Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

From the 1st of March 2014 ( next year ) if you are

a) Building a new house
b) Building an extension which is greater than 40m2

These changes will affect you as follows , from that date

When works start you must send to your local authority in standard formats set down by regulations

1 . A Commencement Notice signed by you ( not your agent as may be the case now ) stating when works will start and including all drawings , specifications and calculations to show how you will comply with building regulations.

2 A Certificate of Compliance ( Design ) signed by your Architect , Engineer or Surveyor* to confirm that the building is designed in accordance with building regulations

3. A Notice of Assignment of Person to Inspect and Certify works signed by your Architect , Engineer or Surveyor* ( who may differ from the person at 2 )

4. Undertaking by Assigned Certifier – the person at 3 confirms your appointment of them

5. Notice of Assignment of Builder . You confirm you have appointed a competent builder ! Self build / direct labour posters note this one !

6. Undertaking by Builder . The builder confirms your appointment of him . He confirms he is competent and that he knows and will build to regs. Self build / direct labour posters note this one too !

At completion of the works and – note carefully – before the house is occupied or used the following must be submitted to the local authority

8. Certificate of Compliance on Completion as completed by the person at 3 above

10. As built drawings specifications and calculations

11. The Inspection Plan as implemented by the person at 3 above.

The days of building off planning permission drawings and "do I really need an Architect/Engineer/Surveyor?" are now numbered.

Bullseye1

Hi Sinnerboy just to confirm the (b) in your post above are you sure its for extensions over 40 sq. m? I've bolded the text below which seems to contradict?? Maybe I am misreading.

(2) The requirement for a Certificate of Compliance on Completion shall
apply to the following works and buildings—
(a) the design and construction of a new dwelling,
(b) an extension to a dwelling involving a total floor area no greater
than 40 square metres

Typo in the SI.
Our Masters and Overlords are not perfect

Bullseye1

Cheers. LOL.

atech

sinnerboy wrote: »

8. Certificate of Compliance on Completion as completed by the person at 3 above

Regarding this cert it appears that the builder (a Principal or Director of a Building Company only) also has to sign Part A of this.

So although you could technically have gotten individual trades to sign the undertaking of their various trades (i.e. going the direct labour route) this appears to require a single contractor to take responsibility for all the trades.

My own reading of this (and I could be wrong) is that there is nothing to stop a self builder appointing himself Main Contractor and by so doing accepting an onerous responsibility.

A fella called fish

I wonder why they request that design calcs are submitted upon completion of the works, as opposed to the UK who comment on calcs prior to construction thus reducing the risk of design error?

Seems a bit pointless to submit calcs once the structure has been built.

No - you always submit drawings and calculations at commencement and - if changes are made during construction then supplemental / additional calculations also at completion.

And local authorities will be performing a validating and public filing service only. They will not be "approving" anything.

sinnerboy wrote: »

And local authorities will be performing a validating and public filing service only. They will not be "approving" anything.

Even this Building Control (lite version) is better than the current system. Hopefully it will evolve into a more comprehensive system like in the UK.

con1982 wrote: »

Even this Building Control (lite version) is better than the current system. Hopefully it will evolve into a more comprehensive system like in the UK.

Interesting to see what the increase in costs will be.

I suppose project costs will increase due to:

(1) Increase in insurance premiums to cover risk
(2) Additional supervision & inspection on site required to satisfy certification process
(3) Paperwork of (2)

con1982 wrote: »

Even this Building Control (lite version) is better than the current system. Hopefully it will evolve into a more comprehensive system like in the UK.

I can see why one may think this but it is simply not the case. The Building Control Act 1990 bestows tremendous powers on Local Authorities to enter properties ( sites and completed buildings ) to inspect , open up works and demand alterations etc. and for 23 years Local Authorities have avoided exercising these powers. With great power comes NO responsibilty in this case.

The latest regulations in my view further reduce Local Authority responsibilities , de facto. They will charge fees , demand documents ( drawings / calcs ) and simply store them. Be under no illusion that the validation process that these regs require is a superficial exercise to check that a package of documents is on the face of it a complete set of documents but they will play no part to determine or approve any actual substantive content of the documents.

Make no mistake , inspections and enforcement of building regulations will in everyday practice , be something that Local Authorities will continue to have no hand or act or part in.

I took this out of the Certificate of compliance that from March of next year which will come into force when submitting drawings to the planning authority at commencement notice stage.

"3. I confirm that I have been commissioned by the building owner to design, in conjunction with others, the works described above and to certify such design. I further confirm that I am a person named on a register maintained pursuant to Part 3 or Part 5 of the Building Control Act 2007 or Section 7 of the Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland (Charter Amendment) Act 1969 and that I am competent to carry out my design and to coordinate the design of others for the works concerned."

I had a look at the Building control act 2007, I may give it another look but I think I may have to undertake a Professional Practice Exam!! I never heard of this, I have a Diploma max. and 4 and a half years supervised experience, don't know if that's recognized supervision. Any information on the above would be appreciated.

Supertech

If you are a registered Architect or Building Surveyor, or a Chartered Engineer, you' re fine.

If you're anything else you're not, and from March 1st next year you will be unable to sign the certificate from which that extract is taken.

It's that simple, and that serious.

Depending on your qualification and experience there a number of routes on to the register of architects. Routes to the Building Surveyors Register are less clear but seem less flexible. There is a defined progression route for engineers, but I don't have any experience in that area.

If you are a registered Architect or Building Surveyor, or a Chartered Engineer, you' re fine.

If I apply to CIAT and become a member does that register me? Do I have to register with the Board of Admissions? I will defo look into this more over the next couple of days. Hard to decipher the legal mumbo jumbo!!

Supertech

As it stands at the moment architectural technologists and CIAT are not included, and it appears unlikely at this stage that that situation will change. There's no such route as registering with the Board of Admissions. If you wish to supervise and certify at construction stage for compliance with Building Regulations you will need to undergo technical assessment or complete the Register Admission Examination an register as an Architect, or seek to Register as a Building Surveyor through one of the appropriate routes.

Supertech wrote: »

If you are a registered Architect or Building Surveyor, or a Chartered Engineer, you' re fine.

If you're anything else you're not, and from March 1st next year you will be unable to sign the certificate from which that extract is taken.

It's that simple, and that serious.

Depending on your qualification and experience there a number of routes on to the register of architects. Routes to the Building Surveyors Register are less clear but seem less flexible. There is a defined progression route for engineers, but I don't have any experience in that area.

Just because someone isn't themselves a registered professional doesn't mean that they can't do design under the supervision of a registered professional. So the unregistered designer (eg Engineer pre chartered, etc) can still work within an organisation.

muffler

con1982 wrote: »

Just because someone isn't themselves a registered professional doesn't mean that they can't do design under the supervision of a registered professional. So the unregistered designer (eg Engineer pre chartered, etc) can still work within an organisation.

What about the "sole trader" though?

muffler wrote: »

What about the "sole trader" though?

You are right. Having only worked within organisations I hadn't give it much thought.

If someone has managed do develop or sustain a construction based consultancy in the current market, I'd assume that they are probably well qualified. I suppose I'm coming from a structural engineer's perspective.

Is there any particular group of designers which you feel are at risk to the changes?

con1982 wrote: »

Is there any particular group of designers which you feel are at risk to the changes?

The whole profession of architectural technology has been undermined by these changes.

There is some illogical thinking in this that all architects are technicians and all technician are wannabe architects

con1982 wrote: »

Just because someone isn't themselves a registered professional doesn't mean that they can't do design under the supervision of a registered professional. So the unregistered designer (eg Engineer pre chartered, etc) can still work within an organisation.

"under supervision" would infer that the supervisor, who is the ultimate certifier, is the senior as regards technical knowledge.

the problem occurs when the designer is more knowledgeable than the certifier.
Cases will arise where the ultimate signatory of the certificate does not have the requisite knowledge to do so.
Forward to where the build is on site and the mess that will happen.
One of the underlining functions of the technician was to be the communication between the design architect and the builder.
That is now gone.... and the reasons for the initial formation will arise again.

From the perspective of the housebuilding/extending client the exclusion of technicians limits the pool of persons available to quote for these technical design inspection and certification services. Will be very interesting to tune into Joe Duffy when that dawns on the general public....

As it stands at the moment architectural technologists and CIAT are not included, and it appears unlikely at this stage that that situation will change. There's no such route as registering with the Board of Admissions. If you wish to supervise and certify at construction stage for compliance with Building Regulations you will need to undergo technical assessment or complete the Register Admission Examination an register as an Architect, or seek to Register as a Building Surveyor through one of the appropriate routes.

Steady up here, Do you mean Architectural Technologists and CIAT are not allowed to inspect and certify at construction stage or not allowed to do work for the design stage?? Where does that leave lowly self employed Architectural Technicians who do work for the design and planning stage?? Whats the legislation for those who provide design and planning services??

Brave Harvey wrote: »

Steady up here, Do you mean Architectural Technologists and CIAT are not allowed to inspect and certify at construction stage or not allowed to do work for the design stage?? Where does that leave lowly self employed Architectural Technicians who do work for the design and planning stage??

EXACTLY

Not allowed to Design, Inspect or Certify !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ah now that doesn't seem fair, I'm calling Joe Duffy tomorrow..

CIAT link re:Building Control

http://www.ciat.org.uk/en/other/document_summary.cfm/docid/7C4E94BF-D40E-440E-894732D477DF31B6

Out of those qualified built environmental professionals, these Regulations as proposed, will exclude those professionals who are one of the most qualified to perform the function of certification. We therefore consider it essential that to ensure that our professionals in Ireland are able to practise and provide the skills required, which must include certifying compliance, such Regulations must include Chartered Architectural Technologists within the list of competent professionals. CIAT already holds a register of competent professionals and any Chartered Member who offers and provides services direct as a sole practitioner, partner or director must register their practice with the Institute, complying with the Institute’s regulations which include mandatory professional indemnity insurance, which is policed. The Institute has a zero tolerance policy on non‐compliance.

Yes and the minister ignored this submission...

Supertech

sinnerboy wrote: »

Yes and the minister ignored this submission...

And every other submission from architectural technologists, which effectively all said the same thing.

What is very interesting in all this is the Minister's record in relation to what have now become known as 'practically trained architects' and indeed to architectural technologists and technicians at the time the original Building Control Act was being introduced. He was a staunch defender of the skills and abilities of these people at that stage, but seems to have developed a form of amnesia in the intervening years.