Self builders note - what the RIAI members think of your plight

RITwing

2 nights ago assembled members rejected the the following motion

In response to the housing crisis and to ensure that the planned house building programme will provide well-built and sustainable homes under a cost-effective Building Control system, we request the Minister for the Environment, Community & Local Government Mr. Alan Kelly TD:

to bring forward the review of the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations S.I.9 that is planned for 2015;
to undertake a full Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations;
to review the limitations on self-building that is a constraint on housing supply under the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations.”
Decision: Defeated by a four to one majority (through a show of hands).

source

You do not have support from the RIAI.

martinn123

RITwing wrote: »

2 nights ago assembled members rejected the the following motion



source

You do not have support from the RIAI.

However the following motion was passed

CONTEXT
At an RIAI Council Meeting held on 18 July 2014, the members of the Council agreed by
consensus the following :
1. Council endorses both
• as a Working Document, ‘Strengthening the System 3’ (1st July 2014) and
• a process of engagement with a broad spectrum of views
to inform RIAI development of a proposal for an enhanced system of Building
Control
2. RIAI members will be made aware of this work and will be engaged in structured
feedback and, in accordance with the Strategy, the developed Working
Document will be shared with them.
3. Council asks the Steering Group to immediately coordinate the development of
a measured and rational Strategy for the promotion of changes to S.1.9 in line
with the Working Document in a manner that will build alliances, optimise
successful adoption of changes and repair relationships within the Institute and
with the Department of the Environment.
4. Council will welcome further detailed proposals for enhancing the system of
Building Control from inside and outside the RIAI.


ORDINARY RESOLUTION 2:
“That the registered members endorse and confirm their support for the decision of the Council made at the July 2014 Council Meeting to develop a working document on Building Control that would propose amendments to S.I.9 of 2014 and constructively engage with
stakeholders in order to realise the best interests of the profession for the long term”.

Resignations from the Council, as follows

I also wish to advise members that the following Council members - who had proposed Ordinary Resolution 3 referred to above - resigned a few hours in advance of the meeting: Caomhan Murphy, Deirdre Lennon, Orla Hegarty, Joan O’Connor, Vivian Cummins and Eoin O Cofaigh. I also regret the recent resignation of Darren Bergin from Council.

I am disappointed that the Council members have decided to resign but respect their decision to do so given their views are divergent from the majority of Council and other members of the Institute as resolved at last night’s EGM. Notwithstanding the six resignations yesterday, 17 Council members remain and under the bye laws will continue to oversee the direction of the Institute as mandated by the majority of members.

from the same source quoted above.

Infighting??

No6

Darren was the AT rep, I'dlike to hear why he left, I'd be pretty sure as it's because he has realised there is no future for architectural technologists in the RIAI.

RITwing

@ martin123
Certainly.
Those who wish to engage in platitudes have won.
Those eager to effect meaningful change have lost.

RITwing

constructively engage with stakeholders in order to realise the best interests of the profession for the long term”.

My point again - as contained in the thread title - self builders are not being and will not be helped by architects here

martinn123

RITwing wrote: »

My point again - as contained in the thread title - self builders are not being and will not be helped by architects here

While I am not intimately familiar with this Organisation, I doubt that they proport to be a lobby group for Self-Builders, however a cursory look at their Web-site, I came across the following

The Institute will continue to work with the Department, the construction industry and the public to ensure the delivery of a better building control system, including our focus on strengthening the role of architectural technologists in the building control system.

Our primary concerns with BC(A)R include:

Lack of appropriate independent oversight - to support those tasked with compliance
Absence of mandatory project insurance - in line with international best practice.
Inadequate timescale - to ensure the supporting systems and documentation are in place. This is why the RIAI called for a deferral.

Self-Builders
It is unclear how self builders will be able to operate under the new system. The government will need to provide clarification on this issue.

RITwing

The RIAI engages with government, the professions, industry, clients and the public to promote the value of quality and design in architecture: to deliver attractive and sustainable built environments; to enrich our distinctive culture and heritage; to contribute to the competitiveness of our economy; and to improve quality of life for the people of Ireland, today and for generations to come.

That is what they claim to be about. Some of them aspired to this broader remit other than "the best interests of the profession".
They were asked to vote on a proposal to respond to our housing crisis by inter alia addressing the limitations imposed now on self builders .

They declined.

Shame on them.

They deserve the departments continued contempt.

DOCARCH

RITwing wrote: »

You do not have support from the RIAI.

@ RITwing. Were you there, at the EGM?

As far as I am concerned, you are talking through your hat and I am in two minds whether or not to close this thread as inflammatory!

There was no 'anti' self builder vote at the EGM on Tuesday.

That motion was quite rambling and involved an awful lot of various topics. Once the motion is put down, it can't be split or one part of the motion accepted and another part rejected.

The main reason the motion was rejected was the 'bring forward the review of the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations S.I.9 that is planned for 2015' part of the motion, as the sub-group of the RIAI are not ready with a review document yet.

The rejection of the motion has/had absolutely nothing to do with self builders. Bear in mind that self build projects are many rural architects bread and butter.

RITwing

I was not there. All anyone but the 300 odd who attended have to assess is the written RIAI record of the event.

My assessment is that architects rejected meaningful resolutions 1 + 3 in favour of the gelatinous platitude of resolution 2.

I accept there was no anti self builder sentiment but it appears from the written records there is at best an indifference to them.

That the RIAI respond in this way to legislation that

1. imposes (probable / arguable) uninsurable risks on it's own members
2. leaves it's AT members thoroughly disenfranchised
3. shoe horns all extending more than 40m2 ( or less if cumulative works must be counted) into the expense of SI 9
4. leaves the general society with a still inadequate system of building control ( a developer may still "buy" certs as before )
5. leaves LA's with all the power and no responsibility
6. leaves the future of self building in serious doubt

exposes the (majority ) membership as narrow focused self serving cowards

No more of this stuff from architects now please

.

DOCARCH

RITwing wrote: »

My assessment is that architects rejected meaningful resolutions 1 + 3 in favour of the gelatinous platitude of resolution 2.

Well...I was there and all I can say is that (respectfully) I would completely refute your assessment.

On Motion 1, if architects voted to seek the revocation of SI9...revocation simply will not happen...everybody else will simply move on...with engineers and surveyors very happy with themselves!

On Motion 3, a review of SI9 is scheduled by the DoECLG for early 2015. As I stated above, a sub-group of the RIAI (all members/working architects) are working on a very detailed proposal for (meaningful) amendments to SI9 for this review. If the RIAI seek have this few brought forward, the detailed proposal may be incomplete.

sydthebeat

DOCARCH wrote: »

.....

On Motion 1, if architects voted to seek the revocation of SI9...revocation simply will not happen...everybody else will simply move on...with engineers and surveyors very happy with themselves!

.....

TDs, senators and county councils have started to request revocation.

Alan Kelly doesnt seem to slow about changing things his predecessor started.

... just maybe.......