Weather-beaten, well and truly

By K. Raveendran | Special to Gulf News | 3/3/2006

According to WorldClimate, a portal that provides worldwide weather data over long periods of time, Singapore receives an average annual rainfall of about 240 cm and London some 61 cm per year. Compared to this, Dubai gets an average rainfall of only 10 cm for a full year.

So, one might assume that buildings in Singapore and London would be more resistant to the fury of rains and thunderstorms. But certainly this does not mean that Dubai buildings need to have only one-tenth of the resistance of properties in these two metropolises to face the vagaries of nature, irrespective of whether a Dubai property would be exposed to the kind of onslaughts these cities suffer not even once in 10 years.

Yet, how some of Dubai’s new constructions, including glitzy shopping malls launched with great fanfare, have stood up to what the weather office prefers to call ‘wet weather’ with hardly a couple of centimeters of rain raises serious issues about the local construction standards.

Many households in the fashionable residential developments in The Meadows, The Springs and Arabian Ranches has water seeping through their villas, while malls presented the most clumsy scene of shopkeepers placing buckets to collect water leaking from the roof and desperately trying to protect their merchandise from the rain.

It is most significant that trouble has occurred only in the new constructions while residents of properties in the regular parts of the city have had no problems. This factor clearly turns the finger to the lower quality of construction in the new developments compared to the old buildings. It has implications for the image of the construction industry in Dubai, which is often described as a living museum of construction.

Cracks on the walls, problems with roof and doors, faulty air-conditioners and windows that do not close properly have been commonplace in many of the freehold developments. There have also been cases where the delivered properties were unfit for living and the developers offered alternative accommodation to owners whose properties required immediate improvements.

There have been complaints that the contractors have used substandard goods and materials sourced from places like China to save costs, which poorly reflected on the overall quality of construction. Lack of proper supervision, coupled with the break-neck speed in the construction activity, leads to further deterioration in the quality standards.

Poor maintenance has already been a major issue with a number of developments. This even prompted residents to come together and launch coordinated action to demand improvements in the way the developers approach the issues, including those of pricing.

Obviously, there have been factors beyond the control of the parties involved, such as the unexpected increases in the cost of steel, cement and other building materials, which played havoc with budgets. These are indeed significant considerations when it comes to calculating profit. Still, no consideration is too big to compromise the safety and security of people.

Freehold does not mean freedom from obligations and mechanisms must be in place for redressing complaints, whether it is the developer, contractor or the large number of intermediaries engaged in the business who are at fault.

It is ironic that in a country that puts so much emphasis on the enforcement of quality and standards not enough attention is paid to a factor that is so vital to the safety and security of the inhabitants of housing units.

With a new law to guarantee the rights of the consumers waiting to be enacted let’s hope the issue will get the consideration it deserves in the days ahead.