Building consent authority accrediation (BCA) update - January 2011
Contents
Auckland Council established
The new Auckland Council (the Council) was officially established on November 1, 2010. With it came the formation of a new building control operation, which before November 1 was made up of seven individual building consent authorities (BCAS) with seven different sets of rules, policies, procedures, interpretations and bylaws. There were more than 600 staff spread from Franklin in the south to Rodney in the north and working with some 240 different building control forms and checklists.
The challenge over the past 6 – 12 months has been to consolidate these different factors and provide for a more consistent set of rules and practices and one BCA system to service the entire Auckland region. This will take time but good progress is being made.
The Auckland Transition Authority (ATA) and Department of Building and Housing have supported this work, with Andrew Minturn from the Department being seconded to the ATA for a little over 13 months.
A project team was formed with members from the ATA, Auckland City Council, North Shore City Council, Rodney District Council, Waitakere City Council, Manukau City Council, Papakura District Council and Franklin District Council.
One of the first tasks was to get feedback from customers within the Auckland region about what currently worked and what didn’t.
The project then looked at all these different policies, rules, practices and approaches and selected which good practices to keep and incorporate into the new building control operation.
As well as establishing the framework for the new building control operation, the project team needed to think about ways to make the process more efficient for customers. A more ‘customer centric’ approach.
A key development for medium to large building projects has been the introduction of a regional pre-lodgement service. Customers can bring their concept plans and details into the Council and meet with key staff from various areas to discuss the Council requirements for their particular project, well ahead of their consent application.
This one-stop shop approach incorporates representatives from not only building but from development engineering, planning, environmental health services and other compliance functions.
This ensures the pro-active customer knows up front what the full range of compliance requirements and documentation are before they lodge their consent application; the Council believes this will save the customer time and money.
An important milestone for the new building control operation has been the introduction of a single building consent application form and a reduction in the total number of building control forms and checklists from 240 down to just 46. This, the Council said, aids in the reduction of paperwork previously generated and helps improve efficiencies.
In addition, the new Council challenged itself to have a number of systems in place on 1 November that would ensure customers received as similar and consistent advice as possible and had access to the same information throughout the Auckland region, regardless of what office they were dealing with.
The Council also developed a website dedicated to building control
, which went live before November 1.
The site features a regional product assessment process and register, producer statement policy and register as well as regional guidance information by way of practice notes which provide information on various topical issues. Each section features downloadable forms and checklists.
The development of this information is ongoing and news flashes providing clear guidance for Council staff, building practitioners and home owners will appear when new information is ava ilable.
The Council’s next challenge is to continue to develop streamlined, consistent and effective polices and procedures across all of its BCA operations and gain accreditation against these by November 1, 2011.
Also expected to be completed over the next six-12 months are:
- a regional code of practice for consent processing
- regional fencing of swimming pools guidelines
- a regional building warrant of fitness policy and procedure
- regional consent conditions and advice notes
- a regional process for building consent applications for reclads and weathertightness repairs
- a single regional building consent authority management policy and procedures operating manual.
As well as developing new systems and processes, the project team needed to ensure staff had the support they required to deliver the changes.
The Council has recently introduced the Department’s National BCA Competency Assessment System to assess and identify the competencies, skills and experience of its staff. This ensures their building control staff are being assigned work to match those skills and competencies as well as providing ongoing training and up-skilling of all staff. It also enables staff interoperability across each of the BCA offices, as a Res 2 or Com 1 building official means the same wherever they are working.
The Auckland Council BCA is also considering reintroducing a cadet scheme to attract more people to the building control industry.
Open minds and collaboration have been the key to the project’s success, the Council says, and that this is only the start of a continuous improvement programme for building controls at the new Auckland Council.
Back to top
BCAs accredited to quality assurance standards
The Department congratulates all building consent authorities (BCAs) who have been accredited by International Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ) to the standards in the Building (Accreditation of Building Consent Authorities) Regulations 2006. All council BCAs achieved Phase 2 accreditation before the deadline of December 1, 2010.
Phase 2 of the BCA Accreditation Scheme has successfully concluded now. While BCAs had to maintain their accreditation status against the Phase 1 standards (regulations 5-16), a key focus in Phase 2 was to develop a sound quality assurance system for their BCA building control functions and then demonstrate that they are implementing it successfully (regulation 17).
Over the last two years a number of BCAs have taken the opportunity to streamline, refine, and improve some of their business systems, policies and procedures developed during Phase 1 of the BCA Accreditation Scheme. This resulted in considerably less unnecessary paper work, a refocus on key risk issues, and helping to ensure their core building consenting, inspection, and approval functions are carried out as efficiently and as effectively as possible. Those undertaking this streamlining work have realised the benefits in documenting the important stuff.
While there is always room for further improvement, the benefits of the BCA Accreditation Scheme are being realised by many BCAs and the Department recognises the hard work and effort that building officials, quality assurance and building control managers around New Zealand have put into achieving this milestone.
Back to top
Rebuilding Canterbury
As smaller earthquakes continue to shake Canterbury, Department staff maintains their support with Fletcher Construction, the Christchurch City, Selwyn and Waimakariri District Councils as well as local people with their recovery and reconstruction efforts. At the same time, planning for what is arguably New Zealand’s largest rebuilding project since the Napier earthquake of 1931 is underway.
It’s fair to say that on Saturday September 4, and during subsequent shakes, the calibre of the New Zealand Building Code was put to the test. Most of the modern buildings, despite being severely shaken, responded as they should.
Department of Building and Housing Deputy Chief Executive for Building Quality, David Kelly, says that our buildings performed so well and that there were no deaths or serious injuries is not just sheer luck.
He puts it down to four key things:
- New Zealand’s earthquake engineering skills
- New Zealand’s construction practices and the lessons we continually learn from earthquakes here and overseas
- a building control system which focuses on safeguarding human life and minimising damage to buildings and property
- a partnership between central and local government which helps ensure buildings are built to Code and that emergency services work well in a crisis.
The Department has been actively involved in the Government’s response to the earthquake since September 4, 2010. Within hours, the Department’s structural engineers and building control experts were on the ground in Christchurch helping councils carry out safety checks on buildings.
Mr David Kelly says one of the Department’s first tasks was to check the safety of its own offices so it could get staff back into the building and onto the phones to manage the large number of calls it received from landlords, tenants and building owners whose properties had been damaged.
“We also worked with the councils and the building sector to provide advice on simple remedial work that could be done without a building consent.”
In the week following the quake, the Department took steps to introduce special earthquake legislation to help speed up rebuilding and repair work in the Canterbury region, without compromising building quality. This involved extending the range of simple work that could be done without building consents to allow people in the Canterbury region to carry our necessary demolition and minor repairs on their homes, such as repairing or replacing decks and carports or demolition of severely damaged buildings.
The Department is also working with local councils to help streamline the consenting and inspection process. As a result of these discussions, the Christchurch City Council decided to exempt some building work from the requirement to have a building consent, provided it is carried out by a licensed building practitioner and/or a chartered professional engineer, in accordance with the Building Code. They are sensibly utilising their Schedule 1 item K discretionary powers to support rebuild and recovery work in Christchurch
Mr David Kelly says the Christchurch City Council’s decision recognises the importance of the Licensed Building Practitioners in the Canterbury reconstruction effort.
“Successful reconstruction depends on skilled and experienced building practitioners who consumers can rely on to repair and rebuild to a high standard.”
The Department estimates that 1600 licensed building practitioners will be required to manage the volume of rebuilding work in Canterbury. At the time of the earthquake Canterbury had approximately 160 licensed building practitioners. A major recruitment drive by the Department has rapidly increased these numbers.
“We’ve run 40 workshops and a large licensing Expo which has jointly led to an increase of 1300 practitioners either licensed or still in the assessment process since the Canterbury earthquake,” says Mr Kelly.
The Department is now working with the Earthquake Commission and their project management office - Fletcher Construction to facilitate the rebuilding process for repairs in the $10,000 to $100,000 bracket. Peter Sparrow, the Department’s Senior Advisor for Performance Monitoring and Review, has been seconded to Fletcher Construction’s project management office in Christchurch to assist them with the reconstruction effort. Peter’s role is to help ensure the processes applied comply with the Building Act, Regulations and Building Code, and are as streamlined and efficient as possible.
Peter says discussions are well underway with Fletcher and the Christchurch City, Selwyn and Waimakariri District Councils to place a greater reliance on using competent practitioners (e.g. licensed building practitioners and chartered professional engineers) to carry out and supervise repairs, thus reducing the BCAs oversight.
“We need to provide assurances that building quality and public safety will not be compromised during the repair process,” says Mr Sparrow.
Streamlining the consenting process extends beyond residential building work. The Department is working with major construction companies and council staff to help establish and formalise a commercial building peer review process to streamline the consent process for commercial buildings.
“Reconstruction will take a long time and we need to find practical ways to create efficiencies in the consent system, without compromising the integrity of our building control system,” David Kelly says.
The Department is keen to learn and share as much as it can from the earthquake. The information collected about building performance and land stability, with the support of leading geo-technical and construction engineers, will be used to improve the building control system and inform policy and Building Code development.
Together with an engineering advisory group, the Department has developed technical guidance for architects, engineers, builders and councils on how to repair and rebuild houses in areas where there has been ground damage. A copy of such guidance is available online on the Canterbury earthquake section of our website.
David Kelly says the quake has highlighted the vital importance of good earthquake design, quality construction, good planning and a partnership approach.
“It’s important that we share this information with the sector to improve building quality and to keep people as safe as possible in an earthquake.”
Back to top
Schedule 1 exemptions
What has happened
From December 23, 2010, Schedule 1 of the Building Act 2004 was expanded to allow a broader range of building work to be done without a building consent.
By law all exempt work must still meet the requirements of the Building Code and other relevant legislation, such as the Plumbers, Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act 2006, the Electricity Act 1992 and the Resource Management Act 1991.
What will be exempt?
In summary, from December 23, 2010, the list of exempt building work has expanded to also include:
- replacing or altering linings or finishes of any internal wall, ceiling, or floor of a dwelling
- making a penetration no greater than 30cm in diameter to enable the passage of pipes, cables, ducts, wires and hoses and the like through any existing building, and any associated work such as weatherproofing, fireproofing or sealing
- installing thermal insulation in an existing building other than in an external wall or a firewall of the building
- demolishing all or part of a damaged building that is detached (stand alone) and no more than 3 storeys high
- repairing and replacing all or part of a damaged outbuilding with a comparable outbuilding within the same area
- removing any sign and a sign’s structural support, retaining wall, plinth or similar foundation, or playground equipment.
Constructing, installing, replacing, or altering any:
- sign and any structural support of a sign if the sign has been designed by a chartered professional engineer, or the sign does not exceed 6 square metres and is no more than 3m above the ground
- height restriction gantry, and the removal of any such gantry
- retaining wall in a rural zone if the wall has been designed by a chartered professional engineer, retains no more than 3m depth of ground and is no closer than its own height to any legal boundary or existing building
- plinth or similar foundation designed by a chartered professional engineer, used for supporting mechanical plant, a tank, equipment, machinery, or any similar item
- stall, booth, compartment, or similar structure with a floor area less than 100 square metres used at a fair, exhibition or market for no more than one month, and the removal of any such stall, booth, compartment, or similar structure
- shade sail less than 50 square metres, made of fabric or other similar lightweight material and associated structural support provided it is at least 1m from any legal boundary and on the ground level or first storey level if on a building, and the removal of any such shade sail
- ground level carport not exceeding 20 square metres and the removal of any such carport
- playground equipment designed by a chartered professional engineer provided the work is for a government department, Crown entity, licensed early childhood centre or a territorial or regional authority
- playground equipment used by a single household provided no part of the equipment is more than 3m above the ground.
The following changes were also made to exemptions listed under Schedule 1.
- in relation to the construction or alteration of a platform, bridge or the like, the maximum height that a person may possibly fall from the platform or bridge was increased from 1 to 1.5 metres
- the maximum height of a wall, fence, or hoarding was increased from 2 to 2.5 metres above the supporting ground
- in relation to the construction or alteration of tanks and pools and any structural support of the tank or pool the following additional configurations will be exempt:
- up to 16,000 litres no more than 0.25m above the ground
- up to 8,000 litres no more than 0.5m above the ground
- up to 4,000 litres no more than 1m above the ground
- up to 1,000 litres no more than 3m above the ground
- in relation to the construction, alteration or removal of a public tent or marquee the maximum floor area was increased from 50 to 100 square metres
- in relation to the construction alteration or removal of a fabric, glass, or metal awning on the ground or first storey level, the maximum size was increased from 15 to 20 square metres
- in relation to the construction alteration or removal of a porch or veranda on the ground or first storey level over a deck or patio, the maximum size was increased from 15 to 20 square metres.
In December 2010, the Department updated its guidance on building work that doesn’t require a building consent. Read the full list of building work that does not require a building consent online.
Back to top
Councils show their support for leaky homes financial assistance package
The leaky homes financial assistance package has the support in principle of all of the councils in the communities most directly affected.
'”Collectively, these councils represent around 90 percent of current leaky home claims,'”says Building and Housing Minister Maurice Williamson. “Local Government New Zealand describes this as a 'resounding endorsement' by the main affected councils.”
The councils are Auckland, Christchurch, Tauranga and Wellington.
Local Government has also advised a further 20 councils have indicated their support in principle for the package, bringing the total number of councils on board to 24. The door remains open for other councils to opt in at a later stage depending on their local situation and need.
Discussions on the details of the package with territorial authorities are progressing well and the scheme is on track to be up and running from early 2011.
Under the proposed package, repairs would be funded by a 25 percent contribution from central government, 25 percent from local authorities, and 50 percent by homeowners, backed by a government loan guarantee if required.
What the package means for existing and potential claimants
It is intended that homeowners who have claims in the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service (WHRS) will be able to apply for the financial assistance package.
In the meantime, homeowners who have not lodged a claim under the WHRS can apply to the Department to make a claim. If their claim is accepted, that 'stops the clock' on the 10-year limitation for making a claim.
The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 set a 10-year limit for bringing a claim. A house has to have been built or altered (if the alterations leak) within 10 years of the date of lodging a claim.
The length of time it will take for homeowners to access the financial assistance will depend on their individual circumstances. However, it is expected to be a lot faster and less costly than the disputes and litigation process.
Back to top
Dam safety scheme deferred
Getting the right level of risk management is the focus of a review of the Dam Safety Scheme in the Building Act.
New Zealand has many large dams that, until now, have not been subject to a formal system of dam monitoring, inspection and maintenance.
The Building Act 2004 provides for a national regulatory risk management scheme for large dams in New Zealand, the Dam Safety Scheme.
The scheme was due to come into effect from July 1, 2010 to ensure all large dams are regularly monitored and that any associated risks to people and property from their failure are minimised.
However, the Government decided in June to defer the start date to July 2012 following an independent review by Bruce McLean, an experienced engineer and project management specialist. The review found the reach of the proposed scheme, affecting 1,150 dams, was too broad and imposed rules and compliance costs out of proportion to the risk to New Zealanders.
The review recommended a number of changes to the Scheme including changing the definition of dams requiring specific safety plans to more clearly target large dams and those that pose a particular risk to people living or working downstream.
The Department has consulted the sector on the review's recommendations and is now considering amendments to the scheme.
Back to top
James Hardie celebrates first 'CodeMark’ product certification
Securing New Zealand’s first CodeMark certificate for its Linea weatherboard was considerable cause for celebration by James Hardie on 12 November 2010.
The building products firm hosted Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson, Department officials, Building Industry Federation members and other product manufacturers at a function that also acknowledged the appointment of Global-Mark as this country’s first certification body.
James Hardie now enjoys the certainty that its Linea weatherboard must be accepted as Code compliant by building consent authorities (when used and installed as its CodeMark certificate specifies).
Minister Maurice Williamson congratulated the firm on this achievement and on the message of confidence it brought both to the building industry and to consumers.
Months of work by the Department have gone into implementing the voluntary CodeMark product certification scheme, which is provided for under the Building Act 2004. It is being operated jointly with the Australian government, with the Joint Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand (JAS-ANZ) responsible for accrediting all product certifying bodies.
JAS-ANZ business development and technical services manager Brett Abraham was at November’s function and recognised the appointment of Global-Mark as New Zealand’s first product certification body. Global-Mark’s managing director Herve Michoux also attended and presented the first Code-Mark certificate to Craig Chetty of James Hardie.
The Department will continue to work with Global-Mark and any other product certification bodies, and prospective applicants as CodeMark certification and branding becomes increasingly visible. Already, some 15 New Zealand manufacturers and suppliers are considering CodeMark for their building products.
Back to top
Licensed builder practitioner scheme takes off in Canterbury
Rebuilding with confidence in Canterbury got a major push last October. Mark Scully, LBP Registrar, and his team hosted 350 tradespeople, builders and designers at a licensing expo in Christchurch.
This followed months of work, including workshop at merchants like Carters, ITM and Placemakers. The Christchurch office was geared up and staffed for people to drop in with their queries and applications.
As of December 2010, the LBP team had already registered nearly 400 new LBPs in the region, with another 400 applications being assessed. With that work and the expo, there’s now a total of 1800 licenses either granted or in processing having their competence assessed.
It’s been a concerted Department effort to get the scheme rolling. The warm welcome and support from the Christchurch office enabled the LBP team to get things moving quickly. Meantime, the Wellington national office and Porirua teams have been pulling out all the stops to get this avalanche of applications through to assessment. Another 22 competency assessors have been recruited and trained to help manage the load.
The LBP team says practitioners welcome the opportunity to get licensed. They report that people getting licensed appreciate the recognition, whether it’s for their years of experience or their qualifications.
Confidence among consumers and accountability among builders are at the heart of moves to get more tradespeople licensed in Canterbury. The expo raised public awareness of the scheme with TV and radio exposure.
The Government wanted to see 1600 licenses issued by the end of November; the Department has since achieved this goal. However, we are still encouraging people to get licensed, particularly architectural designers and brick and blocklayers.
Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson is right behind the push. "For owners, using Licensed Building Practitioners means greater confidence that homes will be repaired right first time," he said.
"The upswing in the number of people licensed to carry out essential building work means that people are going to be able to get back into their homes faster, and can be more confident about quality workmanship."
This is all part of the continuing leadership role the Department is taking in response to the Canterbury earthquake.
One-stop licensing shops
The Department recently transformed the Riccarton office into a one-stop licensed building practitioner (LBP) shop, where applicants came to get licensed. The office was geared up to take photos, copy documents, answer questions and process applications.
Riccarton staff are still eager to sign up building practitioners to the scheme. So if you, or someone you know, would like help, call 0800 60 60 50 or drop in to the Department’s Christchurch office at Level 2, 10 Nelson Street, Riccarton.
Restricted building work
Restricted building work is expected to start in March 2012. Certain types of critical building work will only be able to be done or supervised by licensed building practitioners. Do-it-yourselfers (DIYers) will be able to seek an exemption from restricted building work requirements.
For more information about the LBP scheme or to get your application form, visit www.dbh,govt.nz/lbp, phone 0800 60 60 50 or email licensing@dbh.govt.nz.
Back to top
Select Committee invites submissions on the Building Amendment Bill (NO 3)
A new Bill proposing changes to the Building Act 2004 has been introduced to Parliament, Minister for Building and Construction Maurice Williamson announced recently.
"The Building Amendment Bill is the result of a comprehensive review of the Building Act 2004,” Mr Williamson says. “It forms part of a package of changes aimed at lifting the overall performance and productivity of the building and construction sector.”
The Building Amendment Bill (No 3) spells out clearer accountabilities for the Code compliance of building work for building practitioners, building consent authorities and consumers.
It also provides for a risk-based consenting process where the amount of checking and inspection is aligned to the risk and complexity of the work, the skills and the capability of the people doing the work.
"This Bill will make it clearer who is accountable for what. People will know what is expected of them and what they can rely on others for. This should see more work built right first time.”
Mr Williamson said the proposed risk-based consent system would only be introduced once he had confidence that ‘quality is being built’. He indicated this would take time and would only be introduced if a number of preconditions were met.
The pre-conditions that need to be in place include:
- greater awareness and understanding by the sector of the performance requirements of the Building Code and how to comply with them
- a sufficient base of competent practitioners in the sector, the cornerstone of which is the Licensed Building Practitioners Scheme
- strengthened contracting requirements and related consumer protection measures in the residential construction sector
- an effective monitoring regime to ensure building quality is maintained or improved.
The proposed changes to the building consent system are expected to reduce compliance costs over time but Mr Williamson made it clear the Government was not prepared to reduce costs at the expense of building quality or public safety.
The Bill also proposes new measures to encourage professional conduct among building practitioners. A Code of Ethics will now form part of the Licensed Building Practitioners Scheme and licensed building practitioners will be able to be disciplined for breaches of the Code or other behaviour that brings the scheme into disrepute.
“We need to be explicit about the standard of behaviour we expect from people working in the sector. Good standards of behaviour will help restore confidence in the sector,” Mr Williamson said.
The Bill is now with the Local Government and Environment Select Committee for review. The Select Committee is seeking submissions on the Bill. Submissions close on March 4, 2011.
For more information about the Building Amendment Bill (No 3) and how to make a submission please see the Building Act Review section of the Department of Building and Housing’s website.
Back to top
Simple house opens in Auckland
22 October 2010, Minister for Building and Housing, Maurice Williamson, opened the Simple House in Otara, Auckland.
The Simple House was the winning design in a competition that encouraged architects and designers to develop innovative plans for a family home as a way of road testing the draft Simple House Acceptable Solution.
The Simple House design was praised by the judges for its striking contemporary appearance and its carefully planned design.
The possibilities for developing projects using the Simple House Acceptable Solution are broad. Simple Houses can be built anywhere in New Zealand with respect to earthquake loads, the
majority of sites with respect to wind, and in most populated areas with respect to snow load. Layouts can be easily changed to suit owners’ needs and the house reoriented to capitalise on sun and privacy and a house designed to Simple House Acceptable Solution will be of low weathertightness risk.
Therefore, the Simple House Acceptable Solution remains a guide to development rather than a master plan. In addition to the Otara model, there are currently seven other Simple Houses constructed, being built, or planned by architects across New Zealand.
The document is purposely designed to allow for the design of houses that can grow with the additions and changes of New Zealand families.
The Simple House Acceptable Solution is one of a number of initiatives aimed to improve the availability of affordable houses by streamlining the consent processes and defining good quality construction standards. These initiatives, known as the Blueprint for Better Building also includes MultiProof, the National Multiple-Use Approval scheme for repeat buildings of the same design.
The Simple House will go on the market over summer 2010 and be sold through a real estate agent.
Back to top
How best to certify solid fuel heaters
A number of building consent authorities (BCAs) have been raising concerns about the quality of solid fuel heater installations and the amount of non-compliance resulting in a significant number of failed inspections. In addition, customers are complaining about lengthy approval processes, delays in inspections and disproportionately high compliance costs from BCAs for consenting these items.
The Building Act 2004 (the Act) requires that building work must not be carried out without a building consent. However, the Act does not take into account the type of building work proposed. As a result, many BCAs apply a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to building consent applications, whether for the installation of a solid fuel heater or the construction of a new dwelling.
The purpose of this article is to provide BCAs with guidance and advice on how best to approve solid fuel heaters. In addition, we provide a number of examples of BCAs who we think do this reasonably well.
Approval and certification process
We recommend BCAs consider developing the following streamline process for the approval and certification of solid fuel heaters.
Following receipt of the consent application and a completed checksheet over the counter, the BCA carries out a quick compliance check. This is to assess whether the consent application and documentation are complete and whether Building Code compliance has been adequately illustrated. We consider, in most cases, this process could quite easily be completed over the counter while the consent applicant is waiting. It is important to ensure that the person carrying out this compliance check is technically competent to do so. This may be a technical administration officer or a building official, both of whom would need to be trained in the assessment and approval of solid fuel heaters and all of their code compliance requirements. They would also need to be covered by the BCA’s competency assessment system. Where more complex installations are being proposed such as solid fuel heaters connected to a wetback, the input from a building official with plumbing expertise would be appropriate. Following this check and payment of applicable fees, the consent should be granted and issued. We recommend BCAs set a standard fee that reflects the simple nature of this type of building work and the narrower scope of compliance checking necessary. The Department believes this consenting and administration process should not take more than a day at the outset.
To issue a code compliance certificate (CCC), the BCA must be ‘satisfied, on reasonable grounds’ that the completed building work complies with the building consent. One way to be satisfied of this is to carry out an inspection of the installed appliance. In most instances only one inspection should be required, which should ideally be prior to using the appliance. Provided the BCA passes this inspection, they can then issue a CCC. Again, given the simple nature of the building work the CCC review and issue administration shouldn’t take more than a day or so after the inspection.
There are several benefits to this process. Approval can be granted instantly, which significantly reduces approval times consent applicants often experience. Note, if the application isn’t complete we suggest rejecting it at the front end and putting the onus back on the applicant to fulfill their obligations to provide an adequate consent application. These are simple applications that can often come from the same applicants (eg: fire place installers) so it’s not unreasonable to expect a complete and adequate application at the front end.
Applying a fast track and streamlined process to the approval of solid fuel heaters gets them through the system quickly, helping free up building officials and administration staff to focus on more complex applications.
Examples
Following are a few examples of BCAs who already provide fast track streamline processes for solid fuel heaters which we consider sound pretty reasonable.
Rotorua District Council. Applicants, who in the past have consistently submitted good quality consent applications, can be added to the Council ‘Exempt from Vetting Register.’ This allows applicants to omit a pre-lodgement vet, which takes place at the processing stage instead. This exemption can be revoked at any time at the Council’s discretion, should the standard of consent applications drop. Provided the application meets the Council requirements and following payment of a standard consent fee, the Council usually issues the consent the next day. In addition, where inbuilt fireplaces are proposed, the Council only requires one inspection following installation. This, the Council say, creates a commercial advantage for installers and reduces compliance costs applicants incur.
Lakes Environmental. Lakes Environmental (Council’s regulatory agent) vet and process applications at the same time while the customer waits at the counter. This enables them to ask questions or seek additional information efficiently. A check sheet, which the applicant is required to complete before lodging the consent, is utilised. In addition, customers can book inspections at the time of lodging the consent application. The consent is usually issued the following day.
Nelson City Council. Nelson City Council offer a streamline process called ‘pre-paid building consent application’ for consents they consider minor in nature such as solid fuel heaters. This process does not require a pre-lodgement vet. The Council engages an external contractor to process applications and carry out site inspections. Consent applications are generally processed within one working day. Inspection appointments apart from the busiest times can usually be made at a days notice.
Minimum information requirements
The following are minimum building consent application information requirements for a solid fuel heater and a list of applicable Building Code clauses to help demonstrate Building Code compliance.
- floor plan showing location of appliance and new smoke detectors
- make and model of appliance and confirmation it complies with the National Environmental Standard for Air Quality
- clearances from combustible surfaces indicated
- hearth dimensions and fixing details where appliance is freestanding Manufacturer’s specification and installations instructions (eg: as per AS/NZS 2918:2001)
- details of seismic restraints
- external flue and flashing details.
Relevant building code clauses
B1 Structure: Provision of seismic restraints, flue not cutting through existing roof framing, flue stability, chimney construction details (including foundation and provision of lateral bracing), hearth slab (supported on timber or concrete floor)
B2 Durability: 5 years for free standing appliance, 15 years for inbuilt appliance and flues
C1-4 Fire safety: Clearances, heat shielding, ceiling and chimney liners, ceiling plate, floor protector, etc
E2 External moisture: Roof or wall penetrations and flashing details
F7 Warning systems: Provision of smoke detectors (as the installation of a solid fuel heater is an alteration to an existing building section 112 of the Act applies and an up-grade to the means of escape is required, this is easily achieved by installing smoke detectors in residential dwellings).
Back to top
Association of building compliance - inaugural meeting
The Association of Building Compliance (the Association) was launched at its inaugural meeting on November 18, 2010, held at Kingsgate Hotel, Parnell, Auckland.
The Association was established to look after the interests of independent qualified persons (IQPs) and building compliance companies who often act as the owner’s agent in relation to compliance schedules and building warrants of fitness (BWoF) requirements under the Building Act 2004 (the Act).
The Association has branches in Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington and Christchurch.
They intend to have bi-monthly branch meetings. Territorial authority officers who deal with the compliance schedules and BWoF functions under the Act will be invited to attend.
Department representatives Craig Hill, Manager, Operational Policy and Regulatory Services and Gary Higham, Advisor from the Department’s Performance Monitoring and Review attended this first meeting and presented an update on a number of projects that the Department is involved with, including the proposed BWoF changes as part of the Building Act Review, and the existence of some sector lead work on a national IQP assessment framework and register.
Gary Higham discussed the recently published guidance document titled ‘Owners responsibilities to ensure their buildings are safe to use (Guidance on building warrants of fitness and compliance schedules)’. While this document is primarily aimed at owners of buildings with specified systems and compliance schedules, the Department considers that IQPs should also consider it essential reading, particularly those that are still not fully familiar with the BWoF and compliance schedule requirements under the Act. This guidance document is freely available on the Department’s website.
Rosemary Killip, Managing Director of Building Networks facilitated a group brain-storming session to identify and prioritise the problems and issues that the Association’s members want to present to the Association’s committee for future discussion.
For further information about the Association please contact Bronwyn Stallard on (09) 478 9790 or email at aiqp@xtra.co.nz.
Back to top
Apprentice of the year awards
The atmosphere was electric at the Boatshed on Thursday, 21October 2010 as ten regional finalists waited to hear who had won the Apprentice of the Year award.
The event was attended by The Minister for Building and Construction, Hon Maurice Williamson, Katrina Bach, Mark Scully, Malcolm MacMillan, Craig Hill, Dave Kelly and Susanne Townsend representing the Department, key representatives of the building and construction industry and the ten apprentices with their families and employers. The employers were almost as nervous as the apprentices and as one of the employers said “This is capping off the end of an era and starting a new one for these guys.”
Mr Williamson, who presented the awards, said the competition showcases the skills and ability of tomorrow’s builders.
“The building industry has faced a number of challenges over the past two years and it’s great to see such a vibrant talented group of young carpentry apprentices coming into the industry.”
“The Apprentice of the Year competition provides a great platform for growth and judging by the standard of this year’s entrants, the industry is in safe hands.”
Before the winners were announced we heard from Mr Williamson that he was due to visit China, and although the visit was in his capacity as Minister for Customs, the authorities in China had expressed a desire for a presentation about the survival of buildings in Canterbury during the earthquake. Mr Williamson said that this shows our Building Code is world class and we can build on that.
Katrina Bach, keenly aware of the apprentices sitting on the edge of their seats, gave a succinct address expressing the Department’s support for the competition and awareness of its value in developing the carpenters of the future. She warmly congratulated the winners and acknowledged the support of their employers in getting them to get to this stage. She also mentioned that she is hopeful of seeing a young woman in the finalist group at some time in the future.
Warwick Quinn, CEO of Registered Master Builders and Mark Burton-Brown of Carters ended the suspense by announcing the winners. Nelson Builder, Isaac Alder was the top apprentice, taking out the coveted title of the Registered Master Builders 2010 Apprentice of the Year, in association with Carters.
Rhys Doesburg of Wellington, was second and Northland’s Atama O’Donnell took out third place.
The National competition judges described Isaac, who is employed by Russell Bruce Contract Builders, as a passionate young man with the building skills to back it up.
“Isaac has an obvious sense of pride in his projects and considers customer service and taking an active role in his community as high priorities.”
“Isaac displayed exceptional skills in all facets of the competition and showed a real appreciation of the importance of building as a business, as well the practical skills required to reinforce ensuring his future success.”
RMBF Chief Executive Warwick Quinn says the competition has grown from strength to strength, which is a reflection of the number of employers dedicated to training the future of the industry.
The Apprentice of the Year competition is in its seventh year and has grown steadily since its inception. This was the first year the competition had introduced a practical judging component in the national final.
This year’s competition attracted 155 entries.
This is the fourth year the Department of Building and Housing has been a key sponsor.
The Apprentice of the Year competition is a joint initiative by Carters, the Registered Master Builders Federation, the Building and Construction Industry Training Organisation (BCITO) and the Department of Building and Housing (DBH). It aims to recognise excellence among carpentry apprentices and raise awareness of the career opportunities in the building and construction industry. The competition certainly got good coverage in local newspapers throughout the regions and even a piece on breakfast TV. This kind of publicity helps to raise awareness of the work being done and supported by the Department to raise standards in the sector.
Mark Scully, who was one of the judges, said that he enjoys seeing these young men get regional and national recognition and the pride they and their employers have in taking part in this competition.
Above: Atama O’Donnell, third place winner, Hon Maurice Williamson, Minister for Building and Construction, Issac Alder, Apprentice of the Year Winner, Warwick Quinn CEO Registered Master Builders Federation, Rhys Doesburg, second place winner, Mark Burton-Brown, National Sales and Marketing Manager, Carters , Katrina Bach, CEO Department of Building and Housing, Ruma Karaitiana, CEO Building and Construction Industry Training Organisation
Back to top
Building officials institute of New Zealand 2011 conference
The Annual Conference and Expo of the Building Officials Institute of New Zealand (BOINZ) is a key annual event in which building professionals have an opportunity to develop a better understanding of the responsibilities and duties empowered to them by Acts and Regulations. It also provides opportunities for Institute members to meet and exchange knowledge and ideas relevant to the science of building compliance.
In 2011, the Building Officials Institute of NZ Annual Conference and Expo will feature speakers and presentations which will provide a wealth of knowledge and information to those in attendance.
A particular focus this year will be lessons learned from the Canterbury Earthquake. Over 400 people attended the 2010 Annual Conference and Expo held in Rotorua and this number is expected to grow once again when Institute members meet in Auckland during April 2011. Delegates will include building control professionals, building surveyors, architects and designers, builders, product manufactures, and others interested in this part of the industry.
Some of the topics to be covered off at the conference in April 2011 will include:
- Keynote speaker - Minister of Building and Construction, Hon Maurice Williamson
- How compliance matters affect industry - Rob Davies, CEO, Carter Holt Harvey Wood Products NZ
- Various topics and sessions from the Department of Building and Housing with an opening address by DBH CE, Katrina Bach
- Insurance Council guidelines for building consents and compliance for residential and commercial property reinstatements – John Lucas, Insurance Council of NZ
- Weathertightness remediation: The BCA viewpoint - going forward - Bob de Leur, Auckland Council
- The Canterbury earthquake recovery process – Steve McCarthy, Environmental Services Manager, Christchurch City Council
- Organising large teams to carry out building evaluations after the Quake – Esther Griffiths and Kelvin Newman, Inspections Manager, Christchurch City Council
- An engineering perspective after the quake – Dave Brunsdon, Engineer, Kestrel Group
- Weathertight decisions and case studies from Heaney & Co.
- Building Act Review Update from the Department of Building and Housing
The Department will also be hosting an information stand where conference attendees can come and discuss issues, ask questions and obtain copies of guidance material and other information.
All building officials and building control managers are encouraged to attend and participate in this continued professional development opportunity.
Registrations can be made to BOINZ via their website.
Back to top
Have your say on proposed changes to important documents
Consultation has commenced on proposed changes to documents which have been described as ‘Edmonds Cookbooks’ for timber framing and weathertightness of timber-framed buildings.
The documents - Acceptable Solution B1/AS1, which cites the Standard for timber- framed buildings (NZS 3604), Acceptable Solution E2/AS1 and Verification Method E2/VM1 - are used to design most timber-framed homes and other low-rise timber- framed buildings such as some community care buildings and commercial offices.
Sections on building envelope and cladding have been deleted from NZS 3604 to allow more focus on structure, and it is proposed to include these aspects in E2/AS1.
The changes also include a proposal to cite a new Standard for light steel framing and a Standard for restraints for building contents and engineering systems. Also included is a proposal for the introduction of a new Acceptable Solution for weathertightness of concrete and concrete masonry.
Consultation on changes to these and other documents began on 26 November 2010 and runs until 4 February 2011. See below for more information on how to make a submission on these consultations.
About B1 and E2 changes
Anyone designing or constructing a building must have a thorough knowledge of the current Building Code and must ensure their work is Code compliant. The proposed changes will affect all builders of residential and low-rise buildings and it is important the sector has its say on the proposals.
Clause B1 of the Building Code deals with structure. It says buildings must be able to withstand the loads they experience during construction, throughout their life and when they are altered.
The current Standard NZS 3604 dates from 1999. In the intervening years there has been a considerable increase in knowledge about wind, earthquake hazards, snow and live loads, as well as changes in design and construction practice.
After wide consultation with the industry, Standards New Zealand has revised NZS 3604 which is expected to be finalised early in 2011, and aligned it with the latest suite of loading standards AS/NZS 1170. Engineered wood products and industry requirements for roof trusses are included in the draft Standard. It also covers structural requirements for higher snow loads and for increased wind speeds.
The Department is proposing to incorporate the revised NZS 3604 into Acceptable Solutions B1/AS1 and E2/AS1.
In the past, specific design was required for buildings if wind speed was greater than 50 metres per second. Following the revision of NZS 3604 and the proposed changes to E2/AS1, the windspeed covered by NZS 3604 and E2/AS1 will be increased to 55 metres per second, which is a 20 percent increase in wind pressure. This means E2/AS1 will be applicable for more areas of the country. To cater for this, a new wind zone has been created called ‘the extra high building wind zone’ or ‘EH’.
The revised NZS 3604 includes the latest earthquake and wind hazard profile, and houses built using the updated version of NZS 3604 are expected to perform better in earthquakes.
Complex issues such as liquefaction and the impact on foundation design are still under discussion following the Canterbury Earthquake.
The revised NZS 3604 covers aspects of barrier design and is more up-to-date than the current Acceptable Solution for timber barriers, B1/AS2. The Department proposes to delete B1/AS2 and replace it with more useful and flexible guidance on barriers that complements the revised NZS 3604.
E2/AS1 is a key document dealing with weathertightness and cladding. It was updated substantially and effectively in 2004/05 and has improved the weathertightness of buildings. The Department is proposing to update E2/AS1 to align with the revised NZS 3604, and to reflect recent research and changes in building practices.
It is also proposed to update E2/VM1, which tests the performance of claddings with drainage cavities on timber-framed buildings, to align with the current AS/NZS 1170 and NZS 4248.
Other changes
The National Association of Steel-framed Housing (NASH) has published a Standard for residential and low-rise light steel framing. It provides a straightforward way for builders using light steel framing to meet the requirements of Building Code Clause B1. For more information visit the NASH website.
The Department proposes to amend B1/VM1 to refer to the NASH standard and also to NZS 4219:2009. NZS 4219 deals with restraints for building contents and engineering systems that may be a hazard in an earthquake.
The Department also proposes to cite the final published version of the Cement and Concrete Association of New Zealand (CCANZ) standard for weathertight concrete and concrete masonry construction. This would create a new Acceptable Solution, E2/AS3, for concrete buildings with a maximum building height of 10 metres.
Need more information?
For more information about the B1 and E2 consultations visit the consultations area of our website.
If you have already registered a submission through the Department’s website for timber treatment, fire, noise, signs and medium-density housing, you do not have to register again to make a submission on proposed changes to clauses B1 and E2.
Back to top
Construction moisture in concrete subfloors
It is common practice in new buildings to install floor coverings over concrete floors. Flooring failures attributed to excess moisture in concrete are a common occurrence and, because of the fast-track nature of a lot of today's construction projects, the installation may be rushed and failure can occur. It’s important to know what to ask for and how to test whether the concrete is dry before flooring is installed.
Excess moisture in the concrete beneath floor coverings can create mould colonies that can affect people’s health long before the mould can be seen or smelt. Reactions can range from headaches and asthma attacks to more subtle effects including concentration difficulties and chronic fatigue syndrome.
Introduction to concrete subfloors
Concrete is an ancient material that can last for thousands of years and floor coverings installed correctly on concrete floors can yield a lasting and durable wearing surface.
Firstly, using the right terminology is helpful because words like “drying” and “curing” are often misused.
The “28 day cure” is the approximate time a 100 mm slab takes to cure, and is often mistakenly used as a guideline to install floor coverings. After 28 days, the concrete is not dry because “curing” and “drying” are not the same.
“Curing” is the chemical reaction that bonds the ingredients (cement powder, sand, aggregate and water) together to make concrete. “Drying” refers to the evaporation of the excess water from the concrete after the curing period.
How long to dry?
The drying time before slabs are ready to receive floor coverings depends on atmospheric conditions and mix design. A 100 mm thick slab allowed to dry from only one side typically requires four months to achieve a relative humidity of 75 percent, although in New Zealand it can take even longer. The drying process only begins once the building is weathertight and the slab needs to evaporate about two thirds of the water in the mix before floor coverings can be safely installed.
A concrete floor slab on or below grade intended to receive floor coverings requires a damp- proof membrane (DPM) to be installed below the slab.
Why does moisture cause floors to fail?
Often in new buildings the flooring is installed before the concrete has completely dried. Consequently, when the building is occupied and the interior conditioned air is dry, the floor covering blocks the movement of excess moisture that migrates upward through the slab. In older buildings, a missing DPM or external sources such as leaks, exterior ground levels, or unusual amounts of ground water, can cause moisture to pass through a slab.
When to test and why?
It is prudent to test for moisture levels in concrete slabs when installing floor coverings especially in new buildings. Standards AS/NZS 2455 and AS/NZS 1884, floor covering manufacturers and adhesive producers recommend testing concrete slabs for moisture, regardless of age or elevation.
To say “it looks dry”, “it feels dry” or “it smells dry” isn't enough. Taping a plastic mat to the floor is also an inaccurate indicator. The electronic meters that test for moisture in concrete yield only a spot test, which isn't a sound basis for a decision to install flooring.
New Zealand and Australian Flooring Standards require concrete floors to have a relative humidity level of no more than 75 percent before floor coverings can be installed. Anything over this can compromise the product or installation, not to mention void all warrantees.
For more information refer to NZ Flooring Industry Standards AS/NZS 2455 and AS/NZS 1884, New Zealand Building Code Clause E2 External Moisture, E2 AS1 and BRANZ Bulletins 330 and 515.
Solutions
The good news is that reliable testing methods are available to help determine when the concrete is sufficiently dry for the installation of floor coverings.
The Floor Covering Industry of New Zealand's standards recognise the Hair Hygrometer for testing moisture in concrete. This method captures the vapour emissions from the top of the concrete as the concrete is drying out.
In-situ probes are the latest technology effectively measuring moisture inside the concrete slab. They are quickly being recognised by flooring manufacturers throughout the world as useful measuring tools in addition to Hygrometers.
Back to top
Updated house design guide published
The second edition of Designing Comfortable Homes was recently launched by the Hon Maurice Williamson, Minister for Building and Construction.
"Good building design is key to improving the comfort and energy efficiency of our homes," Mr Williamson said. “I applaud the concrete industry for its efforts in bringing this to the fore in the updated edition of Designing Comfortable Homes.”
The revised book, commissioned by the Cement and Concrete Association of New Zealand (CCANZ), with assistance from the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA), is a guide to the basic principles of passive solar design as a means to ensure homes stay cool in summer and warm in winter.
Along with general guidance on solar design considerations, Designing Comfortable Homes provides data on the expected performance of homes based around three different combinations of glass, mass and insulation.
“The concrete industry believes the energy efficiency and thermal comfort afforded through passive solar design is crucial to enhancing New Zealand’s housing stock and the quality of all our lives,” says CCANZ chief executive Rob Gaimster.
“Our health, and that of our families, can be enhanced, while the impact of the monthly power bill can be lessened, through what is in essence a very simple concept – passive solar design.”
The first edition of Designing Comfortable Homes was published in 2001, and since that time it has become a staple of all book collections within architectural and design practices. However, with recent changes to the Energy Efficiency clause of the Building Code and the development of NZS 4218, the thermal insulation standard, CCANZ decided it was time for this valuable resource to be updated.
“The premise of this book is that homes can be naturally warm in winter and cool in summer – provided appropriate combinations of glass, concrete’s thermal mass and insulation are used,” says Gaimster.
“Passive solar design principles are not only essential for good home design, but they are also easy to understand. We encourage architects, designers, builders and their clients to embrace these simple concepts in order to achieve much more comfortable and energy efficient homes.”
Hardcopies of Designing Comfortable Homes are available free-of-charge by contacting CCANZ (admin@ccanz.org.nz). Alternatively, a pdf copy can be downloaded from either the CCANZ website or from the EECA website.
Back to top
Upcoming building control training of interest
National BCA competency assessment system assessor training workshop
Dept of Building & Housing, Christchurch 7-8 February 2011
Further information about this system is available online on the National BCA competency assessment system section of our website. For information and to register for the 2 day competency assessor training course please contact Lana Johnson at the Department on 0800 242 243 or lana.johnson@dbh.govt.nz
Changes to schedule 1 webinar
Building Networks NZ Ltd, (Web based) 3 & 18 February 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
Plumbing inspection - water supply & sanitary plumbing
BOINZ Training Academy, Auckland, 7 - 11 February 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.boinz.org.nz/training-academy/calendar.php
Building controls administration forum
Building Networks NZ Ltd, Rotorua, 22 February 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
Specified systems forum
Building Networks NZ Ltd, Auckland, 24 February 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
Barrier free New Zealand trust 2 day accessibility seminar
BOINZ Training Academy, Christchurch, 24, 25 February 2011 & Auckland 31 March – 1 April 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.boinz.org.nz/training-academy/calendar.php
Complex fire design
BOINZ Training Academy, Auckland 8-9 March 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.boinz.org.nz/training-academy/calendar.php
Rosies - Building control boot camp
Building Networks NZ Ltd, Rotorua, 13-14 March 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
Fire documents C/AS1
BOINZ Training Academy, Auckland 29-31 March 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.boinz.org.nz/training-academy/calendar.php
BWOF desktop auditing workshop
Building Networks NZ Ltd Rotorua, 6 April 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
BOINZ annual conference and expo
BOINZ Auckland, 10 – 13 April 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.boinz.org.nz/annual-conference.php
Compliance schedule writing workshop
Building Networks NZ Ltd Rotorua, 4 May 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
BWOF forum 2011
Building Networks NZ Ltd Rotorua, 10 May 2011
Further information available online at: http://www.bnets.co.nz/building-codes-compliance.html
Back to top
2010-2011 Technical review programme
Purpose of technical reviews
The Department of Building and Housing (the Department) carries out technical reviews as part of its statutory function to monitor and review the performance by building consent authorities, territorial authorities, and regional authorities of their functions under the Building Act 2004.
The purpose of a technical review is to monitor the performance of and assist the organisation under review to improve its building control operations.
Role of the consent authority capability and performance group
The Department’s Performance Monitoring and Review (PMR) team within the Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group (CACPG) is responsible, amongst other functions, for technical reviews. The CACPG’s broad functions include:
- monitoring, reviewing and improving performance outcomes of the regulatory building control system
- managing and strengthening relationships with building consent authorities, territorial authorities, regional authorities and other key industry stakeholders
- providing advice and guidance to the regulatory building control sector
- undertaking investigations into complaints about building consent authorities
- undertaking operational policy work and implementing new regulatory reforms.
Members of the department's performance monitoring and review (PMR) team
Peter Sparrow (Senior Advisor) manages the PMR team and has worked for the Department since its formation in 2004. Prior to this, Peter was briefly employed by the former Building Industry Authority to undertake technical reviews. Peter has held various positions in the building industry over the past 15 years, including being a building official with local government, a building certifier in the private sector, a Royal Engineer in the NZ Army and a carpenter in private practice. In 2010, Peter gained the Diplomas in Building Control Surveying from Otago Polytechnic.
Mike Reedy (Advisor) has worked for the Department since January 2008. For the previous 20 years Mike worked in the building industry in a variety of roles including as a plumbing and drainage tutor at a tertiary technical institution, a building official in local government and a craftsman plumber in private practice.
Gary Higham (Advisor) joined the Department in June 2008. Previously Gary worked in the building industry for over 20 years as both an architect in public and private practices, and as a building official in local government. Gary holds a Bachelor of Architecture and was a registered architect from 1983 to 2006.
Paul Hobbs (Advisor) commenced with the Department in September 2008. Paul has 15 years experience in the building industry, most recently as a building official and team leader for local government. Paul is a trade qualified carpenter and holds a Diploma in Construction Management.
2010-2011 Technical review programme
In late October 2010, the Department’s PMR team commenced the 2010-2011 technical review programme by visiting the Southland District Council to review its performance against its core territorial authority (TA) functions.
TA functions were selected as the main focus for the technical review programme because these aspects are not captured by the current accreditation scheme and many of these functions have an element of public safety. Also, since 10 North Island councils were involved in the Department’s previous technical review programme of 2008-2009 which had a focus on specified systems, compliance schedules and building warrants of fitness, it was decided to select several South Island councils for this financial year’s review programme.
The terms of reference for the Southland District Council review, and two others (Nelson and Invercargill City Councils scheduled for late January and early March 2011 respectively), are as follows.
- determining whether building work is exempt under Schedule 1, clause (k)
- producing (voluntary) project information memoranda
- considering additions and alterations, change of use, and subdivisions
- issuing building consents subject to waivers or modifications of the Building Code (including natural hazards)
- amending compliance schedules and enforcing building warrants of fitness
- issuing notices and certificates (including notices to fix, certificates for public use, certificates of acceptance, and infringement notices)
- undertaking functions in relation to earthquake-prone, dangerous or insanitary buildings.
The PMR team spent four days gathering information about the Southland District Council’s building control activities in relation to TA functions by:
- observing staff undertaking work in the Invercargill and Te Anau offices, and out on site
- reviewing written material used and produced by staff (eg, policies, procedures, processing checklists and records, manuals and approved consent documentation)
- interviewing staff about their use of material and their work
- assessing a random sample of building projects (case studies) that were handled by the TA, just before or during the review visit.
Once the Department has completed the initial report, which includes the findings and recommendations based on the case studies undertaken, the Southland District Council will be given the opportunity to review and provide formal feedback to each of the recommendations.
On receiving the Council’s written responses, the Department will analyse and incorporate the Council’s feedback in a public summary report that will be published on the Department’s website www.dbh.govt.nz . This and other technical reviews previously undertaken by the PMR team, will be, and are, free to download. The learnings from these reports may provide other councils with the opportunity to improve their processes and procedures in relation to their building control activities.
Back to top
Investigation of compliant – regarding the change of use and building consenting requirements
The matter investigated
The Department of Building and Housing investigated a complaint regarding the accuracy of a BCA’s advice provided to a member of the public (the complainant). The complainant wanted to convert part of an existing garage, attached to a two story house, into an office. The conversion was to be achieved by installing a non-load bearing wall across part of the existing garage.
The complainant contended that:
- they were incorrectly advised by the BCA that their project involved a building change of use and therefore required them to get a building consent.
- when they asked the BCA whether they were likely to get an exemption to the building consenting requirements, they were advised that this would be very unlikely
- as a result of the dealings with the Council and the consenting process, the complainant allegedly suffered a financial loss as they essentially had to pay consenting fees of nearly $3,000 for a project that only involved around $500 worth of materials to build.
Background
A summary of the background to the complaint is noted below.
- the complainant sought advice from the BCA in 2007 regarding whether they were required to obtain building consent
- the BCA advised that a building consent was required as the work amounted to a change of use
- after approximately a year, the complainant commissioned a draftsman to draw up plans for the building work and submitted an application for a building consent to the BCA in late 2008
- a building consent was issued by the BCA in December 2008
- the BCA’s final inspection was conducted in March 2009
- the complainant and BCA corresponded throughout 2009 over the concerns raised regarding the advice and assistance provided by the BCA
- the complainant lodged a complaint with the Department on 17 September 2009. They also separately applied to the Department for a determination in February 2010.
The evidence considered
Some of the key evidence the Department considered when investigating this complaint included:
- building control advice from the Department’s Performance Monitoring and Review Team
- building control advice from an independent external building control expert commissioned by the Department
- copies of the plans and other consent documents for the building work and correspondence between the BCA and the complainant.
Findings
Having considered the particulars of the complaint, the Department made inquiries into two related issues:
1. Whether the building project constituted a change of use under sections 114 (owner must give notice of change of use, extension of life, or subdivision of buildings) and 115 (code compliance requirements: change of use) of the Act.
2. Whether an exemption to a requirement for a building consent under clause (k) of Schedule 1 of the Act was appropriate in the circumstances.
The Department believes that in this case:
- After assessing the proposed building work, the BCA should have concluded that the work did not constitute a change of use under the Building Regulations (Specified systems, Change the Use, and the Earthquake-prone Buildings) 2005. The Department’s reasons are consistent with those explained in the Department’s determination on this case (Reference 2171 Determination 2010/107, section 5.2).
- According to the Determination, the building work did not constitute a change of use under the Act as the building itself would continue to be categorised as Sleeping Single Home (SH) once the work was completed. The Determination further contended that building work that may arise from a change of use may be exempted from the need for a building consent under Schedule 1 of the Act.
- Whether a building consent is required is determined by sections 40 and 41 of the Building Act. The Building work described in Schedule 1 of the Act is exempt from the requirement to have a building consent. In this case, the Determination stated that paragraphs (ca) or (k) of Schedule 1 would have provided an exemption to the requirements for a building consent. The Department also noted that there is a timing issue as Schedule 1 to the Building Act 2004, was amended in the month prior to the BCA providing its advice. They could be reasonably expected to be up to date with this law change and its effect on the proposed building project.
- There were at least two appropriate opportunities for the BCA to have concluded that the building work would not involve a change of use – during the initial inquiry in person by the complainant and at the time the building consent application was received, vetted or processed.
- The Department accepted the complainant’s concerns about the BCA’s decision-making regarding the change of use and consenting requirements as valid, and that the complainant should have received better quality and competent advice from the BCA.
- The advice appears to have resulted from individual errors in judgment from BCA personnel.
- The complainant would have likely withdrawn their application for a building consent if they had been correctly informed by the BCA of the valid exemption.
Recommendations
The Department recommended that the Council should:
- review its internal procedures around assessing proposed changes of use under sections 114 and 115 of the Building Act and its decision-making processes regarding building consent exemptions
- review the effectiveness of its staff competency assessment, training, and work allocation systems.
Because these issues related to the interface between territorial authority and BCA functions, the Department also provided the Building Consent Authority Accreditation Body (IANZ) with the details of this complaint and asked it to factor the complaint, and any subsequent remedial work the Council implements, during its next accreditation assessment.
Outcome
The BCA agreed with the Department’s conclusions regarding this complaint and has advised that it has refunded the cost associated with obtaining the building consent application to the complainant.
Recommendations to other BCAS
- Ensure staff fully understand the building control functions at the interface of territorial authority and BCA responsibilities (especially the change of use and alterations to existing buildings provisions).
- Ensure you maintain up-to-date knowledge of the exemptions covered by Schedule 1 of the Building Act – as they change over time. Guidance should also be provided to customers on the consenting and exemptions process. To assist with this the Department has produced guidance information covering Schedule 1. This is available on the building publications section on our website.
- Seek clarification on the building regulations and requirements with the Department when you are unsure of technical issues and their application. Consent Authority Capability & Performance Group Building Act and Building Regulations helpline on email info@dbh.govt.nz or Ph 0800 242 243
Back to top
Building act and building regulations helpline
The Department’s Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group continue to offer a free helpline for building officials’ enquiries about the Building Act and Building Regulations. You can email us at info@dbh.govt.nz or phone 0800 242 243 and ask for the Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group.
Please address your email enquiry to this group, provide all of your contact details, and explain your question fully. Like you, staff in the group are very busy and it can take a day or two to respond to individual enquiries as we fit these enquiries in around other activities.
Our message to building officials is use this free service or we risk losing it.
Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group
Department of Building and Housing
PO Box 10-729, Wellington 6143
Telephone: 0800 242 243
E-mail info@dbh.govt.nz attn: Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group.
Back to top
Subscribe to BCA update
This publication has been developed to highlight and communicate topical building control issues. The original circulation list was developed from multiple mailing lists within the Department. To ensure you continue to receive this publication, subscribe online through the address below.
This publication is only produced electronically, so please ensure we have your correct email address.
Back to top