- Joined
- Oct 19, 2008
- Messages
- 28,387
- Points
- 113
Imagine you have to keep paying your mortgage even though your flat has collapsed....
Will our Tiong-build flats suffer the same date ?
- Thread starter blackmondy
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 109,174
- Points
- 113
No lah, I think HDB has more stringent checks. Tiongland is a super corrupted shithole cuntry, construction projects often makan most of the money and use lesser or inferior raw materials to cut costs.
But expect annoyances such as cracks, and HDB to say 'not my problem'.
P.S: Don't forget the shitty Tiong brand lifts found in most newer flats, older flats after experiencing 'lift upgrading', MRT stations and overhead bridges. Don't take my word for it... go inside one and experience for yourself. There's one outside the north gate of Botanic Gardens, at the overhead bridge.
But expect annoyances such as cracks, and HDB to say 'not my problem'.
P.S: Don't forget the shitty Tiong brand lifts found in most newer flats, older flats after experiencing 'lift upgrading', MRT stations and overhead bridges. Don't take my word for it... go inside one and experience for yourself. There's one outside the north gate of Botanic Gardens, at the overhead bridge.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 61,988
- Points
- 113
beware of prc-developed properties in sg. kingsford huray, prc development firm, gets "no-sale license" from ura. all their developments in sg are in jeopardy due to poor quality, shoddy workmanship, and safety issues.
https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/re...ts-no-sale-licence-for-normanton-park-project
https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/re...ts-no-sale-licence-for-normanton-park-project
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2019
- Messages
- 509
- Points
- 43
this one seems like is not due to material problem.they are trying to bring down the building becos of some other reason.although i hate ccp.but also must respect the true news to report.hehehe
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2018
- Messages
- 31,273
- Points
- 113
Kingsford Huray gets no-sale licence for Normanton Park project
Mon, Apr 15, 2019 - 7:15 PM
KINGSFORD Huray Development has been hit with a no-sale licence for its project at the former Normanton Park site, prohibiting it from selling units before the Temporary Occupation Permit (TOP) is obtained.
In June, Kingsford Huray was granted approval for a 1,882-unit project on the site, comprising 1,863 apartments and 19 strata terrace houses. But the Controller of Housing (COH) issued a no-sale licence for the project on Jan 15, "as the company had failed to meet the requirements for a sale licence", said an Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) spokesman in response to queries from The Business Times.
He said the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) had found that at the developer's other project Kingsford Waterbay, some building works such as windows, barriers and common storey shelter "had deviated from requirements under the Building Control Act and Regulations".
"Feedback received from buyers of Kingsford Hillview Peak, another project by the company, was also taken into consideration," the spokesman added.
In December 2017, Kingsford Waterbay was issued with an order to stop building works. This was lifted only after rectification works were completed. Separately, in July 2017, Kingsford Huray was fined S$130,000 under the Workplace Safety and Health Act for repeated safety lapses at its Hillview Peak worksite.
Stay updated with BT newsletters
Sign up
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.
Your feedback is important to us
Tell us what you think. Email us at [email protected]
Developers with a no-sale licence can begin construction but cannot sell units off-plan without approval from the COH.
After TOP is obtained, the developer will still need to apply to the COH to convert its licence into a sale licence before units can be sold. A no-sale licence can also be converted before TOP is obtained, if the developer is able to satisfy the criteria to qualify for a sale licence.
In assessing any application for a Housing Developer's Licence, the COH will consider various factors, including the developer's track record, said the URA spokesman. "Where necessary, the COH may issue a licence with conditions to ensure that the interests of home buyers are duly protected."
The no-sale licence for the Normanton Park project, publicly available on the URA's website, includes conditions such as strict compliance with the Housing Developers (Control & Licensing) Act (Cap. 130) and the Housing Developers Rules.
Another condition is that none of the units may be sold without the COH's prior approval in writing. Kingsford Huray must also obtain Quality Mark certificates for all units in the housing development, and do so before making any application to the Controller to sell them.
In general, such a requirement is "so that home buyers can be assured that their housing units are constructed and finished to a reasonable standard of quality", said the spokesman.
Under the Normanton Park project's no-sale licence, the COH must also be informed within 14 days of any changes to persons holding responsible positions in Kingsford Huray, and any changes to the particulars of the developer and/or the project, as set out in the licence.
In October 2017, Normanton Park was sold to Kingsford Huray for S$830.1 million, in one of Singapore's biggest en bloc purchases at the time. This came with an estimated S$231.1 million additional payment to top up the lease to 99 years.
Also payable was a fee of about S$283.4 million to redevelop the site to a gross plot ratio of 2.1 based on the maximum permissible gross floor area of about 1.39 million square feet. This translated to a land price of about S$969 per square foot per plot ratio.
BT is now on Telegram!
For daily updates on weekdays and specially selected content for the weekend. Subscribe to t.me/BizTimes
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 2,237
- Points
- 83
Don't forget these Chinese also use China Contractors so the bad results of their condos means its the materials, labor, and safety are all not up to standard.
Just ban all Chinese developers and contractors you cant trust them.
Just ban all Chinese developers and contractors you cant trust them.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 61,988
- Points
- 113
not just confined to the normanton park site, all its 3 developments in sg including hillview peak and waterbay have issues. you can read them here.
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/econ...-linked-kingsford-development-cant-sell-flats
"While Kingsford Development made the news for Cui’s swish home and big land purchases, its Hillview Peak and Waterbay developments, as well as affiliated Kingsford Construction Pte Ltd, have drawn the ire of the authorities and buyers."
"Issues at Hillview Peak prompted residents to form a chat group and private Facebook page to air their grievances, which ranged from seepage to busted pipes."
"the parquet flooring was low grade, the marble in his bathroom was cracked, the kitchen counter was stained, a glass window pane was broken and the quality of his bedroom and bathroom doors left much to be desired."
"discoloured, cracked marble flooring, to fixed window panes that seeped every time it rained."
"Complaints like those from Hillview Peak prompted the Controller of Housing to issue a no-sale licence to Kingsford Huray Development in January this year for its large One Normanton Park Condo of nearly 2,000 units. That means it cannot sell any units until it clears quality audits and receives a Temporary Occupation Permit. And after that, it will still have to sell all units in the project within five years of securing the plot."
"The ministry said the firm had shown a 'recalcitrant attitude towards workplace safety and health' and had failed to fix issues flagged by inspectors on two occasions."
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2018
- Messages
- 31,273
- Points
- 113
Island also have quality problems
Opal Tower (Sydney) - Wikipedia
Opal Tower is a residential tower located in the suburb of Sydney Olympic Park in the Australian state of New South Wales. It was completed in August 2018. The high-rise residential tower was built by Icon, developed by Ecove and designed by Bates Smart Architects.[2] The building has 392 apartments, with 34 above ground levels and three levels underground.[3] On 24 December 2018 residents had reported loud banging noises, exposed panelling and cracks which mainly affected levels four and 10.[4] All residents were evacuated from the building and relocated to Airbnb and hotel accommodation over the Christmas and New Year holiday period.[4]
The building was approved in June 2015 by the Australian Liberal Party's former Planning Minister Robert Stokes as a major building project. Inconsistencies with the buildings structure have largely been related to under-design and lower quality materials.[4] Development weakness is of increased concern, particularly during Sydney's construction boom to compensate for Sydney's increasing population density.[5]
The evacuation, which totaled over 3,000 people,[1] led to a report by university deans, with recommendations to create a directory of engineers who work on buildings.[6]
In February 2019, New South Wales announced it would change building laws after the evacuation. The new regulations require the registration of designers, engineers, and architects, with building commissioners appointed to audit their work.[7]
Building features
The building has 392 apartments, a childcare area, and a retail area.[1] Upon opening, prices for flats ranged from $800,000 to $2.5 million.[8]
In February 2019, it was noted that the government owned 43 or more of the units in Opal Tower.[9] In April 2019, 90 of the units had been reoccupied.[10]
