Cornerstone Licencee,Future Homes NZ wins 2 NZ NATIONAL AWARDS

listed by Enviro Pal

Rubbish 

This is why this country will continue to have problems with leaking homes. When the so called 'establishment' give an awards to a piece of rotting s....t like this.

I have no time for idiots who buy crap like this and in 5-10 years time complain because they have to spend 100's of thousands fixing, or rebuilding their homes. It's a simple case of supply and demand. If idiots stop buying this rubbish, then even bigger idiots would no longer build them.
They have had problems in North America since the mid eighties with rotten houses and yet we are still constructing cheap and nasty spray-on cardboard homes here. Why? greed. People see these large homes and want more, more..... space. But being cheap and nasty little kiwis, don't want to pay, so they continue to buy rubbish houses. There should be some legal clause, that states if you want to spend your hard earned money on rottting spray-on homes then you will have no right to complain when it falls apart.............idiots.

Re: Rubbish 

If they would spend less time giving all those "awards" to themself for their own rubbish they have built and learn how to build properly with proper materials we would not see so many cold, damp unhealthy and leaky homes in this country.
I bet that the poorly insulating windows are supplied by NU-look why else would it get their award :-(
The level of incompetence, deception and misleading is just incredible in the NZ building industry :-(

Re: Rubbish 

Anonymous - can you please explain why this house is as you describe?

Re: Rubbish 

Hello anon,

You are right - you are talking RUBBISH.

You cannot tell the difference between an 'Insuclad system' of 40mm Polystyrene sprayed with an acylic modified concrete on a light timber frame, and the Cornerstone System with a solid concrete structure.

Get on the Cornerstone website and find out the difference - note I am an Architectural designer not related to Cornerstone in any way.

Rex

Re: Rubbish 

Anon,

I am currently waiting for quotes back from builders to build a large family house for a family of 5 + granny flat using the Cornerstone System so I felt I should respond. Also, like Rex I have no relationship with Cornerstone apart from being a purchaser of their system. I am also a designer, albeit an electronic product designer rather than architectural, but the approach to design is, broadly speaking, the same across various disciplines.

Firstly, like Cam, I fail to understand from where your first sentence comes from. I don't think this is an idiot system, far from it. It has been well thought out to address problems with the poor levels of insulation found in "built to code" homes. Wall R-value of over R5 for our home. It also has good earthquake/wind-load strength, rigidity and pretty good dimensional stability due to its reinforced concrete posts and beams. In addition the size and format of the panels allow for speedy erection to weatherproof in a short period of time.
The 4 builders who are currently preparing quotes have all been pretty blown away by the system once they understand its benefits.

Secondly, being an engineer and also British. I do not do leaky homes - full stop. This home I am building has been at the planning stages for well over one year. Money spent well at this stage will pay back in benefits over the years to come. It is very simple to build weather tight houses, the important thing is to get the design right so that weather tightness simply follows. Obviously, it it also important to build to design and not cut corners.
I have some sympathy with your comment, "But being cheap and nasty little kiwis, don't want to pay, so they continue to buy rubbish houses. ", especially the last part. I have posted here previously that I think there is a cultural difference between Kiwis and recent European immigrants like myself, in regard to spending on houses. To summarize, I think Europeans being used to spending much more on their houses tend to take the home building process very seriously and look at things longer term than kiwis. Also the opportunities for Europeans to build their own homes back in Europe are very rare, so when we get the chance we want to build the best quality that we can. Take this as an insult or not, but I really don't see in Kiwis the pride I see in Europeans when it comes to their houses.

I also tend to agree with you on "spray on" so to speak weather proofing. One of the standard finishes for the Cornerstone System is acrylic plaster. I'm sure its very good, but as an engineer, for me personally, I don't think its the best solution for NZ's strong winds and earthquakes. We will be attaching traditional weather board with a cavity between it and the polystyrene, more expensive I know but a) it matches the character of the design, b) its a long term choice. Bathroom and Kitchen quality and carpeting will be sacrificed, they can be bought later. Oh, again, thats where I think Kiwis are misled. When I've read magazines such as Trends or homestyle, they are full of "must haves" for kitchens, bathrooms, decor and furnishings, whereas Homebuilding and Renovating (a UK mag to which I subscribe) tends to be full of stuff on UFH, ventilation, windows, energy efficiency materials and design process etc. Again a cultural difference I think. I am not aware of an NZ equivalent to this magazine.

Anon2 "The level of incompetence, deception and misleading is just incredible in the NZ building industry" I'm not sure thats entirely fair, however whilst sorting through some paperwork this evening I came across the Immigration brochure for Sept 2004, which was sent to us when we moved here. In one bit they state "New Zealand is a young county and you'll find this freshness permeates our thinking and open approach to life"
I agree with this, but is'nt it about time someone let the building industry in on the secret :))
Pete

Re: Rubbish 

Hello Pete,

I compliment you on your choice of the Cornerstone system.
I have a little more knowledge in this area than most commentators as I took out a Patent on the almost identical building principle some 30 years ago - (Cornerstone are not in breach as the Patent lapsed 15 years ago).

I respect your reasons for choosing a weatherboard finish over the Cornerstone panel but would not dismiss a plastered exterior too quickly as this system has been proven in Germany and England for many years. This gives a quality weather tight exterior finish – but what about in earthquake prone NZ?

Here is a summary of my engineering test simulating a moderate earthquake.
I was surprised that the exterior surface coating of acrylic modified cement, reinforced with fibreglass mesh, showed some fine hair line cracking, but no substantial loss of bond to the polystyrene. There is a remarkable bond between the two.
Any failure came at the mechanical junction of the wall panel to the timber boundary joists, not in the panel at all.

If this junction is reinforced concrete (as in the Cornerstone system), this weakness is removed and Cornerstone are correct in claiming an excellent earthquake rating.

Of greater concern was the integrity of the system to protect against water penetration.
There is NO building system that is completely perfect in this regard – all can and will leak. It comes down to what happens to the water and what mitigation can be employed (as in your cavity behind the weatherboards).

Obviously, we should design to stop water penetration to start with and this is where precise detailed design prior to construction is paramount. Just as important is the practical implementation of the design into construction, and here the integrity of the builder and the project manager checking is the important control. No doubt you have this under control.

Here, I have to agree with anon. that designers, builders, subcontractors and project managers have been sadly remiss in these areas up until the latest Building Regulation change. You can squarely place the blame on Government and slack Local Body inspectors for allowing this state to develop into the current ‘leaky building’ fiasco – it was predicted by Prendos back in 1994. However, this is now passed and being corrected (at a massive cost).

I think the building industry has learned from this mistake and you can have more faith (and certainly more cash withdrawn from your pocket) to expect a competent standard from now on, but hopefully, not a violent swing into excessive regulation.

Rex

Re: Rubbish 

Although there are certainly benefits to the system (cheap, simple, rapid construction, jointless design, continuous insulation layer, etc), this type of construction cannot be considered healthy, nor ecological or sustainable.
The main material, polystyrene, is anything but environmentally friendly in itself. It is not recycled in New Zealand (at least according to RONZ, call the two companies listed there and you find that they have been wrongly and misleadingly listed). It break apart in small foamballs that pollute areas kilometers away, virtually impossible to contain. It's a petroleum industry product - not renewable.
You then sandwitch it into a composite material bonded together, making it virtually impossible to recycle (at possibly same stage in the future) without spreading the foamballs all over the place polluting land and waterways.
Apart from all that you are then coating it in acrylic plaster (another unrecyclable composite) even reinforced with glassfibre mesh.
And if that all is not enough, you will be enjoying the barrack like interior temperature in combination with the impermeability of the walls.
Moisture can't get anywhere but settle on the walls or in the gibboard if do not ventilate correctly. You have the high mass of the concrete walls (with their high embodied energy) covered with polystyrene on the inside, and therefore removed all the environmental benefits of having them apart from noise reduction.
You heat and it's warm instantly, you stop heating and everything will be cold.
The only thing that is keeping the house warm is the concrete slab.

You could have achieved the same thing with timber frame and a good design of cavity, weatherboard and roof overhangs. But most people want to rather move away from the old fashioned, working, timber design and towards a more modern, sleek and monolithic design that does not react to the local climate and environment.
Leading experts (also and not only in NZ) will tell you that the only way to prevent us from creating a runaway climate change is to be using renewable materials - primarily timber.
Why are we always trying to make things so complicated that worked for thousands of years....

