nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

New Building Control Regs

lawlorboy

Got planning in 2011 then made an amendment which we got planning march 19th 2014 with the conditions attached to the original planning permission but no one knows do we build to to 2013 regs or 2014 regs...anyone know the answer???

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

theirishlad

But thats up to the person building it , if they want the certs they can still do it. So if u wanted to sell if future maybe you should get certs.

People go on about how good our trades men are in ireland so why should any house be of poor quality nowadays never mind years ago what happened. Im living now with good trades men....

Poor Uncle Tom

martinn123 wrote: »

I think the stakeholders who will support it, are the Self-Builders as witnessed by the post above from,@theirishlad.

How many self-builders have actually made submissions in support of this proposal? It would be interesting to find that out.

martinn123 wrote: »

I wonder if the LA's are not willing to take on this inspection regime,

They are actually prevented from doing so by SI No.9 of 2014, This is the whole issue.

martinn123 wrote: »

if an offset could be agreed between the Fees associated with Planning, paid to LA's, and the sums required to have a professional carry out the required inspections etc.

We hear a lot about the low costs in UK for Building Control inspections, in the hundreds for a one off, but the Inspectors wages are being paid by the LA, and presumably subsidised by the Associated Planning Application Fees and Charges.

Did you actually make this proposal in a submission yourself?

Poor Uncle Tom

theirishlad wrote: »

I persume your a builder or architect of some type if u feel this is a bad idea for one off homes. If ssomeone is building a home to live in they will build it to a good standard , we dont need a certifier costing 10grand to tell us its a good standard.

You may be cutting off your nose to spite your face there.

If this move were to become a reality it would lead straight away to a two tier system for one-off housing:

1.Those who have been inspected and certified,
2.Those who have not been inspected and certified,

It is likely that the sale of a house from category 2 would be percieved as being of less value than a house from category 1.

When anyone builds a house for themselves they don't envisage selling it, but the reality is that a huge percentage will end up being sold, be it in 5, 10 or 20 yaers time, imagine your family not being able to realise full value for the property because you couldn't see past the top of your nose.

martinn123

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

This would be a regressive step in my opinion, for obvious reasons. I'm told that none of the stakeholders have backed this proposal, so it's unlikely to gain any serious momentum.

I think the stakeholders who will support it, are the Self-Builders as witnessed by the post above from,@theirishlad.

That support will be driven by the Fees associated so far with providing this service.

I wonder if the LA's are not willing to take on this inspection regime, if an offset could be agreed between the Fees associated with Planning, paid to LA's, and the sums required to have a professional carry out the required inspections etc.

We hear a lot about the low costs in UK for Building Control inspections, in the hundreds for a one off, but the Inspectors wages are being paid by the LA, and presumably subsidised by the Associated Planning Application Fees and Charges.

sydthebeat

theirishlad wrote: »

I persume your a builder or architect of some type if u feel this is a bad idea for one off homes. If ssomeone is building a home to live in they will build it to a good standard , we dont need a certifier costing 10grand to tell us its a good standard.

Decades of badly built houses would show otherwise.

theirishlad

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

This would be a regressive step in my opinion, for obvious reasons. I'm told that none of the stakeholders have backed this proposal, so it's unlikely to gain any serious momentum.

I persume your a builder or architect of some type if u feel this is a bad idea for one off homes. If ssomeone is building a home to live in they will build it to a good standard , we dont need a certifier costing 10grand to tell us its a good standard.

Poor Uncle Tom

theirishlad wrote: »

The word of them making the building regs advisory is still out there. That would mean ya dont need assigned certifier for a one off self build. Does anyone know when the government plan to take this new rule in. Will it b weeks months year's. ?

This would be a regressive step in my opinion, for obvious reasons. I'm told that none of the stakeholders have backed this proposal, so it's unlikely to gain any serious momentum.

theirishlad

The word of them making the building regs advisory is still out there. That would mean ya dont need assigned certifier for a one off self build. Does anyone know when the government plan to take this new rule in. Will it b weeks months year's. ?

sydthebeat

galwaytt wrote: »

...so, after 18 months of work by the client, including buying a site, getting planning, and pricing the job , I got my first "formal" response today of a project not going ahead specifically putting it at the door of S.I.9

"Unfortunately we have had to reconsider the approach we are taking to the move and given all the change that S.I.9 has brought into the market and the costs associated with it we have decided not to build at this time. We will hang on to our plot with a view of reconsideration in a couple years when the market has settled".

perfect timing to use as part of a submission on the review of SI 9 !!

hammer it home to them that theres a tangible real loss of income to both the economy and the central exchequer because of SI 9's failings

galwaytt

...so, after 18 months of work by the client, including buying a site, getting planning, and pricing the job , I got my first "formal" response today of a project not going ahead specifically putting it at the door of S.I.9

"Unfortunately we have had to reconsider the approach we are taking to the move and given all the change that S.I.9 has brought into the market and the costs associated with it we have decided not to build at this time. We will hang on to our plot with a view of reconsideration in a couple years when the market has settled".

galwaytt

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

I understand what you were saying, that element of 'professional' probably don't understand the roles of DC/AC at any rate.

It's hard to believe that anyone going to build a new house in this day and age wouldn't research the process to any degree, if they did so they would have a huge list of questions for any agent, they would also know to get three quotes for any works and not just choose the local school teacher to do the work.

I know, but it's more common than you think. That and starting before they've finished the bank paperwork. ..

Poor Uncle Tom

DOCARCH wrote: »

What I was getting at is that some 'architects' (who are not eligible to act as DC/AC) are (purposely) not telling their (potential) clients that they cannot undertake the role of DC/AC, so, they are not giving their (potential) clients whether or not they want the 'one stop shop'...some 'architects' are simply misleading their (potential) clients, presumably to get the job!

I understand what you were saying, that element of 'professional' probably don't understand the roles of DC/AC at any rate.

It's hard to believe that anyone going to build a new house in this day and age wouldn't research the process to any degree, if they did so they would have a huge list of questions for any agent, they would also know to get three quotes for any works and not just choose the local school teacher to do the work.

Strolling Bones

Well caveat emptor. Anyone involved in a race to the bottom deserves what they get.

DOCARCH

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

While I understand fully what you are saying, it is not obligatory for a planning agent to be able to act as DC/AC. While it might be nice for someone to get a 'one stop shop' type of service, it is not obligatory, necessary or in some cases desirable to be able to do this.

What I was getting at is that some 'architects' (who are not eligible to act as DC/AC) are (purposely) not telling their (potential) clients that they cannot undertake the role of DC/AC, so, they are not giving their (potential) clients whether or not they want the 'one stop shop'...some 'architects' are simply misleading their (potential) clients, presumably to get the job!

Poor Uncle Tom

DOCARCH wrote: »

I have heard a number of stories now where some people have been led down the garden path, where they have engaged 'architects' (or what they think is an 'architect'...i.e. a non-registered one) and get to/through planning stage, with no metion of BCAR, and then they are left high and dry as their 'architect' cannot act as DC/AC.

While I understand fully what you are saying, it is not obligatory for a planning agent to be able to act as DC/AC. While it might be nice for someone to get a 'one stop shop' type of service, it is not obligatory, necessary or in some cases desirable to be able to do this.

A far more important issue here which I feel is being ignored is that there is no emphasis on the ability of the building designer before planning stage where there is a significant expense and once planning permission is obtained the design is somewhat 'locked in'. A DC has to then pick through the bones of what has planning permission and make it compliant with the Building Regulations.

Strolling Bones

If only the local authorities would police building regs....

How silly of me to think that.

DOCARCH

galwaytt wrote: »

Where on earth have they been hiding.

I wouldn't blame Joe Public!

You started another thread on the BCAR public consultation. One of my headings in my submission is 'Lack of Information'. It is astounding how little public information the DECLG has put out there....don't tell people about the daft legislation seems to be the order of the day! Most people don't have a clue unless somebody tells them!

I have heard a number of stories now where some people have been led down the garden path, where they have engaged 'architects' (or what they think is an 'architect'...i.e. a non-registered one) and get to/through planning stage, with no metion of BCAR, and then they are left high and dry as their 'architect' cannot act as DC/AC.

galwaytt

Strolling Bones wrote: »

Up untill now and for small while longer - maybe. But over time as the CIRI register becomes more and more established the AC would be left in an impossible situation in entartaining a novice self builder.

..two people in the last week I've met, with planning, have never heard of DC/AC or SI9, despite using architects to get them this far.

One, yesterday, told me he was doing the blocklaying himself and when I mention AC he said his plasterer has 'all the certs'. Plasterer ??

Where on earth have they been hiding.

Strolling Bones

Up untill now and for small while longer - maybe. But over time as the CIRI register becomes more and more established the AC would be left in an impossible situation in entartaining a novice self builder.

RORY O CONNOR

Strolling Bones wrote: »

Here you go - from the building regs

Given that many builders employ subbies to do the work for them I don't see the difference between a self builder and a so called builder. In fact many self builders tend to be more serious about quality and workmanship than your average builder as it is in their best interests to be so!

Strolling Bones

MairtinM wrote: »

I don't see what the problem is with a Self Builder ( not qualified..but can do the job,

Here you go - from the building regs

2.5 To ensure a proper standard of workmanship, it is essential that persons are competent, possessing sufficient training, experience and knowledge appropriate to the nature of the work he or she is required to perform

RORY O CONNOR

An issue being completely ignored is development levies. I know of a couple who have a site and a budget of €120K to self build a new house.
They were about to put in a planning application and discovered the council concerned wants €12000 in development levies from them. So now they have decided that they can't afford to self build at the moment. The idea that its the professionals driving up building costs is a bit disingenuous!

Poor Uncle Tom

MairtinM wrote: »

not qualified..but can do the job,

In your opinion, who determines which unqualified person can do which job exactly? and who would be willing to certify that unqualified person's work? for the sake of this exercise, how would you determine liability if something were to be done wrong by this unqualified person?

MairtinM wrote: »

then getting a QS out to pass all the stages....

As pointed out above, a QS can't act as an Assigned Certifier.

MairtinM wrote: »

I can do all myself with the exceptions of Electrical and plumbing works.....

Can you get indemnity insurance for your build to back that statement up? or is an Assigned Certifier meant to accept that statement at face value?

MairtinM wrote: »

but where is the Fun! in that.

It's all fun and games until someone spills their milk......

Gumbo

MairtinM wrote: »

I don't see what the problem is with a Self Builder ( not qualified..but can do the job, building his own Home then getting a QS out to pass all the stages....I am currently thinking about buying a plot of land in Donegal which has a stone cottage on site my intentions are to knock down and replace with a donegal cottage, nothing big or fancy just a smallish 3 bedroom.....having read through this thread i am in 2 minds what to do? as it all is sounding so complicated with the amount of people/fees involved and regulations you have to pass before getting planning permission. I can do all myself with the exceptions of Electrical and plumbing works......but the whole process is sounding very daunting.....thinking should just buy a house/bungalow already built.....but where is the Fun! in that.

A QS cannot act as Assigned Certifier.

Chisler2

Drift wrote: »

I don't think there's any question of "if".

I think they will.

This legislation was specifically written for the purpose of removing any responsibility from the door step of the department and the local authorities and assigning it someone else and it does that quite nicely.

It's tied up in a neat little bow because if, god forbid, something awful does happen the department can point to this new legislation and say that it simultaneously holds the professionals responsible for the quality of construction and gives them the power "because they are the experts" to enforce good building practice.

The professionals, of course, know that this is not the case at all but to joe public and joe media it seems to be ideal.

So -hand it back to "them". In this case, the "they" is responsibility of the instruments of public administration and public health and safety.

.........or, alternatively, everyone in the construction-industry can (a) just go on hand-wringing or (b) just keep "blaming the builder". Yech!

MairtinM

I don't see what the problem is with a Self Builder ( not qualified..but can do the job, building his own Home then getting a QS out to pass all the stages....I am currently thinking about buying a plot of land in Donegal which has a stone cottage on site my intentions are to knock down and replace with a donegal cottage, nothing big or fancy just a smallish 3 bedroom.....having read through this thread i am in 2 minds what to do? as it all is sounding so complicated with the amount of people/fees involved and regulations you have to pass before getting planning permission. I can do all myself with the exceptions of Electrical and plumbing works......but the whole process is sounding very daunting.....thinking should just buy a house/bungalow already built.....but where is the Fun! in that.

Drift

10 visits minimum, based on everything going exactly to plan is what we are seeing too.

Of course, in practice, no build ever goes EXACTLY to plan so 12-15 visits is probably a more realistic minimum for a totally "standard" house.*

*N.B.: No house is totally standard!

DOCARCH

BryanF wrote: »

'Guidance on maximum fees... Upto 3800 'max'.

I think the whole thing, this proposed review, is a little smoke and mirrors!

I have now read all the consultation documents issued by the DECLG on Thursday.

That figure of E 3,800.00 that the DECLG suggests, for the role of AC, is based on the AC having a fully certified design available, based on standard construction, based on a competent builder carrying out the works, and, based on 5 site visits/inspections. I will come back to this!

There is no mention anywhere of the role of Design Certifier (DC) and associated costs? The Design Certifier is now the missing person in BCAR!

In the past, your typical self builder (note, some, but not all), got the local draughtsman, or woodwork/tech drawing teacher or guard (it has happened!), to draw up their house and get planning permission...and with those drawings in hand, went off and built their house, direct labour.

Now, under BCAR, you have to have a Design Certifier - either a registered architect, chartered engineer or building surveyor who not only has to sign off on the design, but as per the Design Certificate, signs off/certifies that they were involved in the preparation of the design drawings/documentation.

The self builder now must have a set of drawings...typically construction drawings...and calculations/documentation demonstrating how the design complies with the Building Regulations. The aspect alone, has its own significant cost. This is not addressed/mentioned in the consultation documents issued by the DECLG?

The biggest cost issue the DECLG has not mentioned, for the self-builder, and not mentioned for review, is that the BCAR will still prohibit the direct labour route for building. In reality, for the self builder, this is where the bulk of the additional cost is, the fact that anybody wanting to build a house must use a main (CIRI registered) building contractor. The difference between the main contractor route vs. direct labour could be E40K for a typical one off house?

The BCAR review by the DECLG will not tackle this aspect of cost!

The sensationalist (past) reports in the media that AC's are charging E50K/E60K for the role is just pure spin from the DECLG, and an attack on professionals, the easy target!

It is quite plausible that a self builder who was going to builder their house, direct labour...and then confronted by BCAR...would face a hike of an additional E50K...this would likely be the combined cost of now having to appoint a main contractor and appoint a DC and AC.

Why don't the DECLG suggest putting a cap on building costs? They wouldn't dare!!!

Back to that figure of E 3,800.00 that the DECLG suggests, for the role of AC (again note, based on the AC having a fully certified design available). The flaw in the DECLG calculation for AC fees is that it is based on 5 site visits/inspections.

In conjunction, the DECLG have also published a sample inspection plan, of what DECLG would expect needs to be inspected. I would suggest this is a marker for the AC! If the AC inspects what is on the sample inspection plan, they could/would be deemed to have carried out their duty as AC. If the AC does not carry out inspections of what is on the sample inspection plan, they could/would be deemed not to have carried out their duty.

The huge flaw in the DECLG calculation for AC fees is that what is on the sample inspection plan...simply and physically cannot be inspected on 5 site visits/inspections.

I am going to do my own exercise on the sample inspection plan, but, I have already concluded (conservatively) that it is a minimum of 10 site visits/inspections would be required to adhere to the sample inspection plan, and, bear in mind that is for 'standard construction'! Anything off standard will also need inspection, in addition...e.g. no mention of structural steel in the sample inspection plan!

That is why I believe the E 3,800.00 figure that the DECLG suggests is simply fantasy!

BryanF

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/kelly-orders-review-of-building-regulations-1.2163301?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it

'Introduced to end self certification' :
No there is still essentially a situation where the developer pays for certification

'Since the regs were introduced more than 6000 homes have been built'
Is that not planning permissions?

'4options':
'Advisory instead of Mandatory ' : so you only/ sort of / might bother complying???
'Boarden the pool..increase competition.. Reduce prices' : but same Liability?
'Guidance on maximum fees... Upto 3800 'max' + 2200.. If compliace issues' : brilliant this 'guidance' on 'max' fees!!!
'Exemptions' : I'm building a house and don't want to pay for anyone to ensure I comply with building regs, may I be exempt please...

BryanF

Home builders want a house built to building regulations.
The government ( & DOE) through legislation removed themselves and their building control authorities (actual contractor/ self-builder supervision) from any liability.
Designers/professionals are (due to current legislation) completely responsible for building regulation compliance. They need to check everything. This has some economies of scale, the shock is arguably worse felt on the domestic project, which is certainly suffering from the increased associated costs, leading to this si9 Amendment.

Who else can take on the responsiblity of complying with regulations on site, every detail/ material/system installed? To reduce the designers visits/checking requirements - for example, Will a domestic electrician/ plumber/ rebar fixer/ window installer carry PI indemnity and issue an ancillary certificate taking responsiblity/liability for their work?

I empathise withe home-builders/self-builders - what liability will they take on, perhaps in the form of insurance for the first 10 years?

The amendments 'schedule of visits' is not practical to confirm/ certify/ accept liability - but the costings in this amendment suggest an extremely 'light touch' approach, by the designer/certifier.

Will this amendment reduce home builders costs?
Will the insurers accept this or raise there PI cover?
Will professionals find themselves doing more design/supervision/ administration (=costs) to ensure compliance?
Will the costs in another year be similar to now, perhaps after the next election the next government will sort this out?
Will an increase in those elgible to certify find it easy to re-enter the market, considering they were ostracised/excluded a year ago?
Will their clients come back to them now?
What impact has this had on their reputation?
Has anyone put a cost on Mr Hogans si9 legislation?

Will this amendment, reduce the costs of domestic building?