Structural problems
2018 evacuation
Doors were prised open by police with heavy equipment to allow residents to exit the building. Buildings, roads, and a railway station all within a radius of 1 kilometre were evacuated.[1] After the evacuation, experts determined it had shifted between 1 and 2 millimetres. Cracks were found on the 10th and 4th floors.[1]
A fissure on the 10th floor, millimetres wide, created a loud bang, and police were called at 2:45 pm on Christmas Eve over a bomb suspicion. 300 people were evacuated.[8]
Residents were allowed back in after midnight on Christmas Eve, then evacuated later on 27 December.[8][11] By 3 February 2019 Icon ceased paying for food and accommodation outside of the building for all units that were deemed safe by Cardno, an independent engineering firm engaged by the Owners Corporation to oversee rectification work performed by Icon.[12]
On 19 February a 36-page report commissioned by the NSW Department of Planning asserted it was "overall structurally sound."[8] More residents returned in March 2019.[13] As of June 2019, around half of the tower's rooms were not fit for reoccupation.[8]
Causes
Developer Ecove denied that there had been any corners cut in construction on 27 December 2018.[14] In January 2019, there were reports that horizontal support beams in the structure were possibly "not strong enough to hold precast concrete panels installed on top of them." At the time, four different investigations were looking into the cracked panels. The original structural engineer, WSP was investigating, as was the NSW Government, the Owners Corporation through Cardno, and builder Icon Co. through Rincovitch Partners.[15] On 25 February 2019, a government report blamed the cracks on design and construction faults. It found the building was structurally sound overall, but that horizontal supports beams were not compliant, under-designed and without proper grouting. 221 of the 400 units were empty then.[16]
Minister for Planning and Housing, Hon. Anthony Roberts, requested an investigation into the structural, design and material deficiencies. The report published by Unisearch with data formalised by a collaboration of academics from the University of New South Wales. Results showed four key areas of weakness.
Firstly, the under-design of the hob beams (a structural element which redistributes weight and creates stability.[17]) and panel assembly allowed for pressure to build, triggering the subsequent cracking and bursting.[4] Secondly, partial grouting of hob beam joints reduced resilience to movement and pressure.[4] Thirdly, the original construction and repairs to concrete panels as well as the choice of lower strength concrete for the hob beams results in the design inconsistencies and structural weakness.[4] Finally, concrete panel damage on Level 10 was the result of the poor structural quality of the hob beams, not direct issues with the panelling.[4] Concluding the building design was not structurally strong enough to hold its weight.
Australian tabloid news program, A Current Affair, revealed onsite video footage obtained from a subcontractor.[18] The footage alleged that neglectful behaviour and structurally unsafe material were used in the construction of the residential tower.[18] Concrete slabs, used for the hob beams, were severely cracked and poorly patched up, whilst filler was used to secure slabs that were in poor condition, rather than being replaced, as is protocol.[18]
Recommendations in the Interim report suggested steel hob beam reinforcements for the weakened concrete.[18]
Political impact of evacuation
On February 2019, University Deans of Architecture completed an emergency report on the structure, with five recommendations, mainly that the government "create an official registry of engineers who would then be used to provide independent third-party certification of designs and on-site inspections during construction." On 26 June 2019, The Guardian reported that Australian engineers were saying that the recommendations to fix Opal Tower had not yet been enacted, and people did not have to be registered in NSW to work as an engineer.[19]
New South Wales has experienced high levels of residential development since 2013 to keep up with increasing permanent and temporary population size.[20] The Australian Bureau of Statistics recorded an 18% increase in apartment approvals in the greater Sydney region, leading to the development of 78 000 apartments between 2012 and 2015. In 2016, former Planning Minister Robert Stokes (who also approved Opal Tower, announced 184 000 further apartments between 2016 and 2021.[21] This rapid spike in residential development has created community concern about the integrity and quality of large scale construction projects.
Australian media were quick to report on the discussion of who was at fault. It became apparent that political decisions made by a development focused state planning minister, Anthony Roberts, could have played a factor in allowing for the under design and poor quality materials.[22] Roberts was quick to respond, launching an investigation into compliance, adding two university engineering professors, advising them to complete a report into the cause and current stability of the building.[22]
High levels of publicity around Opal Tower and the recent surge in inner-city residential development has placed pressure of government institutions to improve the development approval process.[23] Increased foreign investment and involvement - outsourcing of jobs and use of cheaper international materials - in Australia's development boom have heightened consumer concerns around the structural integrity of new, mass-produced residential buildings.[24] A lack of independent bodies and over sight into the development process - design, construction and material acquisition - of recent developments has provided an opportunity for cost-cutting measures which reduce overall quality.[23]
Social implications of evacuation
An increase in Sydney's population, caused by higher wages, smaller family sizes, career based migration and an appealing buyers market, had led to rising demand for housing around Sydney's CBD.[25] The unprecedented amount of construction, for both residential properties and social infrastructure, created an opportunity for building industry players to exploit advantages of an expansion-focused city.[26] The social impacts are felt by wider society as the original purchasing value of these apartments did not represent assumed quality standards. This leaves Sydney's housing market with sizeable amounts of new properties which are over priced, without the security of knowing if structural integrity and safety are assured.[21]
Reparations on the building only began in April 2019, leaving a large level of displacement, with 169 of the apartments unfit for habitation at the time.[18] Icon has spent close to $10 million in compensating the loss of income, interim living costs, damages and clean up costs associated with repairs to home owners.[18]
Icon's parent company, Kajima Corporation of Japan, has since agreed to an extended warranty on major defects in Opal Tower for 20 years.
There has been concern about the rapid approval of housing and development plans in New South Wales.[22] The lack of structural integrity of Opal Tower brings doubt to the housing market, in turn having a poor economic impact.[22] If a state does not have a clear set of enforced standards and procedures around approval, design and construction practices, the overall calibre of housing is lower.[23] This has an impact of the standard of living and as a result the liveability of Sydney on the global stage.
Economic impact
Economic costs primarily hit the individuals who own apartments within the high-rise tower. Opal Tower's structural deficiencies have seen a loss of trust in Opal Tower and have helped form greater context to Australia's inattentive construction industry.[23] A combination of city-wide high property prices and weak approval process for buildings constructed between 2012 and 2018 has a large impact on the return investment.[20] The Australian Financial Review released data stating that 85% of new apartment owners in Sydney have structural problems in newly built apartment buildings.[27] Consumer perception is significant in achieving a healthy resale value and longevity of the property.[28] Property owners as a result can struggle to find renters and will suffer a loss of investment because of structural issues as the building does not hold consumer confidence[29]
The economic impacts go beyond individual wealth. Sydney's property market could see the devaluing of Sydney properties, constructed during times of questionable approval processes, or a massive requirement of new properties to be checked and updated to reflect the new standards of adapted development.[23]
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) released an update on the impact of Opal Tower on house prices across Sydney. Property analysts concluded that Opal Tower will impact not only the property value of its own apartments, but will reduce the value of all off-the-plan apartments across the city.[30] This flow on effect has large implications, as Sydney is on track to reach its expected over supply of properties, leaving the possibility of largely empty, or 'ghost' buildings.[30]
Future implications
Learn more
This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic.
Opal Tower is currently approved for habitation.[31] The building will need further rectification to reflect the safety and building standards in New South Wales, once new authoritative bodies are operational.[4]
The New South Wales government has decided to reform the building approval and oversight processes in an attempt to better secure consumer confidence and greater transparency in NSW's, particularly Sydney's, housing market.[32] Sydney's rapidly growing transient and permanent population[33] has caused a high density development boom over the last decade.[5] Australia has national building standards.[34] These codes ensure that developments built in Australia must meet an assumed standard. When these standards aren't met consumer faith is destabilised, generating doubt in the quality of housing in Australia. Peaks in development approvals, to match a growing local and global demand, leave housing markets, like Sydney's, with highly overvalued properties, made with low quality materials and little motivation to improve sturdier older properties.[35] It is important for these standards to be enforced and reviewed to ensure economic stability both locally and internationally.
Opal Tower provided an example for the recent concerns around residential development in inner city New South Wales. The Interim Report, published January 2019, written by University of New South Wales research team concluded with the structural deficiencies. A final report was published in early 2019, by Unisearch, listing material and structural design choices for the hob beams as the cause of damage.[4]
In February 2019, the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) published an article discussing the incoming changes the high-rise laws, as a direct result of Opal Tower debacle. A new high-rise 'watchdog' will be introduced, with a new registration scheme for engineers and builders, in an attempt to appease significant concerns around NSW construction industry[23] This will ensure that any company, contractor or individual involved in the design, construction and acquisition of materials is qualified to New South Wales standards.[23]
Property analysts spoke to the drop in consumer confidence, referring to the timing of Opal Tower's destabilisation as highly regrettable for the state-wide industry.[30] Analysts suggested that the impact of Opal Tower could potentially impact other Australian state housing markets, through new, lower consumers perceptions of Australian construction stability and standards.[30]
The University of New South Wales has developed a research team with the intention to further understand and improve the New South Wales development and construction industry, particularly in relation to residential high rise buildings.[36] Conclusions from their studies state that whilst most strata buildings have defects, state-wide improvement needs to address the consumer impact of conscious cost cutting, certification occurring too late in the development process and hesitance from government around intervention.[37] Going forward, the University of New South Wales team has suggested increased transparency with buyers around construction quality, drawing on the current 'Five Star' rating system used for cars.[37] This was previously implemented in the 1990s, but failed due to a lack of funding under former New South Wales premier Bob Carr.
Opal Tower (Sydney) - Wikipedia
Opal Tower is a residential tower located in the suburb of Sydney Olympic Park in the Australian state of New South Wales. It was completed in August 2018. The high-rise residential tower was built by Icon, developed by Ecove and designed by Bates Smart Architects.[2] The building has 392 apartments, with 34 above ground levels and three levels underground.[3] On 24 December 2018 residents had reported loud banging noises, exposed panelling and cracks which mainly affected levels four and 10.[4] All residents were evacuated from the building and relocated to Airbnb and hotel accommodation over the Christmas and New Year holiday period.[4]
| Other information | |
|---|---|
| Technical details | |
| General information | |
| Opal Tower | |
 | |
| Type | Skyscraper |
| Classification | Residential |
| Location | Sydney Olympic Park |
| Town or city | Sydney |
| Country | Australia |
| Completed | August 2018[1] |
| Height | 117 m |
| Floor count | 36[1] |
| Number of units | 392 apartments |
The evacuation, which totaled over 3,000 people,[1] led to a report by university deans, with recommendations to create a directory of engineers who work on buildings.[6]
In February 2019, New South Wales announced it would change building laws after the evacuation. The new regulations require the registration of designers, engineers, and architects, with building commissioners appointed to audit their work.[7]
Building features
The building has 392 apartments, a childcare area, and a retail area.[1] Upon opening, prices for flats ranged from $800,000 to $2.5 million.[8]
In February 2019, it was noted that the government owned 43 or more of the units in Opal Tower.[9] In April 2019, 90 of the units had been reoccupied.[10]
Structural problems
2018 evacuation
Doors were prised open by police with heavy equipment to allow residents to exit the building. Buildings, roads, and a railway station all within a radius of 1 kilometre were evacuated.[1] After the evacuation, experts determined it had shifted between 1 and 2 millimetres. Cracks were found on the 10th and 4th floors.[1]
A fissure on the 10th floor, millimetres wide, created a loud bang, and police were called at 2:45 pm on Christmas Eve over a bomb suspicion. 300 people were evacuated.[8]
Residents were allowed back in after midnight on Christmas Eve, then evacuated later on 27 December.[8][11] By 3 February 2019 Icon ceased paying for food and accommodation outside of the building for all units that were deemed safe by Cardno, an independent engineering firm engaged by the Owners Corporation to oversee rectification work performed by Icon.[12]
On 19 February a 36-page report commissioned by the NSW Department of Planning asserted it was "overall structurally sound."[8] More residents returned in March 2019.[13] As of June 2019, around half of the tower's rooms were not fit for reoccupation.[8]
Causes
Developer Ecove denied that there had been any corners cut in construction on 27 December 2018.[14] In January 2019, there were reports that horizontal support beams in the structure were possibly "not strong enough to hold precast concrete panels installed on top of them." At the time, four different investigations were looking into the cracked panels. The original structural engineer, WSP was investigating, as was the NSW Government, the Owners Corporation through Cardno, and builder Icon Co. through Rincovitch Partners.[15] On 25 February 2019, a government report blamed the cracks on design and construction faults. It found the building was structurally sound overall, but that horizontal supports beams were not compliant, under-designed and without proper grouting. 221 of the 400 units were empty then.[16]
Minister for Planning and Housing, Hon. Anthony Roberts, requested an investigation into the structural, design and material deficiencies. The report published by Unisearch with data formalised by a collaboration of academics from the University of New South Wales. Results showed four key areas of weakness.
Firstly, the under-design of the hob beams (a structural element which redistributes weight and creates stability.[17]) and panel assembly allowed for pressure to build, triggering the subsequent cracking and bursting.[4] Secondly, partial grouting of hob beam joints reduced resilience to movement and pressure.[4] Thirdly, the original construction and repairs to concrete panels as well as the choice of lower strength concrete for the hob beams results in the design inconsistencies and structural weakness.[4] Finally, concrete panel damage on Level 10 was the result of the poor structural quality of the hob beams, not direct issues with the panelling.[4] Concluding the building design was not structurally strong enough to hold its weight.
Australian tabloid news program, A Current Affair, revealed onsite video footage obtained from a subcontractor.[18] The footage alleged that neglectful behaviour and structurally unsafe material were used in the construction of the residential tower.[18] Concrete slabs, used for the hob beams, were severely cracked and poorly patched up, whilst filler was used to secure slabs that were in poor condition, rather than being replaced, as is protocol.[18]
Recommendations in the Interim report suggested steel hob beam reinforcements for the weakened concrete.[18]
Political impact of evacuation
On February 2019, University Deans of Architecture completed an emergency report on the structure, with five recommendations, mainly that the government "create an official registry of engineers who would then be used to provide independent third-party certification of designs and on-site inspections during construction." On 26 June 2019, The Guardian reported that Australian engineers were saying that the recommendations to fix Opal Tower had not yet been enacted, and people did not have to be registered in NSW to work as an engineer.[19]
New South Wales has experienced high levels of residential development since 2013 to keep up with increasing permanent and temporary population size.[20] The Australian Bureau of Statistics recorded an 18% increase in apartment approvals in the greater Sydney region, leading to the development of 78 000 apartments between 2012 and 2015. In 2016, former Planning Minister Robert Stokes (who also approved Opal Tower, announced 184 000 further apartments between 2016 and 2021.[21] This rapid spike in residential development has created community concern about the integrity and quality of large scale construction projects.
Australian media were quick to report on the discussion of who was at fault. It became apparent that political decisions made by a development focused state planning minister, Anthony Roberts, could have played a factor in allowing for the under design and poor quality materials.[22] Roberts was quick to respond, launching an investigation into compliance, adding two university engineering professors, advising them to complete a report into the cause and current stability of the building.[22]
High levels of publicity around Opal Tower and the recent surge in inner-city residential development has placed pressure of government institutions to improve the development approval process.[23] Increased foreign investment and involvement - outsourcing of jobs and use of cheaper international materials - in Australia's development boom have heightened consumer concerns around the structural integrity of new, mass-produced residential buildings.[24] A lack of independent bodies and over sight into the development process - design, construction and material acquisition - of recent developments has provided an opportunity for cost-cutting measures which reduce overall quality.[23]
Social implications of evacuation
An increase in Sydney's population, caused by higher wages, smaller family sizes, career based migration and an appealing buyers market, had led to rising demand for housing around Sydney's CBD.[25] The unprecedented amount of construction, for both residential properties and social infrastructure, created an opportunity for building industry players to exploit advantages of an expansion-focused city.[26] The social impacts are felt by wider society as the original purchasing value of these apartments did not represent assumed quality standards. This leaves Sydney's housing market with sizeable amounts of new properties which are over priced, without the security of knowing if structural integrity and safety are assured.[21]
Reparations on the building only began in April 2019, leaving a large level of displacement, with 169 of the apartments unfit for habitation at the time.[18] Icon has spent close to $10 million in compensating the loss of income, interim living costs, damages and clean up costs associated with repairs to home owners.[18]
Icon's parent company, Kajima Corporation of Japan, has since agreed to an extended warranty on major defects in Opal Tower for 20 years.