I have seen buildings and I visited some back in Germany. For some strange reason they never became mainstream. I wonder why.... (sarcasm off)

It's not only the environmental impact of the construction materials, but also thing about what will happen with your building in 50 or 100 years time.

It might be a good building system but I am getting sick of having it advertised as environmentally friendly or healthy.

It is neither.

Regards,
B.E. Arch. / reg. Architect / Building Biologist / NZGBC accredited professional (EBANZ, NZIA, LCANZ)

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Ingo,

As my building application is in with the council right at this moment I thought I'd should address some of the points made in your post above and also to defend and explain why I have chosen to build a polystyrene house.

I agree, when made from oil its probably not the greenest or most sustainable material in isolation. However, whats your measurement criteria? If I consider the whole of life carbon reduction of the house then its substantially better than a home build to NZ code. If I consider the chemicals used to prevent timber framing from rotting then its possibly on par with. if not better. As the panels are manufactured to size, there is also no waste compared with the construction of timber framing.

Now heres an interesting fact (thanks Wiki) "Polystyrene was discovered in 1839 by Eduard Simon, an apothecary in Berlin. From storax, the resin of the Turkish sweetgum tree (Liquidambar orientalis), he distilled an oily substance, a monomer which he named styrol. " Trees are reasonably sustainable I believe?

Polystyrene is recyclable, it has the number 6, when I looked at the RONZ directory there are at least 3 companies that use recycled poly in their products Bondor, poly palace and poly reform (perhaps we looked at different areas of the website?). I met the owner of Poly Palace when I was the waste minimisation officer at Masterton District Council. However I agree, the majority of polystyrene products are not recycled. Again, courtesy of Wiki "Expanded polystyrene scrap can be easily added to products such as EPS insulation sheets and other EPS materials for construction applications. Commonly, manufacturers cannot obtain sufficient scrap because of the aforementioned collection issues. When it is not used to make more EPS, foam scrap can be turned into clothes hangers, park benches, flower pots, toys, rulers, stapler bodies, seedling containers, picture frames, and architectural molding from recycled PS"

Health, do you ever buy meat from the supermarket, get a coffee on the go, eat yoghurt - quite often they are packaged in a polystyrene container yes. Had a meal on an airplane? Served in and the cutlery? No organisation anywhere has classified polystyrene as a health risk. So I would refute your claim to it being unhealthy.

The construction used by the Cornerstone system is a solid panel held every 1200mm (approx) by a 100x100mm concrete column, a concrete ring beam ties in the tops of the panels. Although, probably not as cost effective for construction, I see no reason why the columns could not be steel or engineered timber. In this respect it is very different from other polystyrene construction types, e.g. blocks that you fill with concrete or concrete panels with a poly layer sandwiched in. If one was careful then there is no reason why the building could not be dismantled and the polystyrene re used. Although, this is quite likely to be uneconomic - similar to dismantling most current building constructions in fact.

Moving on to my own house construction.

No acrylic plaster for me. I'm cladding with weather boards over cavity battens. Firstly, coming from a damp island of the coast of Europe, I want a weather tight water proof home. Having a cavity and good detailing of the roof/wall & window/wall junctions, while no guarantee, gives me a bit more security on this.
Secondly, aesthetics - I simply don't like the look of plastered NZ houses. Sorry if I offend anyone with a plastered house, but to me most of them simply don't look right, they look a little pastiche. The buildings themselves look lightweight for a heavy cladding, the big eaves and the windows near the front of the walls give the game away. I think you would need to see the heavy block and stone houses in Europe which are cement rendered to understand what I mean. Its probably a personal thing, but like I say acrylic plaster - definitely not.

Barrack room temperatures, I hope not. Hotwater underfloor heati

Re: Rubbish 

(too long so here's part two - Pete)

Barrack room temperatures, I hope not. Hotwater underfloor heating, passive solar design and uPVC double glazed windows will hopefully give me an equable indoor temperature year round. The walls are light weight (as explained above), so not really much different from a timber frame wall stuffed with glasswool. Regarding sound insulation - very important to us, my wife is a midwife and often needs to sleep during the day. We are building a large inglenook fireplace, using dense block and brick enclosing a free standing woodburner, central to the building. In addition to the concrete slab this will add thermal mass to an otherwise lightweight building

You are absolutely right regarding ventilation, we will be having heat recovery ventilation.

