Architectural & BIM Technology

Architectural & A ; BIM Technology

Executive sum-up

The undermentioned papers is based on the development of St John’s college Waterford metropolis. A brief debut will present the reader to the plants being carried out in the development itself. A background on the history of the college edifice is carried out and from here the chief legal issues that will originate in such a undertaking will be outlined and three of these issues will be examined in more item. These issues will be be aftering with regard to preservation & A ; protected constructions, wellness & A ; safety and contractual differences. At the terminal of the study a brooding acquisition piece will be written to demo what the writer has learned during this procedure.


The undermentioned study is based on the development that will take topographic point at St John’s college Waterford metropolis. The study will foremost place the chief legal issues that could originate in such a development and secondly critically measure these legal issues. Not all of the chief legal countries will be looked into but all these countries will be listed in the subdivision below. From this subdivision three legal issues will be chosen and analysed in greater deepness from an designer & A ; architectural technician’s point of position. The development that is taking topographic point is financed by the respond lodging association. The chief contractors for the plants to be carried out are Mythen building. The development will include the undermentioned, a full restoral of the college edifice which will include 21 self-contained flats along with a twenty-four hours Centre for aged people. An extra 36 new construct one sleeping room flats will be constructed on site analogue to the folly route. [ 1 ]

Main legal issues

  • Planing with regard to preservation & A ; protected constructions
  • Boundaries & A ; easements
  • On site contracts
  • Contractual differences
  • Health & A ; safety
  • Tendering issues
  • Duty of attention

The three issues that will be analysed in greater deepness will be be aftering with regard to preservation & A ; protected constructions, wellness & A ; safety and contractual differences.

St John’s college background

St John’s College site is located at john’s hill, Richardson folly, Waterford metropolis ( fig.3 ) . Harmonizing to the national stock list of architectural heritage the edifice was constructed between the old ages 1865-1875. The college was originally designed by designer George Goldie [ 2 ] . The design of the edifice can be slackly termed the Gothic resurgence manner ( fig. 4 ) . The edifice is listed as protected constructions ( reg. no. 22830069 ) [ 3 ] while the entryway along Johns hill ( fig.5 ) is besides listed as a protected construction ( reg. no. 22830075 ) [ 4 ] . A full description of both these protected constructions can be found on the national stock list of architectural heritage web site. The original usage of the edifice was a theological college and this was the instance up until 1990’s when the edifice was closed due to a diminution in career [ 5 ] . The edifice has been left unoccupied now for a figure of old ages. In 2007 the respond lodging association in partnership with local authoritiess, communities and the section of environment purchased the college edifice and a part of the environing land with the purpose of lodging for the aged strategy [ 6 ] .

Planing permission for protected constructions

In order for the development to derive be aftering permission the developer will hold to plan programs that are in conformity with the Waterford metropolis council development program 2013 and the planning and development act 2000. This is due to the college edifice being listed as a protected construction ( reg. no. 22830069 ) . Before any planning permission can be received a full architectural heritage impact appraisal and an expert adviser survey must be carried out by a preservation specializer that records the architectural important of the college and recommendations for preservation.

The chief elements of plants to the protected constructions will be the fix and renovation of the college edifice. Prior to the beginning of any plants or fixs and refurbishments a written specification of plants and a works method statement should be submitted to the Waterford metropolis council for understanding in relation to the protected construction. All plants carried out in relation to the protected construction should be carried out in conformity with the best pattern preservation methodological analysiss ; the heritage councils published advice on rules of good pattern in direction of architectural heritage, these are as follows [ 7 ] :

  • Avoidance of unneeded plants.
  • Repair instead than replacing of deteriorated or damaged characteristics.
  • Minimal intercession.
  • Reversibility.
  • Use designers and applied scientists trained in edifice preservation.

In the planning and development act 2000 protected constructions are covered under portion IV subdivision 58 which states the followers:

“Each proprietor and each occupier shall, to the extent consistent with the rights and duties originating out of their several involvements in a protected construction or a proposed protected construction, guarantee that the construction, or any component of it which contributes to its particular architectural, historical, archeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, societal or proficient involvement, is non endangered”. [ 8 ]

With these judicial admissions being addressed and adhered to be aftering permission will hold a greater opportunity of being approved by the Waterford county council.

Health and safety

The plants carried out for this edifice will hold to follow with the safety, wellness and public assistance at plants ordinances 2013. These ordinances give counsel on the proper processs that must be in topographic point before and during building.

First the client must name a undertaking supervisor for both the design procedure and the building phase. The client can be self-appointed if competent to set about the responsibilities involved. These individuals must be appointed before or at the design procedure phase and the beginning of the building phase. The client should besides be sensible satisfied that the individuals allocated will hold the resources to enable that individual to execute the responsibilities posed under these ordinance before the beginning of plants. [ 9 ]

Health and safety program

This program gives the contractors command for the occupation and those working on site the safety issues specific to the undertaking. The program can be divided into two subdivisions: the pre-tender program and the concluding program.

The pre-tender program should be orgainsed by the undertaking supervisor that will be appointed to the undertaking. This program should be prepared every bit shortly as possible when the undertaking is conceived and submitted as portion of the stamp certification. This program should besides put out all of the important safety hazards associated with the undertaking, hence leting the contractor to develop wellness and safety processs and systems for the undertaking. The Pre-tender program should incorporate the followers:

  • Information such as the completion day of the month, site information, conditions and current usage etc.
  • Foreseeable wellness and safety hazards in the design.
  • The building methods recommended by the interior decorator.
  • Any extra information the planning supervisor believes the contractors should be made cognizant of to digest the safety of workers.

