Dublin 15 schools to be shut down over structural defects

thomasj

Just breaking on RTE now

https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2018/1023/1006092-school-buildings/

Tyrrelstown educate together and at lukes mulhuddart are the two schools in question .

Hurrache

The same building, big impact. Issues were found a long time ago within the building, not sure if they're related and they didn't realise the full extent until the concentrated survey today after similar issues found in schools built by the same builder.

hotmail.com

LCC and Scoil Choilm built by the same guys. Dreadful news.

AlanG

An engineer on the pat kenny show this morning was saying that there is a good chance they may be able to fence off the perimeter of the building and put safety scaffolding over the doors to allow occupation to continue. The risk is not of the building falling down but of the outer shell (outside the insulation structural wall) falling off as it is not properly secured to the structural wall. Hopefully he is right and the school can reopen soon.

thomasj

Latest report from RTE states
https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/1024/1006361-school-construction/

The Department of Education has clarified details of the findings of a risk assessment carried out at Ardgillan Community College last Friday.

It says the assessment found that there was an 80% risk of parts of the school external wall falling in the event of storm force winds. This could be bricks dislodging and falling.

Structural engineers who examined the school also found a 20% risk of collapse of internal walls under the same circumstances.

The Department of Education said yesterday that issues discovered in two Tyrrelstown schools yesterday were similar to those found at Ardgillan.

Nijmegen

Ok, a 20% risk of internal wall collapse during a storm just can't be acceptable.

Larbre34

This is awful stuff. Obviously the 40 odd schools in question will have to be properly inspected, but even these three are an indictment of procurement and oversight practices.

Its bad enough that folk buying new build homes in the last 15 years have had to worry about pyrite, fire protection and sound insulation, now that same generation can't trust the buildings supposed to protect their kids.

This is potentially so bad that we'll see some civil servants immediately retiring with only 90% of their pension secured. Catastrophic.

JupiterKid

Larbre34 wrote: »

This is awful stuff. Obviously the 40 odd schools in question will have to be properly inspected, but even these three are an indictment of procurement and oversight practices.

Its bad enough that folk buying new build homes in the last 15 years have had to worry about pyrite, fire protection and sound insulation, now that same generation can't trust the buildings supposed to protect their kids.

This is potentially so bad that we'll see some civil servants immediately retiring with only 90% of their pension secured. Catastrophic.

Yes, shocking but all part of the piss poor construction practices by cowboy builders during the so called Celtic Tiger era. The legacy is to be seen in Priory Hall, the pyrite scandal, the mica scandal and now this..

How many more incidences of atrocious building practices will come to light? Self-certification has been a total disaster as we can now clearly see that builders and those supplying builders with materials just cannot be trusted.

beauf

You'd have to wonder how (be they CS or private sector) how these things came to be missed, both by the people building it and those checking it.

oblivious

JupiterKid wrote: »

Yes, shocking but all part of the piss poor construction practices by cowboy builders during the so called Celtic Tiger era. The legacy is to be seen in Priory Hall, the pyrite scandal, the mica scandal and now this..

How many more incidences of atrocious building practices will come to light? Self-certification has been a total disaster as we can now clearly see that builders and those supplying builders with materials just cannot be trusted.

LCC was opened in 2011, so not Celtic tiger. By all means blame the builders , but equally there a civil services that's responsible too for singing off on these builds

Hurrache

JupiterKid wrote: »

Yes, shocking but all part of the piss poor construction practices by cowboy builders during the so called Celtic Tiger era. The legacy is to be seen in Priory Hall, the pyrite scandal, the mica scandal and now this..

How many more incidences of atrocious building practices will come to light? Self-certification has been a total disaster as we can now clearly see that builders and those supplying builders with materials just cannot be trusted.

Most of these weren't built during the Celtic Tiger period though?

Don't think they were self certified either, someone from the Department of Education was supposed to have inspected the progress periodically. Questions could be asked if they did inspect, and to what extent, or if they just submitted travel expenses.

advertsfox

Update from the school via an email today...

Tyrrelstown Educate Together wrote:

Dear Parents / Guardians,

As you may know, the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and Minister for Education Joe McHugh visited Tyrrelstown Educate Together NS, St Luke’s NS and the Community Centre earlier this morning.

Following a brief observation of the external buildings the Taoiseach and Minister met with both Principals and the Manager of the Community Centre, among others, to discuss the impact the recent closure has had on the local community.

Having raised a variety of concerns that directly impact the children, parents and community in general, we have received assurances and a commitment from the Taoiseach and the Department of Education in finding a suitable solution that would allow children to return to education as soon as reasonably possible. We have also been informed that the Department of Education are assessing a range of viable options for both schools and will inform of us of these in the coming days.

