Did We Throw Up Rubbish Buildings in the Boom?

JupiterKid

Following from the tragic accident in Longford yesterday where two people lost their lives when a 30 foot high wall in a DIY store collapsed on them, the well-known saga of the Priory Hall apartment complex in Dublin which remains vacated due to building and fire safety defects and the iron pyrite in house foundations scandal should we not be scrutinising much of what was thrown up in the Celtic Tiger boom years?

Anecdotal evidence indicates that corners were cut and that the quality of materials and workmanship that went into many new buildings was dubious. Of particular concern for Ireland is that the construction industry is "self-regulating" with respect to building regulations and standards, and that - unlike the UK - no widespread, compulsory independent evaluation and inspection of building work takes place.

Is this good enough? I think not. How many more Priory Hall scandals will emerge in the coming years? Or worse, will more buildings of recent vintage experience structural failures and tragedies?

dttq

JupiterKid wrote: »

Following from the tragic accident in Longford yesterday where two people lost their lives when a 30 foot high wall in a DIY store collapsed on them, the well-known saga of the Priory Hall apartment complex in Dublin which remains vacated due to building and fire safety defects and the iron pyrite in house foundations scandal should we not be scrutinising much of what was thrown up in the Celtic Tiger boom years?

Anecdotal evidence indicates that corners were cut and that the quality of materials and workmanship that went into many new buildings was dubious. Of particular concern for Ireland is that the construction industry is "self-regulating" with respect to building regulations and standards, and that - unlike the UK - no widespread, compulsory independent evaluation and inspection of building work takes place.

Is this good enough? I think not. How many more Priory Hall scandals will emerge in the coming years? Or worse, will more buildings of recent vintage experience structural failures and tragedies?

Yes we did. What I would like to know is which imbeciles granted permission for that yoke on Dame Street outside Dublin castle - pretty much destoyed that part of the street. It's infuriating seen that piece of muck also defacing a square previously enclosed on that side of the road by magnificent Georgian buildings.

nelly17

Not to mention the apts in Dundrum

the great purveyor of mediocrity

As plenty of trades people I know used to say during the boom years...."patch/cover it up, by the time anyone notices, we'll be long gone".

paddy147

Architects,engineers,fire safety officers and others seemed to have turned a blind eye to certain aspects.

Its not just bad builders and property developers that are to blame.

Lack of propper inspection,signing off and checking that plans and actual buildings are the same as the plans states.


They are only just finishing off the refurb work in Belmayne (opposite Priory Hall) over the pyrite problems that every apartment and townhouse up there had.

All the residents were moved out to other accomodation for 6 weeks,while the builder and the construction companies came back in and gutted every building and refurbed them.

paddy147

The older houses of the 30s,40s,50s,60s and 70s were and are propper solid houses...you wont seem them cracking or crumbling too easily.

Yes, definitely. The most annoying regulation they made was having those fecking electric fans come on when you turn on a light switch in a room that was either a bathroom or a room with no boundary walls. You might think that actually makes sense, but not when the fans were so poorly made that they all ended up breaking.

Radiators under the windows was another one.

Too many air vents that weren't sealed properly so air could flow freely inside the walls themselves.

Using the wrong nails (or using the right nails the wrong way) in walls so that the plaster that covers the head of the nail falls off from vibrations of people walking up the stairs or closing doors.

HTML5!

Yes.

I'd never buy anything built in the last 15 years. Pure garbage.

You only have to look at some of them. Tiny rooms in cardboard looking estates.

Pass.

paddy147

Sacramento wrote: »

Yes, definitely. The most annoying regulation they made was having those fecking electric fans come on when you turn on a light switch in a room that was either a bathroom or a room with no boundary walls. You might think that actually makes sense, but not when the fans were so poorly made that they all ended up breaking.

Radiators under the windows was another one.

Too many air vents that weren't sealed properly so air could flow freely inside the walls themselves.

Using the wrong nails (or using the right nails the wrong way) in walls so that the plaster that covers the head of the nail falls off from vibrations of people walking up the stairs or closing doors.

Best place for them...with regards heating a room.

catallus

The saying at the time was : Shure a man in China wouldn't see it! Jocularity ensued. Very sad to see two people dead.

ejmaztec

Using proper foundations in the first house on a new estate, and once the local engineer had signed off on it, throw any old sh1t under the rest of the houses.

tin79

JupiterKid wrote: »

Anecdotal evidence indicates

Well that settles it so. Cant beat good old anecdotes to establish the facts.

P_1

Without a shadow of a doubt.

I wonder how much the margins were increased by cutting back on the quality of the materials used

tin79

HTML5! wrote: »

Yes.

I'd never buy anything built in the last 15 years. Pure garbage.

You only have to look at some of them. Tiny rooms in cardboard looking estates.

Pass.

I fully agree. Every single building constructed since 1998 is pure garbage. It must have taken you ages to get round to them all. :rolleyes:

guppy

Was there ever any real "inspection" of housing or commercial builds? Wasn't most of it self-certified? I am open to correction, but I'm not aware of any official body with responsibility for inspection of buildings.

And you'd think with all the money-spinning quangos created, that might have been top of the list (unless vested interests didn't want that to happen....... but no, that's just my cynicism I'm sure)

Doc Ruby

dttq wrote: »

I would like to know is which imbeciles granted permission for that yoke on Dame Street outside Dublin castle

That would be public servants.

In other news 'we' didn't throw up anything, cowboys did.

chasm

Gleann Riada in Longford is another one.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1009/340861-longford-gleann-riada/

".......However, he said there was clear evidence of the effect of carbon monoxide, methane and hydrosulfite in the area and the gases from the sewers were dangerous.

Dr Kelleher repeated his warning that residents should not light open fires in their sitting rooms.

In a statement, Longford County Council said it is constrained in what it can say due to legal proceedings undertaken by some of the residents.

However, it said all residents should ensure adequate ventilation in the house, do not light open fires, install carbon monoxide alarms in each house and maintain water traps in all toilets."


My Father worked on building sites in the UK in the 60s and 70s and he said there were constant inspections the whole way through the building process, and sites were often closed for a few days till things (often minor things) were put right, yet i have spoken to guys who worked on sites here in the past decade and a few have mentioned that half the time the guys doing inspections didn't even get out of their jeep!

Hootanany

Doc Ruby wrote: »

That would be public servants.

In other news 'we' didn't throw up anything, cowboys did.

Yep they granted Planning
And got there 30 pieces of silver.

Lapin

nelly17 wrote: »

Not to mention the apts in Dundrum

And lets not forget the roof of the National Aquatic Centre.

Where To

Knowing the lads who left school to go to Dublin labouring, and were contractors within a wet week, I'd be very wary of buying anything unless I knew for certain who was working on it from start to completion.

who_me

I think so. I think we've built a massive amount of 'disposable' architecture. Cheap and functional sure, but in 50 or so years when it starts to look a little tatty, it's more likely to be torn down while older buildings will retain their charm. I'm struggling to think of many buildings from the last 15 years or so that make me think "Yeah, that really adds to the city".

I used to frequent a popular Irish architecture forum, and it used to drive me nuts how many of them would rant on about the necessity of apartment-living (as opposed to everyone living in a detached house with a garden) to avoid urban sprawl. Sure, that makes sense; but then you have to build sustainable apartment buildings, including family-sized flats, adequate storage, outdoor/garden facilities, larger elevators for moving in furniture etc. Instead, planning permission is awarded to buildings with tiny apartments with no facilities, maximising the financial return but meaning everyone sees an apartment as a temporary home until they move to a bigger house in the suburbs, so the whole plan goes tits up.

I found it funny that one award winning apartment development in Cork city centre was slammed by on the forum by one of its own architects! He claimed the senior architect was more concerned with how it looked externally and had little regard for the practicality of the internal layout (and, IMO, the exterior of the building in question isn't up to much either!) And also in Cork, we had one proposal submitted to build in the middle of the Lee (I kid you not), and another on one of the bridges.

And that's just talking about the architecture, don't get me started on the build quality!

Boombastic

Did We? Did We? No We did not. I had no hand, act or part of building anything during the boom so don't be trying to pin the blame on me now.


:mad:

Ruudi_Mentari

Seems were still in the novice stages of this building with large, glass panels and almost exclusively nothing else. Frames that hold them.. just give me classic style. concrete.. set in stone

though comparing the very impressive Aviva to the somewhat more established "National Stadium" makes that rather irrelevant. Should see the new Walkinstown BOI branch old one was concrete, set back from the street and one teir but now this tall monstrosity with panes of fupping one-way mirror, right up on the path. Very insulting in this climate. very dispiriting.. very imposing. ruined that corner so they have

The Aussie

Boombastic wrote: »

Did We? Did We? No We did not. I had no hand, act or part of building anything during the boom so don't be trying to pin the blame on me now.


:mad:

I worked on the sites during the boom.

I pity the fools who brought those piles of SH!TE, now they are stuck with massive mortgages for poorly constructed garbage.

I also pity the young fellas who left school at 14 to learn how to construct crap, they learnt nothing but how to cut corners and bodge a job.

housetypeb

Spare a though for all the farmers sons who jumped on the trowel and were block layers within a day,building houses in estates and putting in poorly fitted insulation and wall ties the wrong way around so water would drip onto the inside leaf of a cavity wall.

the keen edge

The amount of generalizing bullsh1t is this thread must be some kind of new record for AH.

frag420

Is this the Lego forum?

The industry has proved that it cannot regulate itself.

As always there should be more officers enforcing the industry, like other countries, such as Germany for instance.

snubbleste

Anyone ever seen a poor planner?

Dravokivich

the keen edge wrote: »

The amount of generalizing bullsh1t is this thread must be some kind of new record for AH.

Well, if we've all seen the same things and none of us know each other, the generalising, isn't too far off.

mconigol

Boombastic wrote: »

Did We? Did We? No We did not. I had no hand, act or part of building anything during the boom so don't be trying to pin the blame on me now.


:mad:

You would say that though.

Judging by your overreaction I'd say it was all your fault

Leftist

structurally? I don't know.

Architecturally? yes. Look at the national conference centre, looks like a tin of beans stuck in a block of concrete. All these garrish glass and metal buildings have zero character.

myflipflops

I don't know anything about building or construction but I have lived in four different countries now including Ireland and I lived for at least one year in similarly priced apartments in each of those countries. I can say without doubt that the apartments I lived in in Dublin (one in Ballsbridge, one in Rathfarnham) were of much lower quality than anything I have experience in the other countries.

The amount of noise leakage I experienced in apartments in Dublin was terrible.

Solair

There's no doubt but that it was one of the most stupid eras of Irish history. Effectively we were conned and many, many people bought into the hype that went along with the con.

Billions upon billions were borrowed and handed over to developers and/or borrowed by developers and landowners who made an absolute fortune.

All that's left is a load of mediocre to poor quality buildings, many of which are unoccupied as they're built in stupid locations and a massive debt which was mindbogglingly nationalised !

That real estate boom quite litterally destroyed the country, financially and probably to a large degree physically and socially as well.

A few people became obscenely wealthy at the expense of everyone who was stupid enough to be sucked into the scam that was the property bubble.

It was a big pyramid scheme, dressed up as a property boom.

the keen edge

Dravokivich wrote: »

Well, if we've all seen the same things and none of us know each other, the generalising, isn't too far off.

I worked in the construction industry before during and after the celtic tiger years.
Yes there were a lot of badly built houses, but the vast majority were constructed to the required, and acceptable, standard.

To say (broadly) that houses built in the 30's-80's are of a better construction than those built during the 00's is just plain wrong.
Building control was pretty much nonexistent during that earlier period as were finances to be spent on buildings.

Older properties maybe roomier and be set on bigger plots of land but that is a result of the terrible planning c/o the various local authorities.
Matchbox sized apartments and ghosts estates aren't a result of poor building practice.

IMO its the infrastructure in Ireland that is the total fcuk up.

