Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

greenbuildingadvisor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 282 posts

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#101

Post by WalterBright »

Bank buildings built before 1929 tend to be massive masonry structures with greek columns, marble, etc. Ones build later tend to be cracker boxes in strip malls.

My theory is that the older banks needed to impress their clients with stability, conservativeness, safety, responsibility, etc. After FDIC, customers looked to the government for that, and so banks no longer needed to spend the money on the building.

The massive, glittering vaults are sadly gone now, too. The money exists as data on a server somewhere, little need for a vault.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#102

Post by trgn »

Retric wrote: post #10

Survivorship bias is a really important caveat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias Many cheap brick buildings from 100 years ago are gone, where the high quality ones are more likely to remain. Also, steel Lintel are often used over windows in brick buildings. They don't last as long, but are fine for cheap construction that is not expected to last. AKA the kinds of building that are unlikely to be aroun…

Not when it comes to this particular issue: build quality between 1800s and today has declined.

If anything, a whole bunch of perfectly decent old buildings have been torn down. Because they were no longer of any use (prolonged vacancy is the worst for any building), not because they were falling apart.

Somewhat of a tangent. Good architecture has three properties: it's useful, it's robust, and it's beautiful. That's a three-legged stool from antiquity, and I firmly believe architects and builders sat on it for centuries. Modernism was an ideological project that discarded two of these legs: only utility was important. the pursuit of beauty was either for old-regime bourgeois or for unenlightened proles, and robustness was not all that necessary for the beancounters anyway, eternity is not a concept for the godless machine age.

Is is also fairly recent that the architect needed to take on all aspects of architecture. For example, architecture training was often taught in the fine arts faculties. The structural issues then were then taken on by the master-builder. It worked, the latter had a wealth of experiential knowledge, an architect didn't need to tell him how to frame a window, or ensure water didn't drip along the wall. The architect becoming first a licensed professional in need to defend his title, then some sort of artist willing a new pristine creation in the world, claimed more and more roles. Now every detail needs to be in the plan almost, less room for correction by skilled craftsmen (who also are thinning out..).

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#103

Post by CPLX »

yetanotheracc wrote: post #99
carsongross wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the "survivor bias" argument is that it allows for a lazy denial of actual trends in things: sometimes stuff does get worse. The same applies to "every generation thinks the next generation is horrible". That may or may not be true, but sometimes there are horrible generations.

> but sometimes there are horrible generations. What do you mean?

I'm not sure what he meant either.

But it might be this: https://www.reddit.com/r/ledootgeneration/

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#104

Post by redcalx »

nikatwork wrote: post #89
computer wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ceiling heights of 7 feet? Are you sure? Many tall people would only just fit upright...

7' is accurate for many new Housing Estate houses eg AV Jennings. The buildings all look similar except for roof color. It's very disorientating. My house is 1860s with a 12' ceiling. Those other places feel like claustrophobic rabbit holes in comparison. Low ceilings minimize material costs and maximize profits.

> Low ceilings minimize material costs and maximize profits.

They also minimise heat loss, which is strictly regulated in the UK. Hence that other annoying feature of many modern build - tiny windows.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#105

Post by sitkack »

marincounty wrote: post #46
Joeri wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4. The 19th century buildings which were shoddily built (the majority) have been torn down. It's the same bias that makes people claim old appliances were built better than modern ones. The article's author is not wrong. The average 1980's brickwork building is built less well than the average 100 year old building. However, 100 years ago buildings probably were built worse on average than today. Both of those statem…

People used to be able to repair old appliances. Now, they basically last two years(durable good), and we throw it out. I'll take repairability, over modern, in appliances, and even automobiles. I used to be able to fix my appliances; I just throw them away now. I wonder what the net cost is to the enviornment? I currently have a dryer that never stops beeping. A washer that never really cleaned clothes, but only use…

I was renting a place that had a washer and dryer set from the early 60s. It worked wonderfully, until one day the washer wouldn't cycle properly. I tore it apart and there was a stack of plastic gears that ran the state machine for the various cycles, one them was worn.

I didn't have the means in 2000 to disassemble the gear pack and a replacement couldn't be found and god I tried. The land lords endedup scrapping both machines and replacing it with shoddy new stuff that didn't work as well. A total shame.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#106

Post by dnautics »

ItsDeathball wrote: post #71
dnautics wrote: post #49

I saw this brickwork on a building in nyc's financial district on a building maybe around 50-100 years old. https://plus.google.com/111337360985340071974/posts/KkDyX34u...

That's structural brick covered in stucco, which was pretty common in American cities in the 18th and 19th centuries. You see it a lot in areas with low-quality clay, since the resulting brick is porous and brittle, necessitating a stucco covering to protect it from the elements and not look awful. It might not be poor construction, just ugly because it's not intended to ever be seen. Of course, by design the stucco…

Did you zoom in on the brick underneath? It's helter skelter.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#107

Post by Spooky23 »

Retric wrote: post #10

Survivorship bias is a really important caveat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias Many cheap brick buildings from 100 years ago are gone, where the high quality ones are more likely to remain. Also, steel Lintel are often used over windows in brick buildings. They don't last as long, but are fine for cheap construction that is not expected to last. AKA the kinds of building that are unlikely to be aroun…

No way. Talk to anyone involved in construction.

Every component in a building today save plumbling, windows and electric is inferior to its complement in 1915. The bricks are of lower quality (to the point there is a thriving market for used bricks), the wood is garbage, and quality of labor has shifted from skilled craftsmanship to glorified assembly work.

My home was built in 1927 as a cheap starter home (upstairs was delivered unfinished for buildout when the owners had kids). It's build quality today would only be seen in a custom home with a very wealthy/particular owner and cost a minimum of $750k. (Current value of my home is around $250k)

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#108

Post by beardicus »

WalterBright wrote: post #101

Bank buildings built before 1929 tend to be massive masonry structures with greek columns, marble, etc. Ones build later tend to be cracker boxes in strip malls. My theory is that the older banks needed to impress their clients with stability, conservativeness, safety, responsibility, etc. After FDIC, customers looked to the government for that, and so banks no longer needed to spend the money on the building. The ma…

> After FDIC, customers looked to the government for that

Or an alternate theory: bank owners used to be local businesspeople, who would have been (rightly) embarrassed and ashamed to erect a shoddy and short-lived structure in their hometown. Now banks are at least regional, if not national or global, and care more about saving a few pennies for shareholders than they do about the communities they inhabit.

Combine this with the fact that consumers and "fellow citizens" don't give a crap about good buildings and good urbanism, and here we are with crackerbox drivethrough shite that nobody gives a damn about because it'll be bulldozed in 30 years, after a brief stint as a laser tag venue.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#109

Post by old-gregg »

The quality of modern construction (not necessarily brick) is a big pet peeve of mine and something I keep looking for answers.

The way I see it, some time right after WWII, people in US suddenly decided to live in a poorly built and ugly looking dwellings regardless of their income level. It is especially easy to see when looking at NYC buildings, some rentals are even explicitly advertized as "pre-war".

Examples of annoying trends in modern construction:

  - Low "hobbit" ceilings. 
  - Short door frames.
  - Tiny windows.
  - Nearly non-existent noise/vibration insulation
Even looking at materials used for construction today, I can't figure out why everyone thinks that drywall-on-sticks is acceptable? Literally every multi-story home I've been in felt hollow and shaky if you jump on the 2nd floor because there's no mass anywhere.

This is clearly not a cost issue, I have taken tours looking at brand-new multi-MM homes in Austin, TX just for fun. While they all had top-notch appliances, finishes and a gazilion of square feet and bedrooms, they were also built using the same "toy" materials and used generally similar architectural patters as middle class homes.

What caused this change? It's like our collective mind suddenly stopped caring about tall doors, 10ft ceilings and solid feel of floors we walk on.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#110

Post by everyone »

finnh wrote: post #83
everyone wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a good article but I think the authors assignment of blame is misplaced. In my opinion the reason contemporary brick construction is not up to par with 100 year old brick construction is the same reason contemporary washing machines are not up to the standard of washing machines 100 years ago: The emphasis in making things now is on speed and cheapness, the emphasis 100 years ago was on quality. The college…

I will gladly trade a 100 year old washing machine (rusty and hand-powered, I assume) for a Miele. I'm sure you have an argument here, but I don't see how washing machines further it.

You assume too much. Also this article is addressing the construction quality and longevity of brick facades. I was referencing the construction quality and longevity of washing machines, pre-war vs modern.

https://youtu.be/baFaEvBywGc?t=22m40s

Post reply on HN