“…As one technical academic review noted in an analysis of building safety post‐Grenfell:Almost every aspect of the industry's safeguarding regulations and procedures appear compromised or overlooked … it is evident that the industry is either unaware of the regulations and standards that apply or is neglecting responsibility for fire safety. (Gorse and Sturges 2017:73)…”
Section: Distributing Disaster: Value Extraction and Engineering In B...mentioning
Despite legislation banning combustible cladding materials after the 2017 Grenfell fire, at least 10,000 buildings were still awaiting remediation in 2022. This is in large part because fragmented ownership and management structures alongside the specificities of British property law produced a situation in which individual apartment owners (leaseholders) were liable for the costs of remediation rather than those who own the buildings (freeholders) or the developers who built them. Faced with unaffordable remediation bills, leaseholders became stuck in uninsurable, unsellable, potentially fire‐prone units. Through the case of a London housing block, we trace the relationship between the structure of landed property, value extraction, and the distribution of risk to understand how a significant portion of the UK's housing stock have remained firetraps. We argue that institutionalised value grabbing not only created the conditions of social murder but also became an obstacle to remediation, resulting in a politically charged “asset class struggle” over the way in which the structure of housing property and its capitalisation mediates social harm.
“…As one technical academic review noted in an analysis of building safety post‐Grenfell:Almost every aspect of the industry's safeguarding regulations and procedures appear compromised or overlooked … it is evident that the industry is either unaware of the regulations and standards that apply or is neglecting responsibility for fire safety. (Gorse and Sturges 2017:73)…”
Section: Distributing Disaster: Value Extraction and Engineering In B...mentioning
Despite legislation banning combustible cladding materials after the 2017 Grenfell fire, at least 10,000 buildings were still awaiting remediation in 2022. This is in large part because fragmented ownership and management structures alongside the specificities of British property law produced a situation in which individual apartment owners (leaseholders) were liable for the costs of remediation rather than those who own the buildings (freeholders) or the developers who built them. Faced with unaffordable remediation bills, leaseholders became stuck in uninsurable, unsellable, potentially fire‐prone units. Through the case of a London housing block, we trace the relationship between the structure of landed property, value extraction, and the distribution of risk to understand how a significant portion of the UK's housing stock have remained firetraps. We argue that institutionalised value grabbing not only created the conditions of social murder but also became an obstacle to remediation, resulting in a politically charged “asset class struggle” over the way in which the structure of housing property and its capitalisation mediates social harm.
“…Prior to the fire, new cladding had been installed on the exterior of the building as part of a nine million pound refurbishment project (Gonzalez and Voutsadakis, 2018). While each of the individual cladding materials used in the retrofitting and refurbishment of the building fulfilled the minimum installation requirements in relation to explicit industry regulations for combustible claddings and fire barriers in themselves, there was an unforeseen problem when they were used in combination to form cladding panels (Gorse and Sturges, 2017). Rather than creating a barrier, together the combination of materials used in the new cladding system acted as a catalyst, allowing the fire to spread rapidly across the building and resulting in a potentially preventable tragedy (Gonzalez and Voutsadakis, 2018).…”
“…Based on surveys conducted by Gottfried et al [2] and Alpsten [3], it has been found that failures ascribed to the execution phase are more prevalent than errors in the design process, and the construction phase appears particularly prone to errors. On the other hand, structural elements are considered to be the most fundamental components of a building to be controlled for their quality, since they are directly responsible for structural integrity, strength, and safety, and any defects in them will cause fatal accidents, severe additional costs, or delay [4,5]. In many projects, structural elements have also proved to have defects after execution but directly related to the execution phase, such as incorrect positioning of the frame in relation to the foundation, or insufficient length of the reinforcement bars [6].…”
This paper investigates quality management (QM) during the execution phase of structural elements by proposing, developing, and testing a complete framework by integrating building information modeling (BIM) and augmented reality (AR) technology. QM during execution is boosted by BIM–AR integration through a dedicated web-based system aimed at reducing the occurrence of omissions and negligence. With such a system, efficiency is improved by allowing the entering of inspection data directly in a shared digital environment, where people involved in QM have permanent access to updated information and inspection results, clearly organized, and entered in real time. The system has been developed in the asp.net framework using C# language where, by generating a web-based checklist and establishing its link to AR, it can enhance the process of information extraction from industry foundation class (IFC) 4D BIM models and the recording of inspection data. A test has been performed on a real case study in Budapest, to assess the effectiveness of the system in the field. Results demonstrate the following benefits brought by such a type of QM system: improved understanding of the design, access to information, and overview of the quality status of the project, leading to reductions in defects and reworking, as well as improved and quicker response and decision-making.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