There has been concern about the rapid approval of housing and development plans in New South Wales.[22] The lack of structural integrity of Opal Tower brings doubt to the housing market, in turn having a poor economic impact.[22] If a state does not have a clear set of enforced standards and procedures around approval, design and construction practices, the overall calibre of housing is lower.[23] This has an impact of the standard of living and as a result the liveability of Sydney on the global stage.
Economic impact
Economic costs primarily hit the individuals who own apartments within the high-rise tower. Opal Tower's structural deficiencies have seen a loss of trust in Opal Tower and have helped form greater context to Australia's inattentive construction industry.[23] A combination of city-wide high property prices and weak approval process for buildings constructed between 2012 and 2018 has a large impact on the return investment.[20] The Australian Financial Review released data stating that 85% of new apartment owners in Sydney have structural problems in newly built apartment buildings.[27] Consumer perception is significant in achieving a healthy resale value and longevity of the property.[28] Property owners as a result can struggle to find renters and will suffer a loss of investment because of structural issues as the building does not hold consumer confidence[29]
The economic impacts go beyond individual wealth. Sydney's property market could see the devaluing of Sydney properties, constructed during times of questionable approval processes, or a massive requirement of new properties to be checked and updated to reflect the new standards of adapted development.[23]
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) released an update on the impact of Opal Tower on house prices across Sydney. Property analysts concluded that Opal Tower will impact not only the property value of its own apartments, but will reduce the value of all off-the-plan apartments across the city.[30] This flow on effect has large implications, as Sydney is on track to reach its expected over supply of properties, leaving the possibility of largely empty, or 'ghost' buildings.[30]
Future implications
Learn more
This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic.
Opal Tower is currently approved for habitation.[31] The building will need further rectification to reflect the safety and building standards in New South Wales, once new authoritative bodies are operational.[4]
The New South Wales government has decided to reform the building approval and oversight processes in an attempt to better secure consumer confidence and greater transparency in NSW's, particularly Sydney's, housing market.[32] Sydney's rapidly growing transient and permanent population[33] has caused a high density development boom over the last decade.[5] Australia has national building standards.[34] These codes ensure that developments built in Australia must meet an assumed standard. When these standards aren't met consumer faith is destabilised, generating doubt in the quality of housing in Australia. Peaks in development approvals, to match a growing local and global demand, leave housing markets, like Sydney's, with highly overvalued properties, made with low quality materials and little motivation to improve sturdier older properties.[35] It is important for these standards to be enforced and reviewed to ensure economic stability both locally and internationally.
Opal Tower provided an example for the recent concerns around residential development in inner city New South Wales. The Interim Report, published January 2019, written by University of New South Wales research team concluded with the structural deficiencies. A final report was published in early 2019, by Unisearch, listing material and structural design choices for the hob beams as the cause of damage.[4]
In February 2019, the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) published an article discussing the incoming changes the high-rise laws, as a direct result of Opal Tower debacle. A new high-rise 'watchdog' will be introduced, with a new registration scheme for engineers and builders, in an attempt to appease significant concerns around NSW construction industry[23] This will ensure that any company, contractor or individual involved in the design, construction and acquisition of materials is qualified to New South Wales standards.[23]
Property analysts spoke to the drop in consumer confidence, referring to the timing of Opal Tower's destabilisation as highly regrettable for the state-wide industry.[30] Analysts suggested that the impact of Opal Tower could potentially impact other Australian state housing markets, through new, lower consumers perceptions of Australian construction stability and standards.[30]
The University of New South Wales has developed a research team with the intention to further understand and improve the New South Wales development and construction industry, particularly in relation to residential high rise buildings.[36] Conclusions from their studies state that whilst most strata buildings have defects, state-wide improvement needs to address the consumer impact of conscious cost cutting, certification occurring too late in the development process and hesitance from government around intervention.[37] Going forward, the University of New South Wales team has suggested increased transparency with buyers around construction quality, drawing on the current 'Five Star' rating system used for cars.[37] This was previously implemented in the 1990s, but failed due to a lack of funding under former New South Wales premier Bob Carr.
Similar threads