We are committed to keeping our school community informed of any developments as they occur and will update you as soon as we have any tangible information from the Department of Education.

Kind regards

Tim Stapleton

rolion

advertsfox wrote: »

Update from the school via an email today...

http://tetns.ie/2018/10/update-25th-october-2018/

deandean

Well if the structural assessment concluded there is an 80% chance of the outer walls falling down in the event of a storm, and bearing in mind the storms those schools have been subjected to in the last couple of years, I would say the assessment is completely wrong.
Sensationalism at its worst.

oblivious

deandean wrote: »

Well if the structural assessment concluded there is an 80% chance of the outer walls falling down in the event of a storm, and bearing in mind the storms those schools have been subjected to in the last couple of years, I would say the assessment is completely wrong.
Sensationalism at its worst.

It's a probability not a predictions........tin hat time

LorelaiG

deandean wrote: »

Well if the structural assessment concluded there is an 80% chance of the outer walls falling down in the event of a storm, and bearing in mind the storms those schools have been subjected to in the last couple of years, I would say the assessment is completely wrong.
Sensationalism at its worst.

An 80 percent chance it will means a 20 percent chance it won't. If my kids were in that school there'd have been hell to pay if they were injured in the event of the wall collapsing.

byhookorbycrook

DES has emailed all school principals looking for extra space in other schools, even those outside the catchment areas.

thomasj

deandean wrote:

Well if the structural assessment concluded there is an 80% chance of the outer walls falling down in the event of a storm, and bearing in mind the storms those schools have been subjected to in the last couple of years, I would say the assessment is completely wrong. Sensationalism at its worst.

One thing you do not gamble on , is life.

Nijmegen

deandean wrote: »

Well if the structural assessment concluded there is an 80% chance of the outer walls falling down in the event of a storm, and bearing in mind the storms those schools have been subjected to in the last couple of years, I would say the assessment is completely wrong.
Sensationalism at its worst.

That shows a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of how probabilities work, I would suggest. A 1% chance of failure on an airplane doesn’t mean you should feel comfortable hopping on the first 99 flights. The 1% could happen on flight 1 or flight 1,001

deiseindublin

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

DES has emailed all school principals looking for extra space in other schools, even those outside the catchment areas.

Just what distance could students (and staff) be reasonably expect to travel each day?

beauf

deiseindublin wrote: »

Just what distance could students (and staff) be reasonably expect to travel each day?

Anything on a public transport link within an hour or so?

lawred2

So will the state seek redress/compensation for this?

Are the builders remedying the situation?

Are they solvent?

Hurrache

beauf wrote: »

Anything on a public transport link within an hour or so?

Well take the 40D out as that doesn't hit anywhere residential until it gets to Finglas, and I wouldn't say there's much spare capacity there.

advertsfox

Fresh email in from the school just now:

Tyrrelstown Educate Together - Newsletter wrote:

Dear Parents / Guardians,

Over the course of yesterday and into today we have been in regular discussion with
the Department of Education and their Consultants regarding the options for an
interim accommodation solution for Tyrrelstown Educate Together NS. As I'm sure
you can appreciate, this is a fast-moving situation but we want to keep you as
informed as we can, as things progress.

We are all in agreement that the preferred solution would involve staying on-site in
alternative accommodation, keeping our pupils, teachers, staff and community
together as much as possible. Investigations on establishing whether this is a viable
option will be carried out over the next few days as well as establishing other
possibilities as a contingency.

We will endeavour to keep you updated as things develop and in the meantime,
please find below a statement received from the Department last night.

Kind regards

Tim Stapleton

Thursday October 25th 2018

Update on WBS Building Issues

The Department of Education and Skills has today been in contact with all schools
constructed by Western Building Systems, and which are due to undergo a structural
assessment, to confirm the arrangements for that assessment. The assessments are
proceeding over the weekend and mid-term break in order to minimise disruption to
schools and ensure that they can be completed as quickly as possible.

The Department’s interim accommodation team has been working intensively over
the course of today, in consultation with the school principals, to secure an interim
accommodation solution for Tyrrelstown Educate Together National School and St
Luke’s National School.

Minister McHugh added, “Good progress has been made today in ensuring that the
students and staff of the affected schools in Tyrrelstown will have an interim
accommodation solution by the end of the mid-term break. While we await the
outcome of further structural assessments, we would wish to be clear that school
buildings will only be closed where it is deemed necessary to do so, and every effort
will be made to minimise disruption to students, staff and families.”

Site visits at Ardgillan Community College and the schools in Tyrrelstown also took
place today, involving Department of Education and Skills officials, structural
engineers and representatives of Western Building Systems. This provided Western
Building Systems with the opportunity to view the structural issues identified at the
three schools. The Department is awaiting a response from Western Building
Systems. The overriding priority of the Department remains the health and
safety of the schoolnpupils and staff.

PhoenixParker

deiseindublin wrote: »

Just what distance could students (and staff) be reasonably expect to travel each day?

beauf wrote: »

Anything on a public transport link within an hour or so?

Generally a bus would be provided between the existing school site and the new school site.

Least that's what happened when my local (primary) school had insufficient space and used empty classrooms in a school 20 minutes away.

blanch152

Larbre34 wrote: »

This is awful stuff. Obviously the 40 odd schools in question will have to be properly inspected, but even these three are an indictment of procurement and oversight practices.

Its bad enough that folk buying new build homes in the last 15 years have had to worry about pyrite, fire protection and sound insulation, now that same generation can't trust the buildings supposed to protect their kids.

This is potentially so bad that we'll see some civil servants immediately retiring with only 90% of their pension secured. Catastrophic.

How are civil servants to blame for private sector contractors criminally ripping off the state by building sub-standard schools?

deiseindublin

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Generally a bus would be provided between the existing school site and the new school site.

Jeez, bus would have to be on the go over and back all day in some schools, so many not arriving for first class and signing out early.

ozmo

LCC And 4 others got the all clear according to RTE 9pm News

A Shaved Duck?

blanch152 wrote: »

How are civil servants to blame for private sector contractors criminally ripping off the state by building sub-standard schools?

The civil service had to sign off on the builds, so questions quite rightly have to be asked and evidence of any due dilligence provided.

People simply cant blame the builders here...somebody in the department of education has to sign off.

beauf

Its a systemic failure of the whole system from the top to the bottom. Public and Private.

its not just schools, its all building. Its all standards, Fire, energy and structural.

https://passivehouseplus.ie/news/government/unpublished-seai-report-showed-systemic-building-control-failure

Its been going on for decades.

ozmo

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

People simply cant blame the builders here...somebody in the department of education has to sign off.

Im told by a builder friend that this is complex who is at fault...

It may even be the hired Brick layers at fault - there are these things apparently called "FishTails" which are metal bars with hooks each end - put in to tie the inner walls to the outerwalls - they go in the morter under the bricks.

The issue is that these have to align right on each side or the bricks will not site right - will look crooked - so some brickers may take the shortcut and pull them out if they dont align or not fit them at all in order to keep their brick productivity up - which affects what they are paid.

Once the wall is built - you cannot see them - so inspection would have been difficult.

This may all the out of date information - my builder pal hasn't been a builder for several years.



http://www.btpreservation.co.uk/wp-content/files_mf/1392560703expansivecorrosion.jpg

AGC

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

The civil service had to sign off on the builds, so questions quite rightly have to be asked and evidence of any due dilligence provided.

People simply cant blame the builders here...somebody in the department of education has to sign off.

The builders could self certify in many cases.

If the government/civil service are to be involved it should have been the OPW. To try and lay the blame at a civil servant of whatever grade who may not know one end of a hammer to the next is not correct.

Department of Education looks after education not construction.

Pat Dunne

AGC wrote: »

The builders could self certify in many cases.

If the government/civil service are to be involved it should have been the OPW. To try and lay the blame at a civil servant of whatever grade who may not know one end of a hammer to the next is not correct.

Department of Education looks after education not construction.

You might want to have a look at the following brief from the Dept of Education and Skills, in regards of their Planning and Building Unit.
https://www.education.ie/en/The-Department/Management-Organisation/Planning-Building-Unit.html

The last section mybe of interest

Professional and Technical Section

The section is responsible for:

providing specialist technical advice and assistance as required to all sections within the Planning and Building Unit
development of policy and procedures in relation to capital works
research - planning and design of education facilities, energy efficiency etc. and development of design guidance and standard room templates
provision of assistance to schools and Design Teams at all stages in the progression of projects through the design and construction stages
production of a suite of documents to facilitate school design including design, procurement, construction and procedural advice.

AGC

Pat Dunne wrote: »

You might want to have a look at the following brief from the Dept of Education and Skills, in regards of their Planning and Building Unit.
https://www.education.ie/en/The-Department/Management-Organisation/Planning-Building-Unit.html

The last section mybe of interest

Thanks Pat my bad!