Plazaman

I only have to cite The Mill Apartments in Ballisodare, Co. Sligo to answer your question. A beautiful old stone building was torn down to build these abominations which are now derelict (see link).

The first potential buyer on the scene brought her own engineer with her when viewing the apartments much to the annoyance of the auctioneer. The engineer wasn't in the place 2 minutes when he spotted rising damp and the buyer left. Word got out and not one of the apartments were bought.

If only the builders knew about the possibility of dampness due to, say, the big fúcking river they built beside.


"Cowboys Ted, sure you could talk that into coming down".

Solair

It's quite clear that the planning system was about as useful as a chocolate teapot as vested interests just rode roughshod through it.

There was no reason, other than the state didn't want to, that we did not have enough building inspectors. You just levy the development to pay for them.

I think you're just going to see lots of derelict buildings appearing over the next 10+ years. Many of them were built for the buy-to-let sector, and the quality was poor and the on-going management/maintenance seems poor too. So, what will happen is people will buy/rent the good stuff, leaving the rubbish empty and it will just fall apart, crumble and have to be demolished.

We'd have been better off just shovelling the cash directly into a power station or blowing it all on a mad party, at least we'd have had some heat or fun or something.

Just imagine where we could be if all those vast numbers of billions had been invested into something productive like high tech start ups, R&D, university research, R&D / product development in the food sector, tourism projects, primary schools/secondary schools etc etc etc.

JRant

The problem goes back further in my opinion. In the late 70's and 80's a huge number of poorly built council houses were put up all across the country. The standards of these buildings was atrocious and paved the way for what was to come.

For me it boils down to three things;

Lack of proper planning
Lack of proper regulation
People not being employing there own independent structural engineer to validate any work that was done. A house is the single most expensive item most of us will ever buy, why you'd take the word alone of anyone when paying that kind of money is beyond me.

Leftist

myflipflops wrote: »

I don't know anything about building or construction but I have lived in four different countries now including Ireland and I lived for at least one year in similarly priced apartments in each of those countries. I can say without doubt that the apartments I lived in in Dublin (one in Ballsbridge, one in Rathfarnham) were of much lower quality than anything I have experience in the other countries.

The amount of noise leakage I experienced in apartments in Dublin was terrible.

I've lived in various newly built houses and duplexs etc. thrown up around dublin and they've all been awful. Paper walls, poorly wired, light fittings falling out of paper ceilings.
All just flung up for quick money while the party for jackasses lined their pockets.

myflipflops

the keen edge wrote: »

To say (broadly) that houses built in the 30's-80's are of a better construction than those built during the 00's is just plain wrong.

Would it not be true to say that house were built differently prior to the 'Celtic Tiger' period?

For example, my parents had the 2 houses I lived in growing up built themselves. They dealt directly with the builder in both cases so they could dictate what they wanted. The houses were built well above the required minimum standard because of this. This would have been pretty common in the 80's I guess? My parents were not wealthy.

The apartments thrown in the last 15 years were designed by the developers. People were purchasing them off plans with no idea of what quality they would be. It would have been offensively expensive at that time to get a smaller builder to construct an individual house from scratch.

staker

As a buddy of mine used say- "can't see it from my bedroom window!".
I wouldn't say many of the "one offs" buildings were built to an inferior standard as opposed to the apartment blocks and some lego estates which were literally flung up.
Go to most other European countries though and the architectural and planning aspect to their housing would be far superior to what was done here.
I have friends who paid 1/4 million and more for some of these lego houses and appartments- what an existence!-no amenities as such,very little space,cracked walls,warped skirting, dud internal doorlocks,loose sockets, cracked tiles, noise infiltration....

Grayson

who_me wrote: »

I think so. I think we've built a massive amount of 'disposable' architecture. Cheap and functional sure, but in 50 or so years when it starts to look a little tatty, it's more likely to be torn down while older buildings will retain their charm. I'm struggling to think of many buildings from the last 15 years or so that make me think "Yeah, that really adds to the city".

I used to frequent a popular Irish architecture forum, and it used to drive me nuts how many of them would rant on about the necessity of apartment-living (as opposed to everyone living in a detached house with a garden) to avoid urban sprawl. Sure, that makes sense; but then you have to build sustainable apartment buildings, including family-sized flats, adequate storage, outdoor/garden facilities, larger elevators for moving in furniture etc. Instead, planning permission is awarded to buildings with tiny apartments with no facilities, maximising the financial return but meaning everyone sees an apartment as a temporary home until they move to a bigger house in the suburbs, so the whole plan goes tits up.

I found it funny that one award winning apartment development in Cork city centre was slammed by on the forum by one of its own architects! He claimed the senior architect was more concerned with how it looked externally and had little regard for the practicality of the internal layout (and, IMO, the exterior of the building in question isn't up to much either!) And also in Cork, we had one proposal submitted to build in the middle of the Lee (I kid you not), and another on one of the bridges.

And that's just talking about the architecture, don't get me started on the build quality!

I went to view an apartment to rent on Tuesday. It's a one bed room job. The one bedroom had a doublebed that was up against the wall. It had 1ft of free space at the bottom and 1.5-2ft on the other side. The door barely opened.
I want to know who designed an apartment like that. The sittingroom/kitchen was tiny too, but the bedroom was what really got me. Who would actually think that it was ok to build an apt block with rooms that tiny.

I do think we need to cutdown on urban sprawl, but you're right, if we're building apt blocks, we need to do more than just build a series of boxes.

mattjack

Leftist wrote: »

I've lived in various newly built houses and duplexs etc. thrown up around dublin and they've all been awful. Paper walls, poorly wired, light fittings falling out of paper ceilings.
All just flung up for quick money while the party for jackasses lined their pockets.

When you say poorly wired , do you mean with electrical faults ? my understanding was that all installations had to be verified and tested before being handed over.

Solair

I think there was also a lack of an ability to differentiate between "development" and "mindless building of random stuff anywhere at any cost regardless of demand".

It also shows that the political system and governance system had absolutely zero ability to plan/manage the building of property.

We need to drop the terms "development" and "developers" it should be just "buildings" and "builders" / "speculators". The terminology's totally misleading.

Solair

mattjack wrote: »

When you say poorly wired , do you mean with electrical faults ? my understanding was that all installations had to be verified and tested before being handed over.

Nope!
We only introduced mandatory electrical regulations long after the building boom was over.

Ireland (and also the UK) had some of the weakest electrical regulations in the developed world in terms of who could do what and inspection regimes.

The England/Wales and NI only really tightened things up with the introduction of "Part P" of the building regulations was introduced and Ireland only relatively recently too when the CER took over electrical regulation.

Before that it was all largely theoretical stuff. We had wiring rules, and we had all sorts of requirements but little/no enforcement and over-reliance on self-regulation.

I've heard accounts from relatives/friends of relatives etc One guy who worked on apartment blocks in the UK while he was in college in the 1970s. He wasn't a contractor/fitter/electrical contractor etc although he was studying a very technical subject, yet he wired multi-story buildings for a contractor and also on complicated structural steel stuff apparently without any supervision at all.
A lot of our high-quality electrical installations were just down to diligent electricians in the old days. There was really no enforcement of anything by anyone.

Apparently that was absolutely 'the norm' across the building boom in the 70s over there. Just very little supervision, lack of qualified staff etc etc.

In fact, I don't think the term 'electrician' was even protected!

Architetect wasn't a protected title until quite recently.

The contrast with US states is amazing though. When you consider that you have to have a state license to do all sorts of trades and it's rigerously enforced.

Electrical Contractors, Plumbers, Construction trades of all sorts are highly regulated in most US states and licenses are required to call yourself any of those things. If you don't have a license, you can be facing serious criminal prosecution.

In some states even barbers and hairdressers have to be qualified and officially licensed.

donegal_road

many of the houses built during the boom are health time-bombs because the contractors never bothered putting down a radon barrier.

Radon is thought to cause 16% of lung cancer deaths in Canada





.