Timber frame alternative, yes I probably can achieve similar with a std timber frame, but it would have been more difficult and costly to achieve R5.5 walls in terms of materials and labour. As noted above we have the rest (cavity, weather boards & overhangs)
Ingo, being German, I guess you have heard of passivhaus in Darmstadt. My aim is to get close to their design standards for energy efficiency within the limits of my budget and the NZ building code.

I've not been to Germany (Dusseldorf) since 2004 and know little of German construction (leider, mein schule deutsch is nicht sehr gut) but there seems to be lots of information regarding polystyrene construction at
http://www.energiesparen-im-haushalt.de/energie/bauen-und-modernisieren/hausbau-regenerative-energie/energiebewusst-bauen-wohnen/waermedaemmung-hausbau/daemmung-baustoffe/polystyrol-eps-daemmung.html

Almost there ! I hope to build a long lasting, quality house, so I hope in 50 -100 years time someone else will have the pleasure of living there.

I hope the Cornerstone system does prove to be a good building system for me. We are encapsulating the polystyrene within the walls and cladding/lining with standard materials, so to me it isn't too different from having pink batts within a wall, but we will get a much higher R value for our money and hopefully a good return on the investment in terms of reduced energy bills in the future. I'm, sorry that you are "sick of having it advertised as environmentally friendly or healthy". Maybe you have fallen into the "we don't do it that way" mentality of the NZ construction industry. If 90mm studs with a minimum of insulation and aluminium windows was good enough for grandpapa then it's alright for us :)

Finally, I note you are an architect. I'm sure you design good quality homes with all the sustainable and ecological features that you obviously are passionate about. I think its a shame that many in your profession are not so forward thinking. Having gone through about 12 months of battling my architect over this design, I probably should have gone direct to Cornerstone to design it or done the design myself (as I had a large input into some of the drawings anyway). Because of this, I have a low view of architects I'm afraid.
To me, architecture is akin to art, whereas if you want a properly designed house you need an engineer.

best wishes
Pete
B.Eng (Electronics)/ design engineer/ex Institute Electrical Engineers (professional bodies are protectionist, self-serving and up their own arses anyway)/rebel

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Pete.

As I said before, the system surely has some advantages, especially here in NZ over any "minimalist code compliant" building.
I am therefore not saying the system is bad as such. I am merely saying that there are significantly more sustainable alternatives using renewable resources, namely timber.
It is funny that many other countries, Germany and Switzerland amongst them, move away from solid construction and towards timber buildings IF ECOLOGY IS A MATTER OF INTEREST.
You mentioned that a timber construction achieving the same R value would be more expansive - I totally agree. But is it about building a sustainable house or a cheap house? Sorry, I am provocative here.
And not to get misunderstood: Yes, your building has to meet the budget. And I am sure you have invested into technology rather than a nice benchtop or expensive carpet..... as we did with our house.
Sorry to disillusion you with the polystyrene: Just because it is cheap and hence so many people are using it, that does not make it a good material, does it?
Times where it was extracted from some tree are long time over. Otherwise that tree would surely not there any more, extincted as many other over-exploited resources.
As I mentioned before, recycling is applicable when transforming a material back into something of the same "quality", not downcyvling into coathangers and the like. This gives it just one more life before going to landfill. And that's where I come from, and what's important: Where does it go to, what happens with it.
Subject health: I was not necessarily referring to the material as such but rather the building climate. But again it depend on which "side" you ask. There always varying opinions. Wikipedia gives you some ideas as well.

I have built a house with 90mm timber studs, as some "graddads" did. I do not use electricity for heating, all electricity is baseload, mainly lighting and appliances plus the odd computer.
The sun heats the house to about 90% of the time, the timber offcuts (non treated) will heat the house for about another 4 years. The trees on site will give most of what we need for the other years to come.
The next house will be 90mm studs again, but with 45mm battens on the inside for a cross layer of insulation and for cabling. Yes, you do learn. And again, yes, it has to meet the budget.

I am sure your house will be allright and it will be nice and warm. Your energy use will be pretty low.

I am merely the opinion, that we should clear our mind and not walk from one problem into another. Energy reduction itself does not mean sustainability or green. It is about resource use as well (and various other aspects).
I believe that saving energy is easy (maybe not cheap to start with) but using truely sustainable materials is another matter. I have done conference presentations about that subject and will continue to do it. Hence I recently joined LCANZ (Life Cycle Association of New Zealand) (another self serving body - sorry) in the hope to help bringing LCA's into mainstream and Environmental Choice NZ.

Final word to clarify my post: I do not mind you using Cornerstone's system, I rather mind Cornerstone for praising it as a environmentally friendly system. Such statements simple drive me up the wall. Best case it is "environmentally friendlier" than others.
It's a journey, not the destination. And who sets the benchmark?

Kind regards,
Ingo Ratsdorf

Re: Rubbish 

Hello Ingo,

I have previously complimented you on your home construction.
Will give us all a verbal picture ''cross section' and specification R value Etc. though the wall of your house including your modification using a 45 batten?

I note you used two rows of dwangs (bridging transfer and less efficient insulation area) instead of a metal mid point waling – was this because your stud moisture content was above 20%?

You are not keen on polystyrene for sustainability reasons (here we differ on emphasis) but used it for its benefit , presumable for ground insulation to the concrete floor?

What type of metal weatherboard fixings did you use – concealed metal soakers?

I am merely curious and not interested in being critical.

You will no doubt be in sympathy with the new 2020 BRANZ approach to waste recovery and recycling as noted in the last Ecobob post.

Thanks - Rex

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Rex.

Sorry for the long delay in replying to you, I did not get any notification (maybe lost) and since the forum is still not sorted by last posts date.....

As I said, the current wall is only 90mm timer stud, the next house will include a 45 horizontal batten.

Currently I used rebated bevelback Macrocarpa Weatherboards (untreated, unpainted), nailed with SS nails through a polypropylene batten through PE building paper into 90mm H1.2 pinus radiata stud. Polyester insulation between the studs, 10mm Plasterboard on inside.

Why the PP batten: It drains in every direction, does not soak up water, does not keep moisture, ventilates the cavity as much as possible an keeps the weatherboard as dry as possible. It does not need chemicals for treatment. The manufacturer unfortunately does not yet do recycling. Of course I asked him....

Why the polyester: Because it is the insulation material with the least environmental impact while being fully recyclable.
Why no wool: because wool is a blend of wool and polyester, thus making it impossible to recycle.
Next time I might consider cellulose fibre blown in, but I do not yet trust NZ installers. There have been some major hickups even in goode old Germany.
My much preferred timber fibre insulation is not available for ordinary humans in NZ. Money, money, money.....

Cheers,
Ingo

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Ingo

Can you get fire-rated timber fibre insulation?

Seeker

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Seeker.

I performs similar to cellolose insulation and is treated with boron. That's all I know, I never had a requirement for fire rated insulation.
It is a combustible material , classified as "E" in DIN EN 13501-1, which I am not familiar any more with. It used to be A or B in the old German standard - well ever changing.
Have a look at http://www.steico.biz/download/pdf/products/data/steico_datenblatt_0265.pdf

Cheers,
Ingo

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Ingo

Had a look at the brochure showing "EN 13501-1 Class E" and then did a search and found this, which referes to the 2002 standard:
http://www.efectis.com/nl/Downloads/pdf/techn_productfolder_EN13501.pdf

It notes that "Class E products may quickly lead to a flashover situation, possibly within the first 2 minutes of the reference scenario test." The rest of the page explains the scenario a bit more. (Can't locate EN13501-1:2007 without buying it.)

My question arose from the fact that many a grand NZ historic home has been razed simply by any small fire reaching the "wood shavings" or straw insulation and going through the entire house lightning fast ....

Seeker

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Seeker,

well, I used to burn the leftovers of the insulation in the woodburner. It is impossible to light a fire with that stuff, it simply would not burn, but with high enough starting temperatures it will burn. In saying so, EVERYTHING burns at high enough temperatures...
So it will be a totally different scenario compared to straw or wood shavings.
It will burn more difficult than your timber framing, that's for sure.

Cheers,
Ingo

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Ingo

the density makes a difference in the fire rating too similar to strawbale walls

Re: Rubbish 

Hello Ingo

After reading all the debate here, there is one last comment on the environment that should be further addressed the "Environment". Pete commented about it, and it is being addressed by the industry re the trees. Why should it annoy you ? if ...

1) A product made up of a polymer constituting 2% of the end product, utilizing a "waste material' in the production of oil, which most of us use in one form or another, driving vehicles, mowing lawns catching the bus, ferry or plane.

