post
    They stayed in the house paid off the mortgage and houses in the road are selling for between 160 to 190 thousand pounds now. The neighbour who went to Halewood is still paying rent.
    So they have given your mother indirectly a windfall. That is the case i all rent vs owning land. Your mother's house, the bricks dropping in price, like a car, it was the land that increased in value.

    This explains it well:

    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  12. #117
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    Hi Peter,
    I'll try to put it as simply as I can.
    I only knew one family who lived there, a young married couple and one child. The dampness and creeping mold were there while the estate was new. I believe there were other neighbours experiencing the same problems.
    I'm not qualified to say if it was fixable and I accept that new builds have teething problems, I can tell you the damp started from the roof "area" in my friend's house. General impressions were that the design of the houses was at fault.
    My impression of the estate - At night the "higglety pigglety" ill lit narrow streets resembled the dark courts of the Everton area. This estate stood in an area of dereliction, no local shopping facilities (unless you count a couple of petrol stations), no schools, youth clubs or anything that binds communities together. The estate became known locally as a muggers paradise - I think this was a little bit of Liverpool wit. I don't recall any muggings or crimes at all in my visits to the estate. Another case of give a dog a bad name and it sticks?
    I said your posts. I don't know you, but your posts ramble on. "Empty vessels make the most sound."
    Chas
    I'll put as simply as I can. Why do you persist in attacking the man and not the argument?

    If you can't or don't want to follow the posts or think they ramble on, why don't you ask a question? On the one hand you say you agree with half of it, on the other you say they ramble on and that they're 'empty vessels'. I wonder why you bother.

    ***

    With respect to the 'design' of the Radcliffe... who can say at this stage whether the damp was a design fault, faulty materials or poor workmanship? As I said earlier (when I was rambling on), the architect is not responsible for the failure of a product to live up to it's guarantee or the workmanship of the contractor. So in this one example, did the people you know say whether it was fixed or not?

    The provision of shops etc was clearly not in what the architect (we still don't know if there was one) was asked to do (the 'brief'). Would you expect him to build stuff that there was no money to pay the contractor for?

    With respect to the layout - as I said, I've lived in 'higgledy piggledy' houses with narrow walkways and it was fine, even great. You said there was no actual muggings despite it being called a mugger's paradise. So exactly what criticism are you trying to make? That is was like a court house? I don't think so.

    The houses themselves were built to the building regulations. So they had enough light and they had enough heat. The distance between buildings are regulated too. Which of these rules were broken then?

    They were also built to a cost. A cost that the tenants could afford.

    So in summary the architect (if there was one) designed houses that met the brief, the building regulations and were affordable in a layout that is also regulated and works elsewhere. We have to assume that any defect in detailing, supply or workmanship was fixable (because they all are - regardless of cost because that's how building contracts and insurance work).

    What more could he do? How much control do you think he has? If he breaks any of the 'rules', he does it again until it doesn't break the rules.

    Then you have to wonder what the difference was that gave it the reputation for crime (see above comments about being 'un-policeable'), the general declined to the point of boarding up houses, rubbish in the streets and the costs of maintenance became such that they were pulled down. Do you not?

    In the face of all that, it's just too easy to say him! that there architect! he did it! Isn't it?


    ---------- Post added at 04:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:47 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Big where it matters View Post
    I wonder if in the future the architects who were responsible for designing poorly thought through housing estates that had a negative psychological impact on the people who had little choice but to live in them, will be seen in the same light as we now see psychiatrists who medicated political prisoners in the gulags: just concerned about getting their pay-check rather than the consequences of what they were dishing out?

    Extreme, I know, but I went to see the Florrie over the weekend and just round the corner is an extremely badly designed block of flats that on top of it all has been badly maintained by the council or housing association - soul destroying.
    I don't know a single architect who doesn't care for what he does and the social effect it has. Not one. And do you think he's paid for worrying about it? He most certainly is not.

    He's paid to do a job, just like a plumber or a bricklayer. Do you think a bricklayer has even a passing thought for the social consequences of what he's doing? No, he's paid to lay bricks. That's ok.

    ***

    Again, you tell me what was wrong (or even just where it is and I'll have a go at finding out) and I'll try to give you an answer. I know you're desperate for someone to blame but you have to state your case.

    And try not to roll poor maintenance into 'badly designed'...then we could have a decent discussion about housing mistakes instead of let's batter some architect week.

  13. #118
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    72
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big where it matters View Post
    I wonder if in the future the architects who were responsible for designing poorly thought through housing estates that had a negative psychological impact on the people who had little choice but to live in them, will be seen in the same light as we now see psychiatrists who medicated political prisoners in the gulags: just concerned about getting their pay-check rather than the consequences of what they were dishing out?

    Extreme, I know, but I went to see the Florrie over the weekend and just round the corner is an extremely badly designed block of flats that on top of it all has been badly maintained by the council or housing association - soul destroying.
    I'm not mobile anymore, I guess you mean the Florence Institute? Did you manage to get any pics?
    Thanks for the update.

    Chas

  14. #119
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    72
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Thanks for being little more concise in your post, I'll be even briefer.

    1. I wasn't aware that I was attacking anything, Peter. Anyway, I'm back on the tag now.

    2. I've asked questions and got some answers, more than I could imagine.. I think you misunderstand my "empty vessels make the most sound" reference completely. (?)

    3. Your thread is called " Housing Mistakes" isn't it? I followed it to the posts where you started the rant about unpoliceable areas ~ TV's being thrown from high rise flats etc. You revealed yourself in your true colours- a twopence ha'penny sno* with dangerous ideas. I bother to reply because your ideas bother me.
    PROBABLY PETER WILL DISMISS HIS AS ENVIOUS!!!!!!!
    It's gone from kick the can to pass the buck in Peter's thread.
    Going for my tea,


    Back again with another question. What is the real purpose of architects? Money crops up so many times in the posts. Please don't go back to the obeying rules and regulations speel, indicating others in badly designed housing.
    (re. Radcliffe. I think the family I knew were rehoused qute locally. Radcliffe was a disgrace. If it was a result of cutting costs Liverpool taxpayers paid for it eventually. The speculaters and carpet baggers are at it again.
    PEEL HOLDINGS SPOKESMAN SAYS HE'LL WALK IF THERE'S A PUBLIC INQUIRY. F*CK HIM says Chas)
    All along the watchtower,
    Chas
    Last edited by chasevans; 03-13-2012 at 10:47 PM. Reason: T's over

  15. #120
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    The problem was the planning system - only 7.7% of the land in the UK is settled. This created an artificial land shortage ratcheting up land prices. This put houses out of reach of low income people, meaning the state had to intervene. But they were also strapped by the same constraints, so cheap and nasty estates appeared.

    All because of planning and land.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Terraced Housing In Liverpool
    By Bob Edwards in forum Bob Edwards' Liverpool Picture Book
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-05-2013, 09:15 AM
  2. Court Housing in Liverpool
    By Bob Edwards in forum Bob Edwards' Liverpool Picture Book
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2012, 11:41 AM
  3. Eldon Grove Housing
    By Kev in forum Buildings and Structures
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 11:31 PM
  4. Insanitary Housing Images
    By Kev in forum In My Liverpool Home
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-07-2009, 02:37 PM
  5. cathedral &housing
    By gregs dad in forum Buildings and Structures
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 08:34 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •