Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
24-10-2016, 11:56   #16
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 24,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlantic Dawn View Post
The basic structure is the same as it was when they were condemned, I'd be worried over time they might find more serious issues like they were built on sand or something. Is pyrite not an issue on these?
The basic structure had no faults from what I was told (RC Frame).
The redevelopment saw the blocks stripped back to the shell and rebuilt from there up. I don't think pyrite would be an issue as I can't see them not checking while these works were on going.

Quote:
Originally Posted by riclad View Post
I think there was problems with the old buildings, re they did not comply with safety standards re fire safety .if you are buying you could get a survey and maybe ask for a gaurantee the new building is compliant
with 2016 building regs and fire safety standards .
Are they good value for apartments in that location and that size.
Look on daft ie ,see what other apartments go for.
Find out where was the new building inspected by the council or is just
a case of someone signing a form ,This building is built as shown in the plans and is compliant
with 2016 building regs and fire safety standards .
One of the fire safety issues was with the external facade not been compartmentised properly and the fixings of same back to the frame. In the case of a fire in one unit, it could enter this void and the connections were not fire rated correctly so the whole front facade in theory could fall off onto the fire tenders below.

The Council Architects section supervised the construction with their own clerk of works on site permanently so my opinion is they they are better constructed now to current standards. But it's worth noting that the TGD Part B currently in use is the same regulations since 2006 so they haven't changed.
kceire is offline  
Advertisement
24-10-2016, 12:39   #17
WindomEarle
Banned
 
WindomEarle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Conductor View Post

Well kitted out it certainly is- however, if a block of apartments complying with current regs were built half a mile down the road- its a bit of a no-brainer which people would go for?
I know where you're coming from, but how would you know if the other block was complying with the current regs? It would not have gone through the same degree of scrutiny as Priory Hall.
WindomEarle is offline  
24-10-2016, 12:51   #18
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 24,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by WindomEarle View Post
I know where you're coming from, but how would you know if the other block was complying with the current regs? It would not have gone through the same degree of scrutiny as Priory Hall.
It's worth noting the the current fire safety regs are the same since 2006.
They will be updated next year though.

Also, the MC should have no reconstruction costs as didn't DCC buy and restore them?
kceire is offline  
Thanks from:
24-10-2016, 12:52   #19
goz83
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,832
Passing by an hour ago. They had viewings over the weekend. According to the security guard, they are all sold now.
goz83 is offline  
(2) thanks from:
24-10-2016, 18:45   #20
CFC007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 618
Are these been sold as new builds i.e. Fall under the help to buy scheme?
CFC007 is offline  
Advertisement
24-10-2016, 19:36   #21
The_Conductor
Moderator
 
The_Conductor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 28,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by CFC007 View Post
Are these been sold as new builds i.e. Fall under the help to buy scheme?
Technically- they fail to meet Revenue's definition of a 'new build'- however, if they sold out over the weekend, anything is possible (that said- they priced them to get them the hell out the door- regardless of whether they are new builds, or not, they were priced to sell........)
The_Conductor is offline  
Thanks from:
25-10-2016, 13:45   #22
CFC007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 618
Phase one fully sold out as confirmed above. I'm out of the country at the moment but would have liked to have been able to view the 2 bed duplex. I've been added to the cancellation list but more than likely will have to wait for phase 2. Any idea how far the redevelopment is in phase 2?
CFC007 is offline  
25-10-2016, 14:01   #23
goz83
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by CFC007 View Post
Phase one fully sold out as confirmed above. I'm out of the country at the moment but would have liked to have been able to view the 2 bed duplex. I've been added to the cancellation list but more than likely will have to wait for phase 2. Any idea how far the redevelopment is in phase 2?
At a guess, assuming phase 2 is the opposite side of the street, I would say a good year. They are bare a$$ right now. My brother is expecting to be moving in within the next fortnight, so if I get anymore info, i'll post it up here.
goz83 is offline  
(2) thanks from:
02-11-2016, 23:12   #24
goz83
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,832
18-24 months I am told by acouncil official
goz83 is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
29-01-2017, 20:09   #25
JMNK
Registered User
 
