Faithorn Farrell Timms was appointed by Dublin Simon Community Housing to undertake a stock condition survey to cover their portfolio of 426 assets.
The buildings to be inspected ranged from large multi-occupancy hostels to individual single-family dwellings. Our client wished to capture full component data for the buildings and record the information in an open format with a readily updateable database solution to provide long term cost forecasting and works programming.
- We designed a survey form, and constructed a stock condition survey database for the storage and analysis of the data
- We formulated a schedule of component cost rates and lifecycles appropriate to the range of assets and building components likely to be encountered within the portfolio
- We made access arrangements and conducted the surveys on site over a five-week period
- Data was provided for 100% of the communal parts and the individual residences
There was a vast range of building archetypes to envelop within the survey and our client is continually acquiring properties through a planned programme of growth.
Most of the buildings were occupied at the time of the inspections and some schemes were high dependency units for residents with a history of alcohol and substance abuse.
100% data was required and the properties were geographically spread over a wide area across Dublin and Co Wicklow.
A significant number of the assets were new acquisitions with little historic information available.
We undertook a comprehensive review of the available information for the buildings and developed this into a tabulated and regulated format for the purposes of creating full scheme asset and archetype listings. From our expert knowledge of undertaking stock condition surveys and building attributes, we created survey form designs together with component cost rates and guide lifecycles.
Due to the location of the properties, we had to undertake meticulous programming of the survey inspections to reduce travel times and distances and to increase the likelihood of gaining access. We liaised closely with our client in respect of the availability and collection of keys for void units. A small team of surveyors was used and we grouped the inspections into geographical areas to promote efficiency of travel time and distance between properties. This also enhanced the level of consistency achieved from the survey methodology and data returns.
Specific access arrangements and risk assessments were undertaken for the high dependency schemes with our surveyors being accompanied by Dublin Simon staff during the inspections.
We maximised access attempts to properties as far as possible and only 20 properties out of 426 assets remained un-surveyed. These were all individual street property houses or flats of varying archetypes. Due to the risks associated with cloning data for such properties, we recommended to our client that extrapolated cost projections were made rather than the use of cloned data. These 20 properties are therefore, represented in the cost forecasts but are flagged for survey at the next available opportunity.
Whilst on site, we recorded any minor repairs required and passed this information back to our client along with a photograph in order that they could arrange immediate remedial works.
We updated the asset list as the survey progressed to refine the archetypes and attribute listings and incorporated this into the database for our client’s future reference.