2) Manufactured in New Zealand and the Cornerstone product is sourced from the closest factory to the project to minimize transport.

3) The polymer is available from many sources Maize, Orange Peel, wood waste is another very good area. For the future specialists are finding the answers, and I believe around the Taupo region there has been a sizable willow plantation some years ago in preparation.

4) The Polystyrene bead which makes up 2% of the finished product, is expanded with "Steam" to form the other 98% which is effectively "Air".

5) These balls of 'AIR" can be used to aerate ones garden as I was sold some recently for this purpose, maybe they should not be able to sell such a product if it is not good for the soil (People planting vege's in pots are also making a difference to the overall environment). Back on track

6) The Cornerstone Polystyrene Building System uses about 90% polystyrene for the form work, insulation, and bracing with the balance reinforced concrete posts and continuous ring beam (packaged in the polystyrene) to take roof and floor loads.

7) The savings to the build cost, erection time (allowing a lock up shell sooner with the solid walls),and equally important the energy savings, because of the systems ability to retain the energy within the house.

8) Energy efficiency at an affordable price i.e. cheaper than using a timber frame to try and get the same R values as Pete mentioned above, must be considered a blessing when so many products are climbing higher and higher..

This system has been in the market for many years waiting for the industry to take it's blinkers off. 'Doing what has always been done...."

"This has been at the expense of many where lives have been lost because of homes well below the World Health Standard". What price do we put on lives, who have not often been able to put the heat into their homes, or should I say fridges come winter

Re: Rubbish 

Hello Ingo

Sorry had not finished... I had no intention of leaving you wondering who this is, making all these bullet points about how polystyrene can be viewed as environmentally friendly.

I am very pleased to see that you may have taken on board some of the answers that others have presented you with along the way....I have not been on to see you latest comments until now, thus the slow response.

As an Architectural Designer of some 25 years, developer, builder, painter stopper & general dogs body....that must mean I am very old :-( Oh but wisdom is supposed to come with age :-) Bachelor of LIFE

I challenged the status quo regarding the way we built as I started the design and construction of my own house and the start of my journey in this industry....battling the odds so to speak especailly as a women in the 80's.

After building and designing at least a dozen houses in the area & living in the harsh environment of Oxfords extreme temperatures and high power bills as a solo mother of 5 sons, while studying Architecture, that birthed in me the real desire to find something better than the status quo "timber framed construction" in strength and sustainability.

In Oxford homes the ply braced walls would move with the winds, and curtains needed to be drawn at such times in case the ranch sliders were forced to break, even braced timber framing would easily end up on a lean, & roofing to fly off, where city builders would come up to build not knowing the environment.

Timber construction being pin jointed is a very flexible system, and the other option available was the opposite ridged concrete block and the beginnings of tilt slab.

With the background of a harsh environment, and the area with the highest power rates in the country
getting back to the environmental aspects and the Journey and measuring stick you questioned.

One would have to say from where Cornerstone building system started:-

1) The Cornerstone Building system improved the R value of their homes 50-75% (Energy Audits on the first house supported this) therefore a 100-150% improvement to the way things were...

2) The Bracing Ratings of the system compared to Timber Frame with an angle brace was improved by at least 50%.

3) The environment has been improved by at least 100% in energy savings and a safer construction method.

4) If you don't like the reinforced concrete, the patent covered any type of post and beam, so we could use timber for instance, but again it will be more flexible than the concrete option, but not as flexible as the timber 4 x 2 method.

Accept for the positive feedback that I have had from Cornerstone Homeowners along the way and the PURPOSE attached to the PASSION to improve what we offer, especially to those who cannot afford electricity and whose health suffers for the unhealthy options offered i.e. government housing which should have the best examples if they want the industry to follow suit, I would have given up long ago, for personal and financial cost has been astronomical.

Then you get folks who see that it is a good idea and want to steal it ....

If they don't steal it they RUBBISH it.... We have the "tall poppy" syndrome rife in NZ. Other manufacturers have indicated on ecobob forums and generally that as manufacturers, the industry needs to be more embracing as they tend to stick to "what they know" rather than "stretch the grey matter" to 'make a difference" depriving homeowners of the quality homes they deserve.