JMNK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 5
Jan 2017 purchaser

I have been thru the mill with the vendor the city council Dublin City Council DCC. They are selling these apts WITHOUT planning permission compliance. Yes they have the best builds in Dublin fantastic but to get the mortgage awarded the city council are not releasing any sort of planning docs. They are now suggesting a banking federation approach. Are there any other of the 40+ buyers out there having the same conveyancing problems. This is very serious in terms of planning law. The city council are being economic with the truth here. It will become a problem for any of us who may wish to sell in five years or so. I have been advised by other local authority architects that DCC should have a Part 8 Planning Act for this rebuild but none exists. If all buyers put this issue to DCC then they will need to sort it by Ministerial order for retention. Buyer beware. Let's get DCC to resolve it. They must be fair but are not which is very poor.
JMNK is offline  
29-01-2017, 21:36   #26
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 24,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMNK View Post
I have been thru the mill with the vendor the city council Dublin City Council DCC. They are selling these apts WITHOUT planning permission compliance. Yes they have the best builds in Dublin fantastic but to get the mortgage awarded the city council are not releasing any sort of planning docs. They are now suggesting a banking federation approach. Are there any other of the 40+ buyers out there having the same conveyancing problems. This is very serious in terms of planning law. The city council are being economic with the truth here. It will become a problem for any of us who may wish to sell in five years or so. I have been advised by other local authority architects that DCC should have a Part 8 Planning Act for this rebuild but none exists. If all buyers put this issue to DCC then they will need to sort it by Ministerial order for retention. Buyer beware. Let's get DCC to resolve it. They must be fair but are not which is very poor.
My understanding is that have been refurbished under the original planning application that was granted.
kceire is offline  
06-02-2017, 22:24   #27
JMNK
Registered User
 
JMNK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 5
Planning Permission Compliance

No, they lack the Architects compliance planning certification now needed under new regulations, incidentally devised after the first Priory Hall serious deficiencies. The Law Society template for conveyancing requires a full assessment of planning compliance for the cert of title; such is required by the mortgage company to proceed. Nobody has moved into the apts, the place was empty on Sunday with same security. We put down the deposits in October to DCC. Can they not pull their fingers out to get the buyers the correct paperwork. Can DCC not collectively address the 42 new buyers asap?
JMNK is offline  
07-02-2017, 09:46   #28
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 24,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMNK View Post
No, they lack the Architects compliance planning certification now needed under new regulations, incidentally devised after the first Priory Hall serious deficiencies. The Law Society template for conveyancing requires a full assessment of planning compliance for the cert of title; such is required by the mortgage company to proceed. Nobody has moved into the apts, the place was empty on Sunday with same security. We put down the deposits in October to DCC. Can they not pull their fingers out to get the buyers the correct paperwork. Can DCC not collectively address the 42 new buyers asap?
The works did not require Planning so something is being lost in translation between you, your solicitor and DCC. What new Planning Regulations are you talking about?

The construction works did not fall under SI9, so Assigned Certifier Role was not required.
kceire is offline  
09-03-2017, 10:55   #29
scsa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 19
Anyone else buying one of these and going through snagging right now? How's it going?

I only had a couple of points to get sorted (or so I thought!), but I'm getting a "take it or leave it" attitude back from DCC. :/
scsa is offline  
09-03-2017, 19:43   #30
JMNK
Registered User
 
JMNK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 5
Yes. Still having problems with DCC. Still the issue is Planning Compliance as per my message of 29.1. Many letters swapped between solicitors since, but DCC are being obstinate. Cannot go yet to Bank until DCC supply the correct legal compliance. The recent refurbished build needed planning permission it seems. Waiting but need to close. It's March yet most of us paid deposit in Oct 2016.

Buyers must unite somehow this week to get DCC the vendor to supply us the full paperwork. Can Hooke and MacDonald not help now?.
JMNK is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet