visual inspections

I think that was Reddy’s point

Anyway – in case you missed it Henno- this was issued last Wednesday. It was on the News at 6 and 9pm

Architects Call for Introduction of System to Deliver Stronger Enforcement of Building RegulationsPosted: Wednesday, October 19, 2011

The Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland (RIAI) has today (19th October) called for the introduction of a system to deliver stronger enforcement of the Building Regulations. The RIAI’s Director, John Graby, said that the Institute has been engaging with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (DECLG) about strengthening the enforcement system since 2004 including the creation of a National Building Inspectorate, and a defined statutory inspection system by competent professionals. The RIAI is the regulatory and support body for architects in Ireland.

John Graby said that the current downturn in the construction industry gives us an opportunity to strengthen and improve our systems so that they are in place when building activity commences again. “The introduction of the Building Regulations in the early 1990s has led to a marked improvement in building standards in Ireland. However, enforcement has always been an issue to ensure that these improvements are as widespread as possible. Unfortunately, the aim of those enforcing the Building Regulations is to inspect 12-15% of all building sites and we have been arguing for sometime that this is simply not sufficient.”

Mr Graby said that the RIAI has proposed that a new National Building Inspectorate – which could be staffed by redeployment from existing resources – be part of a stronger enforcement system. However, apart from creating such an Inspectorate, there are a number of possible options to be considered in strengthening our system, John Graby explained.

“We could follow some European systems which require full lodgement and approval of all drawings and construction data prior to the commencement of building work and regular inspections while construction is underway. However, for such a system to work, it would require some 1,200 additional local authority staff in place.

“Another option would be to require all drawings and construction data – with the design signed off by competent professionals – to be lodged online so that they can be accessed and inspected easily by the National Building Inspectorate. The design team on each project would be required to carry out routine statutory inspections and tests during the construction phase and on completion to ensure that the building works have been carried out in line with the original drawings. The National Building Inspectorate would carry out targeted inspections – like the Revenue Commissioners or the Health and Safety Authority. Such a system is under discussion with DECLG which would deliver enhanced public safety and consumer protection.”

While not commenting on any particular case, John Graby said that in relation to most residential building projects, architects and other design professionals are not involved in the construction stage of the buildings concerned, where the problems happen.

“In most residential building projects architects prepare design documentation and specifications for planning permission and fire certificates. This means that they can only give an opinion on the compliance of the buildings with these drawings based on a visual inspection because they are not involved in the construction stage. Clearly this is not sufficient and we believe that design professionals should be actively involved in every stage of the construction process.

“Where there is a building contract, where the architect administers the contract and where a site inspection service is provided then the architect’s opinion is given on that basis. Architects, engineers and other design professionals carry the legal responsibility for compliance of their design documentation with the Building Regulations; contractors, sub-contractors and other construction personnel carry the legal responsibility to build in accordance with the Building Regulations.”

John Graby concluded by saying that it’s important to bear in mind that no enforcement system can deliver 100% perfect results. However, there is definite scope to build on the improvements that have already been made since the Building Regulations were introduced, Mr Graby said.

@spoilsport wrote:

also this is manna from heaven to those unqualified successes, to those lads in the AA, they must be pointing their broadside cannons towards Johns battlements on the square. It will interesting to see how both sides handle this propaganda piece?

In 1990 I qualified as an architect from Bolton Street College of Technology.

In 1993 I was a associate Member of the RIAI – ARIAI.
The following October 1994 the ILS issued its practice note advising Members that Certificates could be accepted from people having prescribe qualifications.

DIR 85/384/EEC and S.I. 15 of 1989 referred.
Both of these documents confirmed my right to use the Title “Architect”
I didn’t need to be registered in order to practice or sign certificates”as an architect”

The ILS warned its members about accepting certs from people who offered them if they competence to do so solely because on their membership of representative bodies.

In other words, people who did not ALSO have either

(i) a prescribed qualification OR
(ii) 10 years providing professional services .

On May 1st 2008 The Building Control Act 2007 [BCA 2007] came into force.
People who were not Registered were prevented from using the Title “architect”.

Members of the RIAI were deemed to be automatically Registered – solely because of their Membership of the RIAI.
Many people held the opinion that this was acceptable because they had been “tested” – but some were tested over twenty years ago.

In order to comply with the I stopped using the Title “architect”.
I started describing my self as a “Planning and Design Consultant”.

In 2010 I joined the architects Alliance in protest at what I saw as a land-grab by the coterie of people running the RIAI.
I helped the Architects Alliance make their presentation to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Environment on 18th May 2010
I helped draught the Building Control Amendment Bill 2010, which wisely included the showing of evidence a proof of establishment
I lobbied members of both the then government and opposition and subsequent members of the current government and opposition.
I and others met with Registrar John Graby to see if common ground could be reached in order to restore the standing of those affected by BCA 2007.

In September 2010 I resigned as a Member of the Architects Alliance.
The spokesperson was on record on RTE stating that he accepted the title “building designer”
It had become clear there were core members who were not supportive of being tested in ANY way.

Ergo I decided to stop fronting for a rudderless organization of people unknown competence and an anti-testing, anti-RIAI bias.
Since then I have worked to assemble my information going back over 22 years to 1989 and before to enable me to apply to Register.

All along I have said that automatic Registration for Members of the Institute ONLY was not the correct way to structure the profession.
Better to include everyone in the organization and then set standards through regular evaluation of members – was this too near the bone?
I pointed out that people like Ruairí Quinn had been tested over thirty years ago and stopped practising as an architect more than a decade ago.
I said that merely having the Part III’s did not actually give any assurance to the public that the architect in question would act competently or with integrity.
I noted that while young architects with the Part II’s were offering an assurance as to what they WOULD DO, people with 10 years in practice could point to what they HAD DONE.

The problem with Stephen Opperman is that he has it all.

An prescribed qualification
More than 10 years in practice in Ireland as an architect.
Membership of the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland.
Yet his office has presided over the debacle that is Priory Hall.

And now the RIAI is blaming “The System” and “Light Touch Regulation”.
Oppermann was the architect of record – certification was his responsibility.

This is not a “win” for the Architect’s Alliance, most of who are neither qualified as architects.
This is not a “win” for the many fine Members of the Royal Institute, several whom I studied with.

What particularly annoys me is that I worked the self-certification system for years AND set the standards for the built work.
They are not mutually exclusive positions – you just refuse to certify for people who try to cut corners or build non-compliantly.

Because if you do that ONCE, you’re lost.

Time for the RIAI to prove its worth to the Public.

ONQ.