Solair

Just to give you an idea of how things work in say Massachusetts -

Over 50 trades and professions are subject to a state-controlled licensing regime (not self-regulation by an industry itself)

You can even verify the person's license online ! http://license.reg.state.ma.us/public/licque.asp?color=blue

That compares to Ireland (or England) where it's all rather more chaotic and based on some kind of notion that nobody would ever lie about their qualifications ever.

Unlike Germany, the Nordic Countries, Netherlands, the USA etc I think Ireland and Britain have always looked down their noses at tradespeople and seen them as unimportant. There's a long history of "professionals" vs "trades" in this part of the world and I really think that is part of the problem.

You see it a lot in the UK with the complete misunderstanding and misuse of terms like "engineer" being thrown around to describe everything from a person who is hugely qualified and designs massively complex industrial plants to the guy who does a weekend course to learn how to screw satellite dishes to your house in the cheapest, ugliest way possible...

I mean, you'd have more issues with people checking that someone had the correct documentation to verify their BA in French Literature than you would have people checking that someone was actually a qualified plumber. Yet, the plumber's the one who could destroy your house!

There's a major, fundamental problem in this part of the world with an inability to regulate and a preference for laissez faire and industry self-regulation.

ronan45

ha ha, Belive me kids, During the boom i was on quite a few building sites....Ask ANYONE that was, and they will tell you there were P L E N T Y of cowboys operating. Cheap Materials, cheap labour,

kylith

dttq wrote: »

Yes we did. What I would like to know is which imbeciles granted permission for that yoke on Dame Street outside Dublin castle - pretty much destoyed that part of the street. It's infuriating seen that piece of muck also defacing a square previously enclosed on that side of the road by magnificent Georgian buildings.

God, that thing makes me apoplectic. I'd like to give whoever signed off on that a good kick up the arse.

Sacramento wrote: »

Yes, definitely. The most annoying regulation they made was having those fecking electric fans come on when you turn on a light switch in a room that was either a bathroom or a room with no boundary walls. You might think that actually makes sense, but not when the fans were so poorly made that they all ended up breaking.

Radiators under the windows was another one.

Too many air vents that weren't sealed properly so air could flow freely inside the walls themselves.

Using the wrong nails (or using the right nails the wrong way) in walls so that the plaster that covers the head of the nail falls off from vibrations of people walking up the stairs or closing doors.

Radiators are supposed to go under the windows, for the proper circulation of the warm air. Basically the cold air from the window will push the rising hot air down and circulate it through the room at mid-height. If the radiator is against another wall the heat just rises to the ceiling, goes along the ceiling until it meets the opposite wall, then goes down the wall, and never reaches the middle of the room. The problem is that people put long curtains over them, which stops the warm air from circulating at all.

mattjack

Solair wrote: »

Just to give you an idea of how things work in say Massachusetts -

Over 50 trades and professions are subject to a state-controlled licensing regime (not self-regulation by an industry itself)

You can even verify the person's license online ! http://license.reg.state.ma.us/public/licque.asp?color=blue

That compares to Ireland (or England) where it's all rather more chaotic and based on some kind of notion that nobody would ever lie about their qualifications ever.

I can agree with you there, I've seen situations where people have claimed to be tradesmen but were generally caught out within a day or two.
I've been a bit disingenious with you, I worked for twenty years as an electrician mainly for long periods with the same contractor, part of my job in recent years was to test and verify installations.
By the sounds of things you probally know what's involved , are aware too that some of the meters are calibrated by outside agencies annually and do a series a tests polarity,tripping time etc
I have on occasion refused to hand over paperwork etc when I found a fault or had a cocern about something.

Appreciate your comments though.

Lollipops23

Leftist wrote: »

Architecturally? yes. Look at the national conference centre, looks like a tin of beans stuck in a block of concrete. All these garrish glass and metal buildings have zero character.

I actually like the conference centre

The problem was never pyrite- that's present in a huge amount of stone infill of loads of houses built over the years.

The problem that's become apparent in Belmayne/Clongriffin and all the other properties that now need remedial works on them, is that because they threw those buildings up in record time, water and air is well able to get in to the foundations and stone infill, causing them to swell and create cracks.

Pyrite is not actually the problem in a lot of cases-crappy builds are.