From here the chief contractor will be appointed and will go at that place duty to develop the program farther into its concluding signifier. The client must so guarantee that this concluding program is developed to a high degree to allow building plants to get down. The concluding program should incorporate the followers:

  • The wellness and safety direction regulations and processs developed for the site.
  • The safety direction construction developed for the undertaking.
  • Any issues the contractor may raise in hazard appraisal prepared in conformity with the safety, wellness and public assistance at plants ordinances 2013.
  • Rules for supervising conformity with the program.

Health and safety file

The planning supervisor has the duty of fixing a wellness and safety file for all constructions that comprise the building undertaking. This file should incorporate the information on the construction design, building and how the edifice will be used by the residents. The followers should be in the completed wellness and safety file:

  • Detailss of the building method and stuffs.
  • A record of drawings and programs used throughout the period of building.
  • Detailss on the location and nature of public-service corporations and services.
  • Detailss of equipment and care installations.
  • Any information from the wellness and safety program that would be relevant for future undertakings.

This file is to be made available for review by any individual e.g. sub-contractors who may necessitate it to follow with their statutory responsibilities or to any individual geting an involvement in the premises by the client.

Contractual differences

On big building undertakings contractual differences can frequently originate, this has become more common topographic point over the last figure of old ages due to the economic down bend. Construction undertaking participants are non willing or able to compromise and utilize hard currency to smooth over unsmooth musca volitanss hence differences arise and finally must be resolved in the legal system. For the intent of this study two countries of contractual differences will be examined in deepness, range of plants and building defects.

Scope of plants

A range of plants is defined by the building contract between the owner/client and the contractor. All contractors involved in a building undertaking have a range of plants, the sub-contractors range of plants are contractually defined but different from the chief contractors. The range of plants set out by the proprietor should be really explicitly defined due to contractors non being contractually obliged to execute plants that are beyond the contractual range of plants. Harmonizing to the RIAI Standard Form of Contract:

“For the consideration hereinafter mentioned the Contractor will upon and subject to the Conditions annexed hereto execute and finish the Works shown upon the Contract Drawings and/or described in the Specification, Bills of Quantities and Conditions all of which together with this understanding are hereafter referred to as the „Contract DocumentsaˆY[ 10 ].

In the event where the proprietor issues a alteration of order to the original range of work, this may be considered a breach of contract and can let the contractors to halt plant until both parties reach an understanding sing the alteration or excess plants that fall beyond the original contractual range of plants.

In the instance of programs and specifications, differences can originate between the proprietor, contractors and design professionals when they interpret paperss otherwise, particularly when the description of plants in programs and specifications are ill-defined or equivocal. The proprietor has the implied guarantee that the programs and specifications are right, accurate and buildable. [ 11 ]

Construction defects

Construction defects can originate at two times, the first being during the building procedure while the 2nd being a good trade of clip after the building is finished, this is known as latent defects.

Over the class of the building period the proprietor may place excess plants in the instance of defects that is either non in the original range of plants or non in conformity with the programs and specifications. A difference arises when the contractors do non hold with the owner’s averment of the faulty building. The contractors by and large allow the proprietor to order the replacing or fix of the faulty work. The contractors will so hold a claim against the proprietor at the terminal of the undertaking in the event that the contractors had conformed to the programs and specifications they received. The chance of this go oning during the building works at St John’s College is really prevailing as the edifice is really old and has non been occupied for some clip and some defects may non be evident during the first reviews of the edifice. In this instance it is the author’s sentiment that a clause should be stipulated in the contract with the chief contractor that a certain sum of money should be held in keeping as a precaution against any defects that may originate during the building procedure.

A latent defect can be defined as building defects that are non readily evident or ascertainable during an review of the completed plants. A building contract should include a latent defects clause so the proprietor of the belongings has a certain sum of clip to foreground a building defect. In the event when the clip frame in this latent clause expires the proprietor may still do the contractor accountable for the building defects. This can be when the contractor is in breach of contract or in a instance of responsibility of attention under carelessness jurisprudence. [ 12 ]

Brooding acquisition



John Scriven, etel ( 1999 ) .a contractual usher to major building undertakings. London: Sweet & A ; Maxwell.

John Uff ( 1996 ) .Construction jurisprudence. 6th erectile dysfunction. London: Sweet & A ; Maxwell.

Susan Fink ( 1997 ) .Health and safety jurisprudence for the building industry. London: Thomas Telford.

Web sites

1870 – St. John’s College, Waterford.Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // . Last accessed 13/03/2015.

Amelia Sorohan.Latent defects: key issues( 2012 ) . Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 15/03/2015.

Architectural heritage protection( 2011 ) . Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 10/03/2015.

Construction Contract Terminology( 2010 ).Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // # range. Last accessed 15/03/2015.

First Social Housing Scheme Funded with Private Borrowing from AIB.Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // . Last accessed 11/03/2015.

Marilyn Klinger. ( 2009 ) .Confronting Construction Conflicts.Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 13/03/2015.

Main Record – County Waterford.Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // type=record & A ; county=WA®no=22830075. Last accessed 10/03/2015.

Pull offing wellness and safety in building( 2007 ).Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 15/03/2015.

Protected constructions.( 2011 ) . Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 10/03/2015.

Public Works Contract for edifice plants( 2014 ) . Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 10/03/2015.

Safety, wellness and public assistance at work ( building ) ordinances 2013.( 2013 ) . Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // Last accessed 13/03/2015.

Saint John ‘s College, Richardson ‘s Folly, Waterford, County Waterford.Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // type=record & A ; county=WA®no=22830069. Last accessed 11/03/2015.

St Johns College, Waterford.Available: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( 2014 ) . Last accessed 11/03/2015.