If Cornerstone building system depended on the Architectural designers, Group Home companies, Engineers, or Builders of this country we would never have gotten off the ground, although I noted that Rex commented to another "Building system manufacturer" that there are some designers out there that are looking for better products, but Rex You are different in that you have had something similar (I have not seen whatever that is, so maybe you can enlighten me privately via the website) generall

Re: Rubbish 

This keeps dropping the ending off so will finish this here.

I was saying that generally the industry players actually talk the client out of using a different product, which has been my experience on many occasions. I have enjoyed asking questions of sales reps of home companies, designers, builder who may have thought I was just a client to listen to the real RUBBISH that comes back.... I have caught people out deliberately being dishonest, then I have enlightened them.

Clients come back and tell you what is happening because they want to have the best possible products.

I am generalizing here, not trying to put anyone in particular down, but rather get people to think, so that this message gets out. Product developers have enough hoops to jump through just to get into the market without being put down without folks researching the product thoroughly.

I see on the forums where people are wanting to bring products in from overseas when New Zealand folks are innovators (one of our strengths). How sustainable is that, should we not be supporting our own products.

To willfully or not publicly go onto forums to attack any person, company or product is extremely damaging

Mary Ginn

Re: Rubbish 

Mary, I applaud you.
steve@timbercrete

Re: Rubbish 

Mary, you are addressing this post to me and raising some very general problems of the NZ industry in there. That would be true for any subject, but does not relate to anything I said.
In addition, you seem not to have read my post dated "28 Nov 09 4:15 PM".

"As I said before, the system surely has some advantages, especially here in NZ over any "minimalist code compliant" building.
I am therefore not saying the system is bad as such. I am merely saying that there are significantly more sustainable alternatives using renewable resources, namely timber." ETC
.....

And am still standing by that, and I am not related to any manufacturer or supplier thus need not talk anything bad. It is merely my very own opinion that results from my research and approach.

Regards,
Ingo

Re: Rubbish 

Mary Ginn wrote

""""I see on the forums where people are wanting to bring products in from overseas when New Zealand folks are innovators (one of our strengths). How sustainable is that, should we not be supporting our own products."""""

What is wrong with that? Where would the building industry be in this country without the influenence of innovative building materials and methods from Europe??
We would all still live in those cold sheds of which we have still plenty around.

Whether it is cornerstone or similar, lightweight concrete, precast concrete, mudbrick, strawbale, real windows, solar design,
modern practical taps and bathroomware, modular kitchens it is all from Europe or America or based on designs inventions from there.(maybe with some mods)
Yes we have an innovative farming and boat building industry but residential building not really??!!!
Or do you call those ali windows, those almost none insulated HWC's or the matchstick cardboard construction innovative ??????grrrr

And last what if the Europeans, Asians, Russians , American stop buying our products we are good at and buy their own????

Dairy, cow sheds, fruit, yachts????

You will never get it right if you judge things that way rather than looking for the best performing. Sorry but the best in building was not invented in NZ by global means...

Re: Rubbish 

And up to the present day it is not possible to buy a water efficient washing machine or properly insulated fridge or freezer made in NZ

Re: Rubbish 

Hi Ingo Yes I was addressing your parting comment, which was clearly directed at myself having for the many reasons listed previously advertised it as an environmentally friendly building system.
Your comments:-
"Final word to clarify my post: I do not mind you using Cornerstone's system, I rather mind Cornerstone for praising it as a environmentally friendly system. Such statements simple drive me up the wall. Best case it is "environmentally friendlier" than others.
It's a journey, not the destination. And who sets the benchmark?

Kind regards,
Ingo Ratsdorf

I agree it is always a journey to improve the way we do things and through the forum as you have become more knowledgeable from the comments of Rex and Pete, there has been a major shift in thought.

We must be careful how we put things on these forums as they are public and one needs to be careful as to what is said so as not to make defamatory remarks resulting in negative ramifications of a business or people.

Here is another line of thought which perhaps should be in the mix.
Do they cut those trees down with handsaws? How do the get the logs from a-b I don't think they send them down rivers and a bit hard on the old horse power. Have you seen all the equipment required for this process, what does it take to mobilise the machinery, then off to the mill to be treated hmmm.

I am not knocking timber because Cornerstone Building system is usually just a small part of the structure,the external walls where it makes a difference to the envelope of the dwelling in order to make the required plus added benefit difference to the home owners.

Professionals in the trade should be offering their clients options so that clients can make the choices based on what is important to them.

Mary Ginn