LorelaiG

The community centre is reopening on 10th November.

A Shaved Duck?

AGC wrote: »

The builders could self certify in many cases.

If the government/civil service are to be involved it should have been the OPW. To try and lay the blame at a civil servant of whatever grade who may not know one end of a hammer to the next is not correct.

Department of Education looks after education not construction.

So your saying that not one person from either the civil service or department of education should at the very least inspect building works for a school that taxpayers money if funding and children will be sitting in 5 days a week?

I find this very hard to believe.

Edit... just noticed you have been educated on this..my bad

AGC

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

So your saying that not one person from either the civil service or department of education should at the very least inspect building works for a school that taxpayers money if funding and children will be sitting in 5 days a week?

I find this very hard to believe.

Edit... just noticed you have been educated on this..my bad

And my original post stated I felt it should be done by OPW. I never said it shouldn’t be inspected by the civil service.

A Shaved Duck?

AGC wrote: »

And my original post stated I felt it should be done by OPW. I never said it shouldn’t be inspected by the civil service.

Which was wrong, department are explicitly responsible.

AGC

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

Which was wrong, department are explicitly responsible.

I know, sure I have been ‘educated’

blanch152

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

The civil service had to sign off on the builds, so questions quite rightly have to be asked and evidence of any due dilligence provided.

People simply cant blame the builders here...somebody in the department of education has to sign off.

We can't be paying civil servants to stand around and watch every bricklayer to see that they are doing their job properly.

This looks like a clear situation of a private sector company seeking to shortcut a public job.

oblivious

blanch152 wrote: »

We can't be paying civil servants to stand around and watch every bricklayer to see that they are doing their job properly.

This looks like a clear situation of a private sector company seeking to shortcut a public job.

You can have an independent engineer to sign it off at critical stages of the build. Like people have to do ascondition of get a loan for an house extension.

Money is drawn down in lots when the section is signed off, final payment at roof and snag. The engineer should also be bonded to cover any mistakes on there part.

beauf

They should take photos and keep them.

tabby aspreme

Up until about 20 years ago on state funded projects, there would have been a Clerk of Works who was employed by the govt dept providing the funding, to oversee the building work, on a large school project they would have been onsite constantly similar to a foreman and would have been very thorough, my father would have built schools and council houses in the 60's and said the CoW would tap a steel nail into the block joints to make sure there was no gaps in the mortar, and push against all the ceiling slabs with a plank after skimming and if any skim popped at the joints or nail holes, it would all have to be redone.

Currently on a school building project, the Board of Management hire an architect, who will work on their behalf, on designing, tendering, and signing off on the work, the dept are at arm's length from the actual job.

Former Former

blanch152 wrote: »

We can't be paying civil servants to stand around and watch every bricklayer to see that they are doing their job properly.

This looks like a clear situation of a private sector company seeking to shortcut a public job.

This, a million times over.

You pay someone to do a job, you expect them to do it properly. If you got a builder to do your own house and three years later it's falling down, you wouldn't say "ah well, I've only meself to blame".

In this specific case (as I understand it), the defect is that the outer wall is not properly joined to the inside wall. So any inspector would have to be on-site as that job is happening, arriving the day before or day after would be useless. That's not reasonable.

I'm baffled by the response of WBS which was pretty much "well, the department signed off on it" - not that the work was up to code, not that they'll fix any defects, but that because the department didn't catch them in the act, tough sh1t...

The bigger worry is what else is lurking in these buildings.

A Shaved Duck?

Former Former wrote: »

This, a million times over.

You pay someone to do a job, you expect them to do it properly. If you got a builder to do your own house and three years later it's falling down, you wouldn't say "ah well, I've only meself to blame".

In this specific case (as I understand it), the defect is that the outer wall is not properly joined to the inside wall. So any inspector would have to be on-site as that job is happening, arriving the day before or day after would be useless. That's not reasonable.

I'm baffled by the response of WBS which was pretty much "well, the department signed off on it" - not that the work was up to code, not that they'll fix any defects, but that because the department didn't catch them in the act, tough sh1t...

The bigger worry is what else is lurking in these buildings.

Two wrongs dont make a right, when the department is spending multiples of millions on a building project at the least there should be a dedicated resource signing off on any and all milestone in the project. Its this attitude of we cant expect a civil servant to be on site thats in my opinion nonsense, its the least that we should expect there is a whole department specifically for this and they are getting paid well.

Former Former

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

Two wrongs dont make a right, when the department is spending multiples of millions on a building project at the least there should be a dedicated resource signing off on any and all milestone in the project. Its this attitude of we cant expect a civil servant to be on site thats in my opinion nonsense, its the least that we should expect there is a whole department specifically for this and they are getting paid well.

