Thatâs a great post. The article below covers a lot of what youâve said as well. Whats your confidence level in the certifiers out of interest? From my limited knowledge, there was someone still signing off on all those buildings in the Celtic Tiger era but they just werenât personally liable for it. Is that the main difference?
You could not make it up. Lads complaining about high paying jobs going into Dublin. Do they forget that the social welfare bill and health bill gets paid out of tax and people have to work to pay tax. No suggestion that maybe People who are looking for social housing might get jobs in these companies or in industries and services supporting them
1 Like
Yes, I am suggesting that taking Facebook employees as your first concern when designing a housing policy is a bad idea. I didnât think it was a difficult point that I would have to repeat three times.
Where or who has Facebook employees as a central part of a housing policy or are you trying to build a new strawman?
On an unrelated point - Iâd suggest you tone down your sneering style of engagement. It might all make sense in your head but most of the rest of us are baffled by your unfounded arrogance.
1 Like
In fairness you could apply that to a few people on here
1 Like
Not untrue - but itâs definitely a theme with this head the ball. Heâs like a hormonal teenager stropping around the place and calling everything and anything stupid.
Pre 2014, it was self certification really. For example, fire certs were given upon design drawings and approval, but no one ever was appointed to ensure what was designed was what actually went in place. So it was essentially up to the builder, and if you have a developer led project, the design team is working with them so its not really in their interest to increase costs on the developer builder so let stuff slide.
I do recall a major housing regeneration project I was on and there was a cowboy set up building it where the architect made them pull down a load of really badly built block walls. Caused huge uproar on the site, but the architect wasnt approving it and letting it go. Again, this was a government led project where the architect was employed for the client and not the builder, so he didnt give a shit what the builder thought of him.
A large number of places wouldnt take on the role of assigned certifier. There is huge ramifications on doing so. Even on the article you posted there, its clear the fault is being put on the architect and they are going after him because he signed off on it. Who signed off on Priory Hall or any of those places? No one knows or gives a shit, whereas now, you are the one going to be sought after if the building fails.
The uptake on BCAR courses by all accounts is huge, even through my own profession where we pretty much completely stay away from it too as it is too much of a liability to even contemplate getting involved in.
Its the age old problem though in Ireland. Having BCAR costs money. And then people moan because they have to pay extra to ensure that everything has been properly regulated, inspected and signed off on. But dont want to pay for the increased costs by having this monitoring procedure in place. One off house builds generally have an opt out clause where you dont have to have it in place, and its fine for them for the most part. All other public works or housing developments do not have the opt out clause.
1 Like
What is your issue with Planning so? You plan for projected demand. You build amenities for that. Because itâs a tech firm itâs an easy one to take a sneery attitude to.
You said there was a crisis, what about the climate crisis?
You go on about âplenty of sitesâ in the CBD. These are the sites being developed- Hickeys, CIĂ Houston, CIĂ Tara, CIĂ Connolly, Castleforces etc. They are looking to build densely on public transport nodes.
In terms of 6 floors or so, this is the problem;
Locals have branded as âentirely unacceptableâ developer Brian M Durkan & Coâs plans to build a seven-storey apartment block in a Dublin suburb.
Part of the group, Durkan (Davitt Road) Ltd, recently applied to An Bord PleanĂĄla for permission to build 265 apartments at the disused Dulux Paints factory site in Drimnagh under the fast-track scheme for large residential projects.
However, Drimnagh Residentsâ Community Group has written to An Bord PleanĂĄla criticising the plan, on which a decision is due in the next 10 weeks.
How can the architect know if the design re fire buffers is followed or correct fire retardant materials used? Would he be able to check that in a real world scenario
You made the point below:
I responded and said I didnât think it should be the starting point of any policy on housing. It shouldnât even be a primary concern. Shouldnât be a concern at all I would argue.
You then accused me of saying attracting jobs is a bad thing or some other nonsense. Which is a Tim Higgins type response youâre normally better than. It was like some sort of Boris/labane why do you hate freedom non sequitur. Christ above.
All I said, and had to repeat three times, is that the likes of your Facebook employees are not your starting point in preparing a policy to address the housing crisis.
All I did was make a simple and consistent point. Then you ran off in all directions with it and you then come back with this:
Well sorry if you find a very simple, clear and consistent point to be baffling and arrogant.
For the love of bejaysus.