Ah listen, there's a chip on your shoulder about civil servants that's completely tainting your view on this.

There should be a basic expectation that a contractor is going to perform the job he's paid to do. Foundations, steelwork, roof - I'd expect an engineer to sign off on those.

To detect any and all faults like this one, you'd need multiple inspectors on site at all times, looking over the shoulders of every builder, plumber and electricinan, and then people like you would be b*tching because bureaucracy is adding to the cost of projects and driving up the cost to taxpayers.

The builder is at fault here. They didn't do their job. I don't know why people have to defend and make excuses for cowboys stealing their taxes.

A Shaved Duck?

Former Former wrote: »

Ah listen, there's a chip on your shoulder about civil servants that's completely tainting your view on this.

There should be a basic expectation that a contractor is going to perform the job he's paid to do. Foundations, steelwork, roof - I'd expect an engineer to sign off on those.

To detect any and all faults like this, you'd need multiple inspectors on site at all times, and then people like you would be b*tching because bureaucracy is adding to the cost of projects and driving up the cost to taxpayers.

The builder is at fault here. They didn't do their job. I don't know why people have to defend and make excuses for cowboys stealing their taxes.

What chip? expecting some responsibility on a department to actually fuflill their remit in terms of oversight for major building projects?

In the last 15 years its been obvious that the private sector has taken advantage of the light touch regulation and we are still seeing the same behaviours by all parties. If you can accept that then thats fine but at least be mature enough to see an alternative view.

What do you mean by "people like me"?

AlanG

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

What chip? expecting some responsibility on a department to actually fuflill their remit in terms of oversight for major building projects?

In the last 15 years its been obvious that the private sector has taken advantage of the light touch regulation and we are still seeing the same behaviours by all parties. If you can accept that then thats fine but at least be mature enough to see an alternative view.

What do you mean by "people like me"?

Hiring QA for a project where where the QA company take responsibility for the work can often cost as much as the initial project and is therefore rarely done. This is because it is very difficult to check most work and guarantee it has been done correctly if you are not doing the work yourself. I have been involved in several major projects where no company even tendered for the QA work because it is so difficult.
Realistically if you want the department to give the guarantees you seem to expect then only half the number of schools will be built. It seems ridiculous but if you ever try to run a project on this scale then you will see that is how it works.
Even if you are just doing a small extension to a house it will cost about 8000 to get an engineer to sign off all the work as opposed to the final external and plan inspection that costs about 600. At that you will still have no recourse.

If you want to see how difficult it is try ringing a few engineering firms asking them how much it costs to get them to sign off AND guarantee work on a 40 square meter extension. I would be surprised if anyone would even quote for the work.

fly_agaric

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

expecting some responsibility on a department to actually fuflill their remit in terms of oversight for major building projects?

We can expect all we want but if the Dept. can't actually do this work, might as well expect pigs to fly. Whatever units the Dept. have on paper I doubt they have enough of their own people with the right skills to make sure contractors don't cut corners. Unfortunately, its unlikely there are loads of engineers and builders out there willing to do all these thorough checks on projects for the state for free. You probably don't wish to pay more taxes to make it happen either (public sector "leeches" and all that Indo propaganda).

Not a parent myself, but I afaik schools seem to expect voluntary contributions from parents to keep running. Every one near me has a yard covered in clusters of "temporary" prefabs for the last 20 years or more. Its not really suggestive of a well funded system with loads of resources to throw at teams of professionals inspecting school building projects.

A Shaved Duck?

Clearly a lot of civil servants reading this thread.

Im not suggesting that there is an infinite pot of cash nor that there isnt blame on both sides.

It does seem that making the point that the department responsible is partly culpable here is pretty unpopular.

If you lads are satisifed that the same lackluster approach to regulation is applied because its deemed to expensive or how can we expect people to do their jobs..then your entitled to your view.

It doesnt change the fact that schools had to temporarily closed down as the system is still broken..but sure carry regardless there is always a grey area or excuse.

ozmo

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

...If you lads are satisifed that the same lackluster approach to regulation is applied because its deemed to expensive or how can we expect people to do their jobs..then your entitled to your view.

Not a civil servant - but only fair to lay blame where it lies - Builder was paid to do a job - and they didn't do it to spec.

It just not possible to put a minder sitting beside every bricklayer as they work....

Gov is doing what it can now - suing the builders and fixing the problem.

Thankfully the numbers of schools left affected is small and caught in time - it could have been much worse.