Do you even know what youâre trying to say or what topic we are talking about?
Thatâs not a policy to build for Facebook at all - youâve completely misunderstood what I was saying. Itâs countering @Mac suggestion that building these apartments is bad - even if they are largely occupied by high-end workers.
My sole point throughout is that supply is the issue, and supply in almost all forms, solves multiple issues of rent prices, homelessness, house prices, affordability etc.
All fire dampers or holes that have been filled have to be essentially marked and signed off on site by an approved fire proofing company (eg Fireseal would be the main one in Ireland). They essentially fill all the holes where pipes pass through and put a little ticket type thing on it to certify they have completed it. They then issue a full detailed specification and report on all the work they have completed which forms part of the certification. Fireproofing works for the most part can only be completed by approved specialist companies.
All materials used need to have all specification sheets included in the BCAR report. And then there would be fire retardant paint or other such items that come with specific references to each individual can, barcode or reference number, and these numbers (often with a detachable sticker) have to be submitted.
Usually, a competent design team would also include a Fire and DAC consultancy practice (usually the one firm can manage the design of both FSC and DAC). They would then be part of the site meetings and supervision once their elements of works arise. Again, small example, but a recent job I was on and the DAC drawings required a 1m opening into all rooms. The Architect didnt cop this and only showed a clearance that gave about 950mm ope. It meant over 80 door ways already built had to be widened and caused considerable expense on the client.
Obviously you could manipulate this in some way and either just say yeah its grand or pretend youâve used the fire proof materials but to go to such an effort to do so would be silly really. It would be going to legal matters of fraud etc by doing so.
1 Like
Yes.
Put it together there.
Itâs all very well to extol the virtues of preservation, environmentalism and ending the housing crisis like many on the left do. But there are trade offs.
The sites in Dublin city worth developing are largely being developed or in planning currently. It does not matter if it is 6 or 10 floors though as NIMBYs will all complain.
And my response to you was that high end workers are not where housing crisis response needs to focus. They really shouldnât even be in the conversation.
And as Iâve also pointed out to you many times, simple supply is not the issue because housing is not a normal supply and demand market. Yes we are short on units, and greater supply is needed. But housing markets are different to other markets in response to supply and demand. Treating it as a simple supply issue, the same as any other supply and demand market, is fundamentally and incontrovertibly wrong. Correct me if Iâm wrong but you seem to be of the view that adding units, any units, will solve the housing crisis. This appears to be FGâs view too, but this is just incorrect.
Who said thatâs where the housing crisis response was focused or should focus?
Thereâs quite a difference between saying that apartments being built beside Connolly is not a bad thing (which is what I was arguing to @Mac ) to saying that a housing crisis focus should be on building apartments for tech workers.
I donât think that just adding units solves the crisis (and it should be noted we have multiple different and interlinked crises) but I canât see a solution that doesnât involve adding units. Can you?
Ok, youâre going around in circles now. If you read back the thread of comments I think my simple point should be clear enough.
Yeah. @Mac made some very valid points as to why the development is not necessarily a good thing. Your response was itâd be good be good for tech workers and Facebookâs future expansion. So, if thatâs what itâs good for it does nothing for the housing crisis and is the wrong kind of development to address the housing crisis, according to your logic.
Youâre now asking me off I see a solution to the housing crisis that doesnât involve adding units? Do you really want or expect me to respond to that question? Whoâs being arrogant now?
My argument is that increased supply will always help the housing crisis. Any existing person living in Dublin moving in to a unit at Connolly is freeing up a unit somewhere else. If they are a new worker to the city and moving into Connolly they are not competing for a unit somewhere else. Both of these have indirect positive actions on the overall market.
Thatâs not an argument that all efforts should be focused on developments like this - its an argument that developments like this can assist the resolution of the housing crisis. For absolute clarification - this isnât me arguing for any policy to support developments like these other than letting them take place (i.e. planning etc)
A simple thought experiment - if we had twice the number of housing units in Dublin today as we do now - do you think the housing crisis would be as acute? Conversely, if we had half the number of housing units in Dublin today as we do now - do you think the housing crisis would be more or less acute?
You say the market doesnât follow simple supply and demand, and to an extent you are correct but it certainly doesnât ignore them.
These community groups would sicken your shit.
Why? - If they raise valid questions then they need to be answered - if they are not valid then they will also be answered.