Technical review of the building control operations of Porirua city council - summary report

October 2007

Contents:

• Important Notice
• Overview
• Roles of the Department of Building and Housing and the Council
• Purpose of the technical review
• The review process

Key findings of the review

• Organisational and management structure
• Consent statistics
• Use of the processing clock
• Procedures for determining compliance with the Building Code
• Assessing alternative solutions
• Procedures for accepting producer statements
• Weathertightness compliance
• Compliance with other Building Act requirements
• Compliance schedules and the building warrant of fitness regime
• Accessibility compliance
• Human resources
• Technical knowledge and ability of staff
• Adequacy of resources
• Adequacy, security and availability of public records
• Relationships with building certifiers and other territorial authorities
• Case studies of completed buildings
• Accompanying personnel during inspections
• Feedback from the Council
• Next Steps

Back to Top

---

Important notice to people reading this technical review report

The Department of Building and Housing (the Department) carries out technical reviews as part of its function to monitor and review the performance by territorial authorities and building consent authorities of their functions under the Building Act 2004 (the Act) and, previously, the Building Act 1991 (now repealed). The purpose of a technical review is to assist the territorial authority or building consent authority under review to improve its building control operations.

A technical review is not an audit. A technical review is a performance review based on a snapshot of information about the building control activities of the territorial authority or building consent authority. It cannot be taken as a full and comprehensive review of the competency and quality of all of those activities. A technical review is carried out by:

• assessing whether the processes and procedures used by the territorial authority or building consent authority under review are sufficient to enable it to satisfy the requirements of the Building Act 2004, the Building Act 1991 (legislation applying during part of this technical review), and related Regulations, including the New Zealand Building Code (the Building Code)
• assessing the processes and procedures used by the territorial authority or building consent authority under review for weathertightness compliance
• providing advice and assistance on best-practice building control procedures to help the territorial authority or building consent authority under review achieve an effective building control regime that is consistent with national objectives
• enabling the Department to receive comment and feedback from the territorial authority or building consent authority under review about its practical operations, ability to assess building compliance, and the role of the Department in this process.

Summary of key messages

Over the course of the review, from June 2004 to February 2007, Porirua City Council (the Council) made a number of improvements to strengthen its building control practices. The Department acknowledges the work undertaken during the review, but considers that further improvements to the Council's building control operations are still required to ensure the Council is able to consistently meet its obligations under the Building Act 2004.

This section summarises the key areas needing further improvement as found during the Department's final on-site visit to the Council in February 2007. It is recognised that the Council has continued its work to strengthen its building control operations after the review, during the course of its preparatory work for accreditation as a building consent authority.

A particular area of concern found during the review was that, in a number of cases, the Council had made very limited progress to implement the recommendations of the initial review. Consequently, the Department had to reiterate recommendations in the follow-up stage of the review process (see parts 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 7, 8, 13, and 14 of the report's terms of reference).

The Department found that the Council deferred resolving some issues identified in the initial review as it made plans to prepare for building consent authority accreditation. At the time of the follow-up technical review the Council was still planning and trialling systems and procedures to support its accreditation preparation and application. The appropriateness of the proposed systems and processes could not be considered in the report as they were not implemented at the time the site visit took place.

The Department considers that the Council needs to give particular attention to the following issues.

Policies, processes and procedures to underpin the Council's building control operations

A common theme identified across the review was that some of the Council's building control functions lacked supporting and sound policies, processes and procedures. Areas where this is relevant include:

• building consent conditions and plan notations
• granting waivers and modifications to the Building Code
• building on land subject to erosion
• alterations to existing buildings
• change of use of buildings.

Additionally, in some areas the Council needs to improve existing procedures to ensure more consistent and effective implementation of those procedures. The key examples found included:

• developing a consistent and rigorous policy and procedure to underpin its building consent processing activities
• appropriately referencing the Building Act and Building Code in its new policy on amendments to building consents and updating its computer system to adequately record whether amendments to a consent have been checked, assessed or approved
• developing more comprehensive procedures to ensure all building control officers assess proposed alternative solutions and producer statements in a consistent manner and clearly document decisions and the rationale for their decisions
• strengthening policies, procedures and checklists used for conducting inspections to ensure all relevant information is appropriately documented and inspections are conducted using a consistent methodology.

Checking compliance with the Building Code

The Council was not consistently rejecting building consent applications that contained inadequate information to enable it to make sound and timely decisions on whether to grant or refuse such applications. The Council needs to reasonably believe that the provisions of the Building Code would be met if the building work was properly completed in accordance with the plans and specifications that accompanied the application.

The Department also identified that compliance with the Building Code was not being consistently achieved, particularly in relation to weathertightness compliance, access for people with disabilities, and fire compliance. In some cases, there was a noticeable lack of site-specific construction detail accompanying building consent applications to demonstrate compliance. Other issues included:

• ensuring project information memoranda consistently contain all required information
• ensuring that where a construction review is a condition of the building consent, the review is undertaken and evidence of this is provided before final sign-off
• requiring producer statements to demonstrate compliance with Building Code Clause B2 (Durability). Note: there is no statutory basis for requiring producer statements.

Resourcing and technical competency

The Council needs to provide staff with significant training in a number of areas of building legislation including waivers, alterations to existing buildings, notices to fix, changes of use and building on land subject to natural hazards. Staff also require further Building Code and building compliance training. Where training had occurred, the Department found that staff were not always effectively applying this knowledge in their day-to-day work.

The Department found a number of additional resource issues impacting on the Council's ability to effectively undertake its regulatory building control activities. In particular, the Council needs to:

• develop a longer-term strategic plan for staff acquisition and retention
• continue to enhance its sharing of technical knowledge among building control staff
• continue to develop and invest in the technical skills of its building control staff, particularly in relation to accessibility, fire compliance, protection of adjoining properties, external moisture and surface water compliance
• ensure adequate time and resources are allocated to the consent processing and inspection of weathertightness compliance and implementing the other recommendations made in the initial review
• employ additional building control staff, including filling the vacant cadet position and providing further administrative support to free up technical staff
• continue to develop its skills matrix to identify training requirements of staff
• ensure staff have adequate access to appropriate equipment and technical resources.

Quality assurance processes

The Council needs to implement and formally document its quality assurance mechanisms (such as peer review, internal audits of completed work, continuous improvement processes, training and provision of guidance) across all appropriate stages of its consent processing, inspection and approval work.

Back to Top

---

Overview

Purpose

This report provides a summary of the results of a technical review of the building control operations of Porirua City Council (the Council) carried out between June 2004 and February 2007. The report outlines:

• the role of the Department and the Council in regulatory building control
• the methodology used in the review
• the Department's key findings and recommendations
• the Council's progress to action the Department's recommendations
• areas requiring further improvement.

The Council

Porirua City Council has an estimated population of 50,300 (as of June 2003 statistics). The Council employs twelve building control staff to carry out its regulatory building control functions. The Department recognises during the course of the review that the Council has a challenging task in a busy building environment, as do many other territorial authorities.

Review process

Technical reviews involve a three-phased process designed to assist territorial authorities and building consent authorities to improve their regulatory building control operations. This process involves two on-site review visits (an initial review and a follow-up review) spaced over time to provide a measure of the Council's progress to implement the Department's recommendations. Reports were produced for both the initial review and the follow-up review. The third stage of the review is the publication of this summary report for the whole process.

Technical reviews are carried out by the Department's Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group, according to terms of reference that cover a range of capacity and capability issues.

Sections 3 to 5 of the report outline the methodology supporting technical reviews.

Key findings from the review

The initial review highlighted a significant number of areas for improvement across different components of the Council's building control operations. It found that the Council was not achieving a consistent level of compliance with the Building Code at all stages of the consent processing and inspection process. The review also identified a number of resource issues which were impacting on the Council's ability to ensure consistent compliance with the Building Code. In particular, the Council needed to address the limitations in the technical skills and knowledge of its building control staff and employ additional staff to meet existing vacancies.

While the Department found that the Council had developed a Policy and Procedures Manual, which covered a number of key building control processes, this needed to be further expanded and enhanced. In particular, the Council needed to improve its building consent processing and inspection methodologies and reassess its procedures for consent lodgement and vetting.

The Department returned to the Council in February 2007 to do a follow-up review. The review team found that the Council has successfully implemented a number of the recommendations made in the 2005 initial review report (see terms of reference 1, 3, 4.4, 8, 9 and 10). The Council partially implemented other recommendations made (see terms of reference 4.1- 4.3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 16 and 17). The Council has not implemented a number of other recommendations made in the initial review and some of the initial review recommendations have been reiterated (see terms of reference 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 8, 13 and 14).

Recent work undertaken after the review

The Council has recently been preparing for its accreditation assessment as a building consent authority. This is to meet the new regulatory scheme introduced under the Building Act 2004. The Council advises that this preparatory work has included a number of initiatives that it considers have partially or fully implemented a number of the Department's recommendations and further strengthened its building control operations. Two key initiatives include:

• developing a Policy and Procedures Manual for all building control work, which covers all areas including training, auditing, procedures and checklists
• instigating a Resource and Capability Review of the Building Control operations.

In addition, the Council advised it has made further progress in implementing the Department's recommendations through the following activities.

• The introduction of a computer recording system to accurately track building consent applications
• An internal review of checklists and information used to compile PIM information
• Implementation of regular staff meetings and training sessions
• Developing policies and procedures for restrictions and limitations on building consents and providing staff training on their application
• The intention to train staff in accessibility compliance and have an officer accredited by Barrier Free NZ
• The purchase of online access to technical documents for all staff
• The provision of additional equipment for operational staff
• The development of an electronic date/signature stamp to ensure appropriate document tracking

The Council advised that this work is relevant to a number of the Department's recommendations under the following headings of the report (including headings 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 17). However, because this work occurred after the review visit, but before this report was finalised, it is noted by the Department but was not assessed as part of the review.

Back to Top

---

Roles of the Department of Building and Housing and the Council

The Department's role

In November 2004, the Department assumed the roles and functions of the former Building Industry Authority. The Department became responsible for conducting technical reviews of territorial authorities and building consent authorities.

The Department has a range of statutory responsibilities for building and housing and administers New Zealand's building legislation. Within this, its building control functions include:

• advising the Minister for Building and Construction on matters relating to building control
• administering and reviewing the Building Code
• producing Compliance Documents that specify prescriptive methods as a means of complying with the Building Code
• providing information, guidance and advice on building controls to all sectors of the building industry and consumers
• implementing, administering and monitoring a system of regulatory controls for a vibrant, innovative sector with skilled building professionals
• making determinations, or technical rulings, on matters of interpretation, doubt, or dispute relating to compliance with the Building Code or the issuing of building consents and code compliance certificates.

The role of the Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group

The Department's Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group is responsible for undertaking the technical review process for the Council. The Group's broad functions include:

• monitoring, reviewing and improving performance outcomes of the regulatory building control system, for example, conducting technical reviews of territorial authorities and building consent authorities
• designing and implementing a system of accreditation and registration to be used to strengthen decision-making at the important building consent and inspection stages of the building process
• managing the accreditation body that will assess prospective building consent authorities
• strengthening relationships with territorial authorities, building consent authorities and other key industry stakeholders
• investigating and resolving complaints about performance issues
• providing guidance, advice and assistance to the regulatory building control sector.

Role of building consent authorities and territorial authorities

Territorial authorities have a wide range of statutory functions and powers under the Building Act 2004. Briefly, these include:

• determining whether applications for waivers or modifications of the Building Code, or any document for use in establishing compliance with the Building Code, should be accepted
• determining the extent to which buildings must comply with the Building Code when altered, their use is changed or their specified intended life changes
• determining whether work is exempt under Schedule 1 from requiring a building consent
• enforcing the Building Act, Building Regulations and Building Code
• performing functions relating to dangerous, insanitary and earthquake-prone buildings
• issuing certificates of acceptance
• issuing certificates for public use
• issuing and amending compliance schedules and enforcing the building warrant of fitness regime
• issuing project information memoranda
• following up on notices to fix, gaining access to buildings, collecting fees and issuing fines and infringements.

Territorial authorities must also act as a building consent authority for their district. Statutory functions of a building consent authority include:

• receiving, considering, and making decisions on applications for building consents within set time limits
• inspecting building work for which it has granted a building consent
• issuing building consents, code compliance certificates, compliance schedules and notices to fix¹.

• Back to Top

---

Purpose of the technical review

Technical reviews are performance reviews undertaken to monitor building consent authorities and territorial authorities and help them fulfil their obligations under the Building Act 2004. The review is a tool to help a territorial authority and building consent authority:

• enhance the performance of its building control activities
• implement appropriate systems and processes so it can carry out its building control operations
• effectively fulfil its obligations under the Building Act and Building Regulations.

Technical reviews also examine whether a territorial authority or building consent authority has the appropriate operational systems and resources to enable its staff to undertake their building control work effectively and efficiently.

They are not intended to evaluate the performance of individual staff and are not comprehensive audits involving detailed examinations of all aspects of a territorial or building consent authority's building control operations. Nor do they assess the territorial or building consent authority against a particular model or expressly measure it against the performance of other territorial or building consent authorities.

Legislative basis

This technical review was initiated under the Building Act 1991². Although the Building Act 2004 repealed the Building Act 1991, the functions of the Chief Executive of the Department of Building and Housing regarding technical reviews were carried over³. This provides the mandate for the Department to complete technical reviews initiated by the former Building Industry Authority (BIA) and to commence new reviews.

Accordingly, this report primarily references the Building Act 2004, with supporting footnotes outlining the appropriate sections of the 1991 Act. Further information on the comparable sections of the two Acts is provided in the Department's publication Building Officials' Guide to the Building Act 2004⁴.

Back to Top

---

The review process

Review timeframe

Technical reviews are typically undertaken using a three-phase process, which usually takes approximately 18 to 24 months from start to finish.

Phase one: The Department undertakes an on-site initial review of the building consent authority's or territorial authority's building control operations and produces a report with recommendations. The organisation then provides feedback to the Department on the report and addresses recommendations made by the Department over the following 9 to 12 months.

Phase two: A follow-up review is usually undertaken approximately 9 to 12 months after completion of phase one, which focuses on how the building consent authority or territorial authority has addressed recommendations from the initial review. A draft follow-up report is provided to the organisation so it can make a written submission on the final findings. Following consideration of any submissions, the follow-up review report is finalised and provided to the building consent authority or territorial authority.

Phase three: The review process is then completed by preparing a summary review report for publication.

The figure below shows the stages of the review process. This report is the summary report for Porirua City Council indicated in phase three below.

Figure 1: Overview of the technical review process

Investigative method

The Department measures a territorial authority's or building consent authority's performance using a number of methods including:

• observing staff doing their work, both in the office and on site
• reviewing written material used and produced by staff (eg, policies, procedures, inspection 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 have recently been, or are currently, handled by the territorial authority or building consent authority.

Figure 2: Preparing for and conducting technical reviews

 

The June 2004 on-site review of Porirua City Council was undertaken over a 5-day period. In February 2007 the follow-up review on-site visit was undertaken over a 5-day period using a six-person team. The reviews provided a snapshot of the Council's building control operation at these points in time. The Department looked at the procedures undertaken in processing and approving building consents, and undertaking inspections, including those that had recently been completed and had code compliance certificates issued. The case studies were selected randomly.

Terms of reference

The table below sets out the terms of reference that form the basis for the review.

Terms of reference that form the basis for the review

Terms of reference
1	Organisational and management structure
2	Consent statistics
3	Use of the processing clock
4	Procedures for determining compliance with the Building Code.Consent application vetting and lodgement processesProject information memoranda (PIMs) processingBuilding consent processingStaged building consentsUse of notations and conditions on building consent documentsPeer review and external assessmentAmendments to building consent applications and requests for additional informationWaivers
5	Assessing alternative solutions for building compliance
6	Procedures for accepting producer statements
7	Weathertightness compliance
8	Compliance with other Building Act requirements
9	Compliance schedules and the building warrant of fitness regime
10	Accessibility compliance
11	Human resources
12	Technical knowledge and ability of staff
13	Adequacy of resources
14	Adequacy, security and availability of public records
15	Relationships with other territorial authorities and private building certifiers
16	Case studies of completed buildings
17	Accompanying personnel during inspection work
18	Feedback from the Council to the Department

Back to Top

---

Key findings of the review

The key findings of the review are outlined under the headings of the terms of reference. This section outlines the Department's recommendations and the Council's actions and responses to each recommendation.

Organisational and management structure

Purpose

To summarise the Council's building control organisational and management structure, identify any issues with its efficiency and effectiveness, and consider how the Council delegates its legislative powers, duties and responsibilities.

Background

Section 232 of the Building Act 2004⁵ covers the delegation of powers of territorial authorities. This section links to Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002, which sets out local authorities' broad powers of delegation.

Initial review

At the time of the initial review it was identified that the Council was in the process of implementing a new organisational structure and that there were a number of staff vacancies that remained unfilled.

The initial review also identified that some of the Council's staff were undertaking functions that were inconsistent with the delegations recorded in the Council's delegations register. The Department considered that the Council should periodically review its delegations under the Building Act to ensure that there are no gaps and that the Council's various functions are only undertaken by appropriately delegated building officials or staff members.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Recruit additional technical staff to fill its existing vacancies.	This issue is discussed under part 11 of the review's terms of reference (human resources).
Ensure appropriate delegated authorities have been established to cover all the Council's authorities under the Building Act.	The Council assessed, recorded and distributed delegations to appropriately delegated building officials and staff members.

Follow-up review

The Council's Building Act delegations had been assessed, recorded and distributed to appropriately delegated building officials and staff members.

No further recommendations were made in the follow-up review.

The Council's organisational management structure at the time of the follow-up review is shown below.

Conclusion

The Council has implemented the recommendations made by the Department under this part of the review.

Back to Top

---

Consent statistics

Purpose

To review selected building control statistics to provide an indication of the volume and nature of work the Council has to manage.

Initial review

The Council provided statistical information for the 12-month period ending May 2004.

Table 1: Porirua City Council consent statistics for 1 May 2003 to 27 May 2004.

Table 1: Porirua City Council consent statistics for 1 May 2003 to 27 May 2004

Action	Total number
Building consents issued	954
Compliance schedules issued	618
Swimming pools listed on register	390
Total value of construction work consented	$42,677,342

Follow-up review

The consent statistics for Porirua City Council's building control operations for the 12-month period from November 2005 to November 2006 were as follows.

Table 2: Porirua City Council consent statistics for November 2005 to November 2006.

Table 2: Porirua City Council consent statistics for November 2005 to November 2006

Action	Total number
Building consents issued	1,026
Compliance schedules issued	996
Swimming pools listed on register	320
Total value of construction work consented	$132,104,986

Conclusion

The Council was faced with a significant volume of building control work at the time of the initial and follow-up reviews. The Council's capacity and capability to process this volume of building work is discussed under headings 11 and 12 of the terms of reference.

Back to Top

---

Use of the processing clock

Purpose

To assess the Council's use of the processing clock and how well the Council is meeting the statutory timeframes for processing applications for building consents.

Background

The Building Act 2004 specifies a range of requirements for a building consent authority when it processes applications for building consents. Section 48 of the Act requires that a building consent authority grant or refuse a building consent within 20 working days⁶. This timeframe may be suspended if insufficient information has been supplied by the consent applicant. The applicant should be notified of this in writing.

Initial review

Building consent applications could not be recorded as suspended during processing because the Council's computer recording system was unable to stop the processing clock once it had been started. Owing to this problem, the Team Leader of the building control unit had developed a separate computer recording system to track consent processing timeframes. The Department found that this system had a number of problems in relation to access, efficiency and accuracy.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Review its system-based processing clock to ensure the accurate recording of processing timeframes.	The Council's computer system was adapted to accurately track processing timeframes.

Follow-up review

The follow-up review identified that the Council has resolved the issues with its computer system found during the initial review. The computer recording system was recording building consent applications when suspended and was accurately tracking processing timeframes.

The Department noted that since the initial review, the Building Act 2004 had introduced timeframes for the management of other statutory requirements, including the issuing of code compliance certificates and certificates of acceptance. The Department considered that the Council should take appropriate steps to ensure these new requirements were appropriately managed.

No further recommendations were made in the follow-up review.

Conclusion

The Council has implemented the recommendation made by the Department under this part of the review.

Back to Top

---

Procedures for determining compliance with the Building Code

Purpose

To review the key processes the Council uses when accepting, vetting and processing applications for building consents and to review how it establishes whether building consent applications comply with the Building Code. Processes reviewed include:

• consent application vetting and lodgement processing (4.1)
• project information memoranda (PIMs) processing (4.2)
• building consent processing (4.3)
• staged building consents (4.4)
• building consent conditions and plan notations (4.5)
• peer review and the use of external assessment (4.6)
• amendments to building consent applications and requests for additional information (4.7)
• waivers (4.8).

4.1 Consent application vetting and lodgement processing

Purpose

To assess how well the Council accepts and vets applications for building consents.

Background

Good-quality plans and specifications submitted with building consent applications help ensure efficiencies in processing and improved compliance outcomes. Modern buildings are now considerably more technically complex. Designers and consent applicants must ensure they provide building consent authorities with appropriate design information to show how Building Code compliance will be achieved.

Initial review

Some building consent documentation was being accepted by the Council when it lacked adequate detail to demonstrate compliance with the Building Code.

The Department also identified that administrative staff regularly accepted and issued building consents for minor work, such as solid fuel burners, without referring these applications to technical staff.

Although no recommendations were made during the initial review, the Department considered that the Council's vetting procedure could be strengthened by better involving skilled technical officers capable of identifying and rejecting poor consent documentation.

Follow-up review

The Council had improved its consent vetting procedures by introducing an enhanced checklist for the acceptance of building consent applications. While this was helping reduce the number of consent applications being suspended during the processing stage, evidence from the Department's case studies revealed that the Council was occasionally accepting building consent applications with incomplete or inadequate supporting information. Such applications lacked sufficient detail and evidence to enable the Council to decide whether the proposed building work would comply with the Building Code if it was built in accordance to the documentation provided with the consent application⁷.

Recommendations made to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council

Response from the Council

The Council could improve its consent vetting lodgement processes by: better defining the information that must be provided before the Council will accept building consent applications and ensuring such information requirements are communicated to staff providing training for consent vetting staff to ensure they can readily identify applications with insufficient information implementing mechanisms to help ensure consistent application of vetting processes (eg peer review and internal processing audits) communicating its minimum information requirements to appropriate external stakeholders.

Council advised that considerable progress has been made since the previous review and is continuing. As part of the ongoing work of process improvement and introduction of best practice, the Council has instigated a Resource and Capability Review of the Building Compliance Centre, to be carried out by a management consultancy. It is expected that the matters for improvement for consent vetting lodgement will be addressed in this review as the report will specifically address administrative and technical roles and the numbers of staff required. Continual improvement is ongoing with training opportunities being taken up. Peer review and audit procedures have been developed and included in the accreditation documentation and implementation requirements.

Conclusion

The Council has partially implemented the Department's recommendations, but this work is yet to be completed. The Department encourages the Council to give the Resource and Capability Review priority and to ensure the building consent vetting and lodgement processes are robust. The Council should also ensure staff and stakeholders are clear about information requirements to help ensure substandard building consent applications are not accepted.

4.2 Project information memoranda (PIMs) processing

Purpose

To examine how the Council uses project information memoranda (PIMs) as part of its building control operations.

Background

Sections 31-39 of the Building Act 2004⁸ cover applications for PIMs. These sections specify the minimum information a PIM must include. Information not apparent in the district plan must be included, as well as details of other authorisations, stormwater and utility systems, and other features or characteristics likely to be relevant to the design and construction of the building on that site.

Initial review

The Council's staff were experiencing difficulties retrieving information electronically when developing PIMs and were reliant on the part-time scanning officer to retrieve this information. While no specific recommendations were made during the initial review, the Department considered that the Council could streamline its PIM procedure by ensuring its staff were better able to retrieve required information.

Follow-up review

The follow-up review identified that the Council had provided training to staff involved in PIM processing in relation to retrieving electronic information. The Department identified a number of other issues that were impacting on the Council's project information memoranda processing activities. In particular, case studies of completed PIMs revealed the Council was not consistently meeting the requirements of section 35 of the Building Act 2004 and was not always providing site-specific detailing. PIMs were also not consistently identifying requirements of other relevant legislation, such as the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Fire Services Act 1975. Case studies also revealed some ambiguity in the use of checklists relating to natural hazards.

Recommendations made to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Ensure project information memoranda consistently include all information required by section 35 of the Building Act 2004.	The Council advised that it is undertaking an internal review of the checklists and information used to compile the PIM information provided by other groups within the Council.
Ensure project information memoranda consistently identify requirements of other relevant legislation.	The Council advised that the internal review should address these matters.
Ensure all information included in PIMs is clear and relevant to the proposed building work.

Conclusion

The Council has begun to implement the Department's recommendations, but this work is yet to be completed.

4.3 Building consent processing

Purpose

To ensure the Council has a robust and defensible methodology for processing building consents.

Background

Territorial authorities and building consent authorities should have systematic processes in place to assess building consent applications in a thorough, consistent and timely manner. This process should clearly document the technical basis for issuing the building consent and the subsequent compliance certification.

Initial review

The initial review identified some shortcomings in the Council's consent-processing methodology, particularly in relation to its compliance assessment processes. The Council's documentation did not always demonstrate what Building Code clauses had been considered. In addition, it was not always clear how the Council was satisfied on reasonable grounds that the provisions of the Building Code would be met if the building work were properly completed in accordance with the plans and specifications that accompanied the application.

The Council was in the process of implementing an electronic system for processing building consent applications. The Department considered that many aspects of the new computer system were causing difficulties for staff.

Recommendations made to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Implement a consistent and rigorous procedure to underpin its consent-processing activities. This should include a checklist to demonstrate that due consideration has been given to all appropriate Building Code requirements and to provide an audit trail for each building consent.	The Council developed new consent-processing checklists.
Strengthen its building consent processing methodology and outcomes by implementing quality assurance mechanisms.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Provide appropriate computer skills training to staff involved in building consent processing activities who are having problems with the new system.	The Council provided staff with training in the use of its computer system.

Follow-up review

The Council was in the process of trialling a number of different consent-processing checklists. The Department noted a number of limitations in these checklists. In particular, case studies found little evidence of checklists being used by processing officers as a method of demonstrating how compliance with all Building Code clauses was being considered.

The Department also found no evidence of processing staff using quality assurance mechanisms (such as quality audits and peer review), although the Council advised that a degree of informal discussion was being held between processing staff.

From discussion with processing officers, the Department considered that some staff were not fully aware of the requirements under sections 112 and 114 of the Act in relation to alterations to buildings and change of use. The Department considered that the Council needed to continue to implement the recommendations of the initial review.

Recommendations made to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Implement a consistent and rigorous policy and procedure to underpin its consent-processing activities. This should include a checklist that: adequately demonstrates consideration has been given to all appropriate provisions of the Building Act and Building Code demonstrates an adequate audit trail is fit for purpose and not excessively time consuming to complete clearly identifies the responsible processing officer clearly identifies relevant details of the project construction type and methods of compliance.	The Council advised that the Policy and Procedures Manual developed for accreditation addresses these matters. Accreditation checklists are included in the documentation.
Strengthen its building consent processing methodology and outcomes by implementing quality assurance mechanisms (such as peer review, internal audits of completed work, training and provision of guidance).	The Council advised that the quality assurance mechanisms will be implemented following accreditation status. Other methodology and outcomes are included in the Policy and Procedures Manual.

Conclusion

The Council has partially implemented the recommendation. It also advises that work is ongoing as it prepares for accreditation as a building consent authority. However, because this occurred after the follow-up review visit, the Department did not assess such work. The Department supports the introduction of the Policy and Procedures Manual and encourages the Council to monitor and evaluate its impact and update as required.

4.4 Staged building consents

Purpose

To assess the Council's processing of staged building consents.

Background

Section 44(2) of the Building Act 2004 states that an owner may make a series of applications for building consents for stages of the proposed building work⁹.

Initial review

The initial review found that the Council issued a building consent for an entire building project while only having building consent documentation for earthworks and foundations. At the time, section 33(3) of the Building Act 1991 applied which allowed an applicant to apply for a building consent in stages. In that particular case the Council did not recognise the need to follow this process.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Review procedures for processing staged building consent applications to ensure they comply with the staged building consent provisions of the Building Act, which require separate consent applications for each stage of a building project.	The Council introduced a requirement that a building consent application was required for each stage of the building project.

Follow-up review

The Council advised the Department that they now require a building consent application for each stage of the building project where relevant. However, the Department was unable to identify any building consents that included a staged building project to verify the Council's process for staged building consents.

No further recommendations were made in the follow-up review.

Conclusion

Although the Council had advised that a step-wise approach had been introduced for each stage of a building consent application, this was not evident in the follow-up review. The Department encourages the Council to fully implement and document this requirement.

4.5 Building consent conditions and plan notations

Purpose

To examine the Council's use of consent conditions and plan notations.

Background

Consent conditions or notations should be used as educational tools and to highlight aspects of construction requiring particular attention. Conditions should not be applied to cover up deficiencies in building consent documentation. While this may enable councils to avoid requesting additional information and can sometimes expedite processing, it fails to meet the requirements of the Act. The incorrect use of notations or conditions may place the Council in the role of being a designer which is not its appropriate role in the building control context.

Section 49 of the Building Act 2004¹⁰ requires building consent authorities to grant consents if they are satisfied on reasonable grounds that the provisions of the Building Code would be met if the building work was properly completed in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted with the application.

Initial review

The initial review identified some instances where the Council was applying notations to cover up inadequacies in consent documentation. The initial review also identified notations and building consent conditions that referenced Building Code clauses that were not relevant to the project.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Develop a policy to clarify when the use of building consent conditions and plan notations is appropriate. ln particular, the Council needed to ensure conditions and notations: were used to highlight specific areas for attention and not to make up for inadequate information provided with building consent applications referenced relevant standards and Building Code clauses.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The Council had yet to develop formal policies and procedures to clarify when the use of building consent conditions and plan notations is appropriate.

The Council advised that notations were not being placed on plans and that stamps were only being used to identify approved or superseded plans and details. Evidence from case studies revealed that in some instances, consent conditions and notations were still being used to cover up for deficiencies in building consent documentation.

The Department reiterated the recommendation made in the initial review that the Council develop a policy to clarify when the use of building consent conditions and plan notations is appropriate.

Recommendations to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Develop a policy to clarify when the use of building consent conditions and plan notations is appropriate. In particular, the Council needed to ensure conditions and notations: were used to highlight specific areas for attention and not to make up for inadequate information provided with building consent applications reference relevant standards and Building Code clauses.	The Council advised that improved plan vetting initiatives referred to earlier will remove the need for excessive conditions and notations by Council staff. The policy for this issue has been included in the Policy and Procedures Manual.

Conclusion

The Council did not implement the Department's recommendations. Consent conditions and notations were still being used to cover up deficiencies in consent documentation at the time of the follow-up review. The Council advised that further work on this issue has occurred after the follow-up review visit; however, the Department did not assess such work as part of this review.

4.6 Peer review and the use of external assessment

Purpose

To examine the Council's peer review procedures and the use of external expertise in its regulatory building control operations.

Background

Having an internal peer review system is an important mechanism that can help ensure the Council conducts its building consent and inspection activities with rigour and consistency.

Councils can contract specialist technical expertise when they do not have appropriate skills in-house. It is generally not feasible for a council to maintain appropriate expertise within its staff for all building control matters. Contracted expertise is often used to supplement council staff or to provide peer review of complex projects that have been reviewed by in-house staff.

Initial review

The Council advised the Department that internal peer reviews do take place, but the Council did not have a formal process for documenting this or evidence that it was happening.

The Council preferred to use in-house expertise rather than to outsource work to external consultants. External consultants were used only for checking work of a specific nature outside the experience of the Council's staff.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Formalise its peer review process, ensuring peer review is implemented at all appropriate stages of the consent- processing, inspection and approval processes.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Ensure applications containing areas of specialisation, such as air conditioning, fire designs and lifts, are peer reviewed if they are considered to fall outside the expertise of the Council's staff.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The Council had yet to develop a formalised process for conducting peer review. The Department found that while the Council was using both in-house and external engineering expertise, evidence from case studies revealed that the Council was still conducting some processing and inspection work that was outside the experience of in-house staff. This was particularly evident in relation to fire compliance.

The Department reiterated the recommendations made in the Council's initial review.

Recommendations to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Formalise its peer review process, ensuring peer review is implemented at all appropriate stages of the consent processing, inspection and approval processes.	The Council advised that its peer review processes are identified in the Policy and Procedures Manual. A separate internal review process has introduced leadership responsibilities including peer reviews - along with weekly staff meetings to discuss operational and technical matters.
Ensure building consent applications containing areas outside the expertise of the Council are assessed by a person or organisation competent to do so.	The Council advised that these matters are addressed by the implementation of the above.

Conclusion

The Council did not implement the recommendations made in the initial review. It also advises that work is ongoing as it prepares for accreditation as a building consent authority. However, because this occurred after the follow-up review visit, the Department did not assess such work. Given the findings of the case studies, the Department considers it important that the Council continues to review and strengthen its peer review processes and ensure external expertise is consistently engaged where designs for systems are outside the scope of internal expertise. There will be many instances where this is the case and specialist external expertise should be engaged.

4.7 Amendments to building consent applications and requests for additional information

Purpose

To consider how amended building consents are processed and how the Council makes requests for further information on consent applications.

Background

Applications to amend a building consent must be made in the same manner as the original application with any necessary modifications as required under section 45(5) of the Building Act 2004¹¹.

Councils can also require further reasonable information in respect of a building consent application. If a council lawfully does this, the application is suspended until a council receives the required information as required under section 48(2) of the Act¹².

Initial review

The Council's policy on amendments was sound but could be strengthened by incorporating references to relevant sections of the Building Act and appropriate clauses of the Building Code.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Incorporate appropriate references to the Building Act and Building Code into policy on amendments to building consents.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The Council had not incorporated references to the Building Act and Building Code in its policy on amendments to building consents. However, at the time of the follow-up review the Council was in the process of developing a new policy and procedures for amendments to building consent applications and requests for additional information.

The Department found that the Council's computer recording system was not adequately recording whether amendments to consents had been checked, assessed or approved.

Recommendations to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Ensure its new policy on amendments to building consent applications incorporates appropriate references to the Building Act and Building Code.	The Council advised that the new Policy and Procedures Manual addresses this matter.
Update its computer system to ensure it adequately records whether amendments to consents have been checked, assessed or approved.	The Council advised that this is part of an ongoing post- implementation computer software review/update. The matter is awaiting an amendment to the software; in the meantime a temporary measure has been introduced to flag the existence of an application for an amendment.

Conclusion

The Council has progressed the Department's recommendations. However, because this occurred after the follow-up review visit the Department did not assess such work.

4.8 Waivers

Purpose

To consider how the Council fulfils its responsibilities under sections 67-68¹³ of the Building Act 2004.

Background

Under section 67 of the Building Act 2004, a territorial authority may issue a building consent subject to a waiver or modification of the Building Code. Where this is done, section 68 provides that the territorial authority must notify the Chief Executive of the Department of Building and Housing.

Initial review

The Council's staff were not fully aware of what waivers were or that they were required to notify the Department of Building and Housing of them.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Ensure its obligations under section 34(8) (Building Act 1991) are properly fulfilled.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Ensure the Department is notified of waivers or modifications that have been issued to date.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Ensure the Department is notified of any future waivers or modifications.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

No policy on waivers and modifications was found by the Department. It was noted that no waivers or modifications had been issued by the Council since the initial review. The Department reiterated the recommendations made in the Council's initial review.

Recommendations to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Ensure its obligations under sections 67 and 68 of the Building Act are properly fulfilled.	The Council noted that no evidence was identified that sections 67 or 68 had not been complied with. These sections are addressed in the new Policy and Procedures Manual. Quality assurance mechanisms will be introduced following the accreditation process.
Adopt a policy on the granting of waivers and/or modifications of the Building Code.	As above.
Provide staff training in relation to waivers and modifications of the Building Code.	As above. The Council noted its Training Plan in the documentation it had prepared for its assessment as a building consent authority.

Conclusion

The Council had not implemented the Department's recommendation. It advises that it has progressed work as part of its preparations for accreditation as a building consent authority. However, because this occurred after the follow-up review visit, the Department did not assess such work.

Back to Top

---

Assessing alternative solutions

Purpose

To examine how the Council assesses alternative solutions proposed for use in building projects.

Background

Alternative solutions are one way of demonstrating that building work will comply with the Building Code. Building consent authorities can use the known performance of the relevant Acceptable Solution (prescriptive means of compliance) as a benchmark to make their own assessment of whether the performance of the proposed alternative solution is adequate. An alternative solution may involve materials, components or methods that differ from those in a Compliance Document,¹⁴ but still satisfy the performance objectives of the Building Code.

Initial review

The Council did not have a formal policy or procedures for the assessment and acceptance of proposed alternative solutions. There was also no evidence that the Council made any distinction between Acceptable Solutions and alternative solutions when consent applications or site constructions were assessed for compliance.

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Develop a policy to define how its technical staff should process proposed alternative solutions, including the requirement to: justify acceptance or rejection of a proposed alternative solution, demonstrating how Code compliance would be achieved clearly document and maintain records of the use and acceptance of alternative solutions.	The Council has adopted the work instructions for alternative solutions developed by the Wellington Cluster Group.

Follow-up review

Despite adopting the work instructions for alternative solutions developed by the Wellington Cluster Group, the Department found that some staff did not appear to be fully aware of when and how to use this procedural document or how to identify and assess an alternative solution. Further work was required to strengthen its procedures for assessing alternative solutions and ensure staff are fully aware of how to identify and assess an alternative solution.

The Department reiterated the recommendations made in the Council's initial review.

Recommendations to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council

Response from the Council

The review team recommends that the Council adopt a consistent policy and procedures for identifying and assessing alternative solutions and train staff in its use. This policy should include the requirement to: clearly document and maintain records of the use and acceptance of alternative solutions justify acceptance or rejection of a proposed alternative solution, demonstrating how Code compliance will be achieved.

The Council advised that this recommendation is addressed through the new Policy and Procedures Manual. Checklists and work instructions, together with quality management processes and auditing, will ensure consistency of approach. Training in the use of the new manual will follow its implementation.

Conclusion

The Council has partially implemented the recommendations. It also advises that it has progressed work as part of its preparations for accreditation as a building consent authority. However, because this occurred after the follow-up review visit, the Department did not assess such work. The Department considers that the Council must now closely support and monitor the implementation of the new alternative solutions policy to ensure its consistent and appropriate use.

Back to Top

---

Procedures for accepting producer statements

Purpose

To examine Council's system for assessing and accepting producer statements.

Background

Producer statements are written statements expressing the authors' views that plans, specifications or completed works comply with the technical requirements to satisfy some or all of clauses of the Building Code. A producer statement will usually be issued by a recognised specialist, for example an engineer, architect or competent specialist contractor. It is up to the building consent authority to decide whether to rely on such a statement. These documents have no specific status in law, but they can still be accepted and considered by a building consent authority when assessing the plans and specification submitted with a building consent application.

Producer statements are intended to reduce a council's input into specific aspects of design-processing or construction monitoring work. A council needs to have confidence that those providing producer statements have the appropriate experience and competence in their field. Acceptance of producer statements is discretionary.

Initial review

The Council did not have a formal policy or procedures for the assessment and acceptance of producer statements. The Council also had no register of approved authors or an audit process for checking the validity of a statement and the credibility of the author.

It was also found that producer statements were rarely nominating compliance with Building Code Clause B2 (Durability).

Recommendations to and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council prior to the follow-up review
Develop a policy to cover its acceptance and checking of producer statements that includes: conditions under which it will require a producer statement its acceptance criteria for producer statement authors (eg, their qualifications, competence, insurance, professional affiliations, quality assurance procedures, scope of practice for which they can write them) the form and required content for producer statements the charges for accepting a statement (which should include cost recovery for undertaking regular audits) audit procedures.	The Council adopted the producer statement process developed by the Wellington Cluster Group and was developing a list of approved producer statement authors.
Require producer statements for appropriate design elements to demonstrate compliance with Clause B2 (Durability) of the Building Code.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The Council had taken a number of actions to implement the recommendations of the initial review. In particular, the Council had adopted the producer statement process recently developed by the Wellington Cluster Group and was in the process of developing a list of approved producer statement authors.

The Department found that the Council was not consistently applying its new producer statement procedures, producer statements were not being peer reviewed, and construction review was not consistently being sought when requested in the building consent application.

It also found that producer statements for appropriate design elements were still not adequately demonstrating compliance with Building Code Clause B2 (Durability).

The follow-up review recommended that the Council continue to work towards implementing the recommendations of the initial review.

Recommendations to and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Ensure all staff consistently apply the Council's producer statements policy.	Refer to comments below.
Develop a peer review process for producer statements.	Refer to comments below.
Require producer statements for appropriate design elements, to demonstrate compliance with Building Code Clause B2 (Durability).	The Council advised that peer review processes are identified in the Policy and Procedures Manual and that its internal review processes, through the development of leadership within the team, includes peer reviews.
Ensure that, where a construction review is a condition of the consent, evidence is sought to show this has taken place.	The Council advised that, in conjunction with peer reviews, weekly staff and service management meetings take place to review operational matters and ensure consistency of approach. The Policy and Procedures Manual provides for regular auditing processes that will ensure construction reviews take place and are recorded.

Conclusion

The Council has partially progressed the Department's recommendations, although the Department could not assess work the Council had undertaken subsequent to the follow-up review visit. The Council is encouraged to continue to strengthen its producer statement processes and use the peer review process to ensure the procedure is delivered consistently.

Back to Top

---

Weathertightness compliance

Purpose

To assess the Council's ability to process and inspect weathertightness compliance with particular attention to:

• weathertightness design-processing methodology
• the level and detail of consent documentation accepted and approved by the Council
• technical competency of both processing and inspection staff in relation to weathertightness compliance
• the Council's inspection systems and procedures.

Background

In response to emerging reports of building failure, the Government initiated several reviews that collectively found that there had been a 'systemic failure' of the building system. The term 'systemic failure' illustrates that no single cause led to the failure; rather it was the result of a complex interplay between a number of factors. Some of the key factors involved included:

• standards of design and construction that were set at the minimum level necessary to achieve compliance, providing no margin for error
• a lack of information and capability on the design and construction side
• inadequate review of consent applications and inspections of building work, which meant that specific problems were not being consistently identified and rectified
• capability and capacity issues within the regulatory building control sector identified the need for better monitoring of emerging trends within the building control system.

The Building Act 2004 introduced a more comprehensive regulatory regime for the building control sector. The Acceptable Solution (a prescriptive means of compliance) for meeting Clause E2 External Moisture (weathertightness) of the Building Code¹⁵ was also updated.

Initial review

The Council lacked sufficient technical capabilities and defined processing and inspection methodologies for checking weathertightness compliance. Designers were also not being requested to provide site-specific construction details to illustrate weathertightness compliance when required. The Department considered that a lack of necessary skills and knowledge and workload pressures resulted in inadequate standards of weathertightness compliance.

While some technical staff had attended weathertightness training, this training was limited in scope and was not being effectively implemented.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Ensure adequate time and resources are allocated to processing and inspection of weathertightness detailing and construction, and that all processing and inspection staff are given appropriate levels of practical weathertightness training.	Some of the Council's staff have been provided with additional weathertightness training.
Require designers to provide site-specific construction details that demonstrate adequate compliance.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Develop robust processes to demonstrate how weathertightness compliance has been achieved.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Ensure consent applications with inadequate weathertightness detail are rejected or suspended.	The Council introduced an improved consent-vetting system.
Develop strategies for targeting design professionals and other stakeholders to communicate Council expectations on the level of weathertightness detail for high-risk-category buildings to be included in consent applications.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

While some of the Council's staff had attended additional weathertightness training, the Council had yet to develop formal policies and procedures for assessing weathertightness compliance. The Council was also still not consistently rejecting applications with inadequate weathertightness detailing, particularly in relation to external flashings, a key source of leaks in new buildings.

The Department also found no evidence that the Council had developed strategies for targeting design professionals and other stakeholders on the level of weathertightness detail required in consent applications for high-risk-category buildings.

The Department reiterated the recommendations still outstanding from the initial review.

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Ensure adequate time and resources are allocated to processing and inspection of weathertightness detailing and construction, and that all processing and inspection staff are given appropriate levels of practical weathertightness training.	The Council advised that a training plan has been developed as part of the new Policy and Procedures Manual. Training on weathertightness issues forms part of the overall process, including peer reviews. External training is provided and used where appropriate.
Require designers to provide site-specific construction details that demonstrate adequate compliance.	As above.
Develop robust processes to demonstrate how weathertightness compliance has been achieved.	The Council advised that checklists and guidance notes are provided in the Policy and Procedures Manual.
Ensure consent applications with inadequate weathertightness detail are rejected or suspended.	As above.
Develop strategies for targeting design professionals and other stakeholders to communicate Council expectations on the level of weathertightness detail for high-risk-category buildings to be included in consent applications.	The Council advises that effective use of the Policy and Procedures Manual in conjunction with staff training and effective client/agent liaison will indirectly ensure design professionals and stakeholders will develop their skills to ensure weathertightness detailing is site-specific, comprehensive and effective.

Conclusion

The Council has made progress in implementing the Department's recommendations, mainly through the new Policy and Procedures Manual, required for accreditation. This work could not be assessed as it happened after the follow-up review. Work on a number of recommendations needs to be ongoing (eg, provision of weathertightness training, and the need to communicate with stakeholders on Council expectations). Internal audits of completed work will ensure the new policies and procedures are being implemented appropriately.

Back to Top

---

Compliance with other Building Act requirements

Purpose

To examine the Council's performance on a range of other building control operations required by the Building Act that are not specifically covered under the other parts of the review's terms of reference.

Background

The Building Act contains a range of obligations and responsibilities relevant to the Council's building control operations. The key requirements examined under this part of the review include:

• building on land subject to erosion, etc (sections 71-74)¹⁶
• alterations and changes of use to existing buildings (sections 112, 114 and 115)¹⁷
• dangerous and insanitary buildings (sections 121 and 123)¹⁸
• earthquake-prone buildings (section 122)¹⁹.

Initial review

The Council had no formal policy or procedures relating to sections 36, 38 and 46 of the Building Act 1991. It was also found that some staff lacked a sound understanding of these sections or their implications.

The Council did not have a formal policy or procedure for assessing and dealing with dangerous and insanitary buildings, although the Council did instigate proceedings when necessary.

The Council needed to develop a formal register of earthquake-prone buildings as the Council was in a high earthquake risk region (Zone A). The Council's delegations register indicated that no delegation of building control functions regarding earthquake-prone buildings had been made beyond the Council's Chief Executive. This limited the enforcement role of building consent officers.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Develop procedures to ensure consistent application of requirements under sections 36, 38 and 46 of the Building Act 1991 and the clear documentation of consideration of these issues.NB: with the passage of the Building Act 2004, the above sections are now covered by sections 71-74, 112 and 114-115 of the 2004 Act.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Ensure staff receive appropriate training regarding their obligations under these sections.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Develop a policy to guide its decision-making on the assessment and consequent action for buildings that are potentially dangerous or insanitary.	The Council developed a policy for dangerous and insanitary buildings.
Develop a policy to identify and assess earthquake-prone structures and establish guidelines for their strengthening according to the provisions of the Building Act.	The Council developed a policy for earthquake-prone buildings.
Ensure its delegation of responsibility for building control work regarding earthquake-prone buildings has been appropriately undertaken and delegated to officers with the appropriate skills and experience.	The Council delegated functions in relation to earthquake-prone buildings to appropriate building control officers.

Follow-up review

The Council had yet to develop formal policies and procedures in relation to the application of change of use (sections 114-115) and alteration to existing buildings (section 112) provisions. It had also not yet developed a policy in relation to building on land subject to erosion (sections 71-74).

The Department saw no evidence that the Council had provided staff with training in these areas.

The Council had developed a policy for dangerous and insanitary buildings as required by section 131 of the Building Act 2004.

The Council had engaged an engineer to undertake a desktop analysis of buildings in the district that may be earthquake-prone. The Council had also developed a policy for earthquake-prone buildings as required by section 131 of the Building Act 2004. Furthermore, the Council had delegated functions in relation to earthquake-prone buildings to appropriate building control officers.

The Department reiterated the recommendations still outstanding from the initial review.

Recommendations made and responses from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Develop policies and procedures to ensure consistent application of requirements under sections 112, 114-115 and 71-74 of the Building Act 2004 and that consideration of these issues is clearly documented.	The Council advised it has developed policies and procedures to ensure consistent application of these requirements as part of its accreditation as a building consent authority. This includes documenting consideration given and decisions made.
Ensure all staff are trained to apply these policies and procedures consistently.	The Council advised that all staff have received, or are in the process of receiving, training in the application of these policies and procedures.

Conclusion

The Council has progressed the Department's recommendations. This work has also continued as part of its preparations for accreditation as a building consent authority. However, because this occurred after the follow-up review visit, the Department did not assess such work.

Back to Top

---

Compliance schedules and the building warrant of fitness regime

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Council's compliance schedule and building warrant of fitness (BWoF) regimes.

Background

Sections 100-111 of the Building Act 2004 set out the responsibilities for owners, territorial authorities and building consent authorities where buildings contain specified systems. Where specified systems (ie, fire alarm systems, lifts etc) are installed in a building, the building must have a compliance schedule, issued with the last code compliance certificate, and the owner must maintain a building warrant of fitness.

Initial review

The Council's document prepared in 2003 outlining its BWoF regime described its process but lacked information about what is physically required to undertake a review of a BWoF or compliance schedule.

The Team Leader was responsible for the Council's compliance schedule and BWoF regimes and had planned to conduct audits on 10% of BWoFs each year, but had not been able to meet this target. It was found that other building control staff lacked knowledge of Council's requirements and responsibilities regarding building warrants of fitness and compliance schedules.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Enhance its compliance schedule and BWoF processes and guidance information and up-skill other building control staff in its compliance schedule and BWoF regimes.	The Council trained additional staff to assist with the processing of compliance schedules and building warrants of fitness.
Formalise procedures for internally auditing its compliance schedule and BWoF regimes and ensure its building control unit has sufficient resources to undertake these audits.	The Council was conducting audits of its compliance schedule and BWoF work.
Formalise procedures regarding enforcement of the Building Act's compliance schedule and BWoF provisions and ensure appropriate enforcement action is undertaken.	The Council had adopted new procedures for issuing compliance schedules and was taking appropriate enforcement action under the Building Act 2004.

Follow-up review

The Council had made a number of improvements to its BWoF and compliance schedule regimes. In particular, the Council:

• had trained additional staff to assist with the processing of compliance schedules and building warrants of fitness
• had adopted new procedures for issuing compliance schedules
• was including a greater level of building warrant of fitness and compliance schedule monitoring in its business plan
• was working to develop an education programme for building owners and IQPs
• was conducting audits of its compliance schedule and BWoF work
• was taking appropriate enforcement action under the Building Act 2004.

The Department made no further recommendations in the follow-up review.

Conclusion

The review team is satisfied that the Council has an effective compliance schedule and building warrant of fitness regime.

Back to Top

---

Accessibility compliance

Purpose

To examine the Council's application and enforcement of the Building Code's requirements for access and facilities for people with disabilities.

Background

The Building Act and Building Code contain requirements to ensure people with disabilities are able to enter and carry out normal activities and functions within buildings. These provisions include sections 117-120²⁰. There are a range of training courses available for staff to enhance their knowledge and skills in this area.

Initial review

A considerable incidence of accessibility non-compliance was found in the Department's case studies of recently completed buildings. It was considered there were significant limitations in the technical knowledge of staff in relation to accessibility requirements and that adequate process support and documentation was not being provided to processing and inspection staff.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Develop appropriate process support and documentation to assist building control staff to assess consents for accessibility compliance and to ensure completed work is also compliant.	The Council developed specific checklists for the assessment and inspection of accessibility requirements.
Provide staff training opportunities, to ensure the accessibility requirements of the Building Act and Building Code are consistently applied by processing and inspection staff with particular emphasis placed on commercial building consent applications.	The Council provided staff with training on accessibility issues.

Follow-up review

The Council had developed specific checksheets for the assessment and inspection of accessibility requirements and had provided some staff with training on accessibility issues. The Department identified a number of instances of non-compliance, which may indicate that accessibility training is not being effectively applied in practice.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Conduct regular internal audits of consents processed to ensure accessibility has been adequately considered and that training provided to staff is being effectively applied.	The Council advised that the Policy and Procedures Manual incorporates auditing across all areas of operation. However, internal peer review processes take place through staff members trained in accessibility compliance. Plans are in place to train staff members in this discipline. It is the Council's intention to have an officer accredited by Barrier Free New Zealand.

Conclusion

The Council has, for the most part, implemented the recommendations of the initial review. Further work is required as non-compliance with accessibility provisions is still occurring.

Back to Top

---

Human resources

Purpose

To assess the strength and depth of the Council's building control human resource capacity and how effectively it is being used.

Background

Increased building activity over the last few years has significantly increased the workload of building control staff. Territorial authorities and building consent authorities are able to address this by increasing staff levels and by using existing staff more effectively. Opportunities to increase staff levels are limited in the short term because the national supply of appropriately qualified and experienced new building control staff is limited.

Initial review

At the time of the initial review, the building control unit had two vacant positions for a building consent officer and a cadet. A new organisational structure had recently been introduced allowing for seven full-time members of staff.

The Department found that high workloads and gaps in technical skills and knowledge were contributing to the variable quality of consent-processing and inspection work. At the time of the review, the Council had begun the process of developing human resource strategies for its medium- to long-term operation.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council
Recruit additional, technically competent and experienced staff to enable it to meet building control work volumes.	The Council had increased staff numbers.
Develop a long-term proactive strategic plan for recruitment and retention of building control processing and inspection staff.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The follow-up review found that although the Council had increased staff numbers, including a new building control manager, the cadet position remained unfilled owing to budgetary issues. The Council also had not developed a long-term plan for staff recruitment and retention.

The Department found that technical staff were not always being used effectively and noted that the Council's building control operations would benefit from further administrative support.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Fill the vacant cadet position.	The Council advised of its intention to fill the vacant cadet position in the near future.
Employ additional administrative support staff to free up technical staff for more technical building control work.	The Council advised that it has engaged a Management Consultancy to review the resource and capability of the Building Compliance Centre. This report will specifically address the administrative and technical roles and the number of staff needed.
Establish a long-term plan for staff recruitment and retention.	The Council advised that it has recruitment and retention policies for its entire staff, including building control staff. In addition to a council-wide organisational review, a review of the structure of the Building Compliance Centre is taking place. It is anticipated that these two projects will provide additional recruitment and retention incentives for staff to work in the Building Compliance Centre.

Conclusion

The Council partially implemented the recommendations through its recruitment of additional building control staff. The Council's endeavours subsequent to the follow-up review are noted, although the Department did not get a chance to consider these as part of this review. The Department considers the Council's building control operations to still be under-resourced for the volume and type of work it faces. This was evident from the time delays in consent processing and inspection bookings, and daily inspection workloads on individual inspectors.

Back to Top

---

Technical knowledge and ability of staff

Purpose

To examine the technical knowledge and ability of building control staff and the provisions that have been made for staff training and up-skilling.

Background

Building control is becoming progressively more scientifically complex as new building materials gain wider use and housing density increases. Construction methods and designs now allow for fewer margins for error and the technical knowledge of building control staff must increase with that trend.

Initial review

Building control staff at the Council had varying but limited degrees of technical building control and compliance skills, knowledge and ability. In particular, the Department found that the Council's staff lacked sufficient knowledge and skills in aspects of commercial construction, accessibility compliance, fire compliance, weathertightness compliance, mechanical services, and requirements regarding the fencing of swimming pools. This was supported by significant levels of non-compliance observed in the case studies and when the Department's review staff accompanied the Council's inspectors on site to witness them at work.

The Department also considered that the Council's technical skills matrix should be reviewed to better reflect the current collective skill sets in the building control unit.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Review its staff competency and technical skills matrix to accurately establish staff competency and training requirements.	The Council reviewed its staff competency and technical skills matrix.
Ensure particular emphasis is given to enhancing staff understanding of certain requirements of the Building Act, Building Regulations and Building Code, including accessibility compliance, weathertightness compliance, fire design and the fencing of swimming pools regulatory requirements.	The Council introduced weekly and monthly training sessions to increase staff understanding of the Building Code, Building Act and applicable Standards.
Ensure this training occurs and provide additional resources to cover staff while they are at training courses.	The Council had provided staff with training in a number of areas.
Enhance the way technical knowledge is shared among building control staff to reduce over reliance on particular staff members.	The Council introduced weekly and monthly training sessions to increase sharing of technical knowledge.

Follow-up review

The Council had undertaken a number of actions to implement the initial review recommendations.

The Council had modified and reviewed its staff competency and technical skills matrix; however, it was still not being used to identify skill gaps, technical weaknesses and specific training needs.

The Council had provided staff with training opportunities, and also introduced weekly and monthly training sessions to increase staff understanding of the Building Code, Building Act and applicable Standards. No staff had undertaken training in fire design or the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987.

The Department considered that staff training was not always being effectively applied in practice. In particular, the case studies revealed limitations in relation to checking compliance with Building Code Clauses: C, D1, F5, E2 and E1. The Department also found that alterations to existing buildings (section 112) were not being thoroughly checked.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Continue to develop the technical skills of its building control staff, particularly in relation to accessibility, fire compliance, protection of adjoining properties, external moisture and surface water.	The Council advised that a training plan is incorporated into the Policy and Procedures Manual. Using the competency and skills matrix for staff will enable this to be developed further.
Ensure training provided to staff is being effectively applied through the use of quality assurance mechanisms such as peer review.	The Council advised that quality management mechanisms will be put in place together with audits and training following the implementation of the Policy and Procedures Manual.
Continue to enhance sharing of technical knowledge amongst building control staff.	The Council advised that the sharing of knowledge is being achieved through the provision of technical leadership within the distinct areas of the team.
Clearly identify training requirements of staff in its competency and technical skills matrix.	The Council advised that the competency and training matrix forms part of the new accreditation Policy and Procedures Manual.

Conclusion

The Council has partially progressed the Department's recommendations and advises work is ongoing as part of its accreditation preparations. The Council still needs to provide significant additional training to staff in a variety of compliance areas.

Back to Top

---

Adequacy of resources

Purpose

To examine the resources building control staff have at their disposal.

Background

The effectiveness of building control staff can be improved with access to appropriate tools and resources such as a technical reference library, digital cameras and moisture meters.

Initial review

Much of the Council's technical documentation needed to be updated. Some staff also needed training to assist them to access web-based proprietary system technical literature, or to access technical information on the Council intranet during building consent processing.

The Department found that inspection staff used vehicles from the Council's central car pool and that there was no continuity in terms of which vehicles building consent officers could access. As a result of this, building consent officers were limited in what equipment they could bring on inspections.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Manage its collection and maintenance of technical literature and resources and assist all staff to access this information when they need it.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.
Ensure its building consent officers undertaking inspections have adequate access to equipment and resources when undertaking inspections.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The Department found that the Council had not implemented the recommendations of the initial review. The Council's technical literature still required updating and staff were not able to access material from the Standards New Zealand website.

Inspection staff were still using cars from the Council's central car pool. As a result, staff were not being provided with adequate access to equipment and resources needed to effectively conduct their inspection activities.

The Department reiterated the recommendations of the initial review.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Manage its collection and maintenance of technical literature and resources and assist all staff to access this information when they need it.	The Council advised that online access for all staff to technical documents is being purchased.
Ensure its inspection staff have adequate access to equipment and resources when undertaking inspections.	The Council advised that the level of equipment and access to it has been reviewed as part of the accreditation process. Additional equipment, including personal protective equipment (PPE) has been provided. The list of equipment also forms part of the accreditation documentation. The equipment will be reviewed annually and replaced or additional equipment provided as required. Building consent staff use 'dedicated' vehicles for the building control unit from the Council car pool.

Conclusion

The Council has partially progressed the Department's recommendations and advises work is ongoing as part of its accreditation preparations.

Back to Top

---

Adequacy, security and availability of public records

Purpose

To assess the Council's record-keeping processes and facilities, including the access it provides to the public.

Background

Sections 216 and 217 of the Building Act 2004 set out the broad record-keeping requirements for territorial authorities and building consent authorities²¹.

Initial review

At the time of the review, the Council had recently introduced a system of digitally storing property files which customers and staff were able to view on screen or on printouts, as required.

The Department found that not all staff were fully conversant with the new filing systems.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Ensure all building control staff can use the new electronic filing system to enable them to readily access the necessary information.	The Council had not implemented this recommendation.

Follow-up review

The Department found that the Council's building control staff were still having some difficulty retrieving and accessing consent documentation and that the retrieval process was time consuming. Documents were also not being adequately tracked by date and signed documents were not being scanned.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Ensure all staff are trained in the use of the electronic filing systems and that they can retrieve files in an expedient manner.	The Council advised that the Policy and Procedures Manual includes a training plan. A recent post-implementation review of the 'Proclaim' software system will assist in facilitating further training in its use.
Ensure all documents are date-stamped prior to scanning to ensure proper document tracking.	The Council advised that an electronic date stamp is in the process of being developed.
Ensure signed copies of documents, such as building consents, project information memoranda and code compliance certificates, are scanned.	The Council advised that an electronic date/signature stamp is in the process of being developed.

Conclusion

The Council had not progressed the Department's recommendations by the follow-up review. While work is occurring as part of its accreditation preparations, this was unable to be considered as it occurred after the Department's visit.

Back to Top

---

Relationships with building certifiers and other territorial authorities

Purpose

To identify any specific issues arising from the Council's dealings with private building certifiers and other territorial authorities.

Background

Building certifiers no longer operate within the current legislative framework. For this reason, aspects of these terms of reference are no longer relevant.

The Department encourages councils to foster relationships with neighbouring territorial authorities (among other organisations) to help achieve consistency and improvement in their regions.

Findings

The Department is aware of the Council's sound working relationship with neighbouring territorial authorities. The Council has regular operational building control meetings to discuss issues with its neighbouring councils in the greater Wellington regional cluster group, formed as part of its preparatory work for accreditation as a building consent authority.

Conclusion

The Department commends the Council in taking a proactive role in its regional cluster group.

Back to Top

---

Case studies of completed buildings

Purpose

To undertake case studies of building consents in order to assess the adequacy of the Council's building consent processing and inspection regime. The case study findings often reflect and reinforce the more general review findings outlined under the other terms of reference.

Background

The Department identified a number of buildings recently processed by the Council and progressed to code compliance certificate stage (although sometimes case studies can involve buildings still in the construction phase). These buildings were chosen to be typical of the building type that the Council dealt with and which involved compliance elements that were known to be difficult (such as accessibility, or weathertightness of monolithic claddings). The findings of the case studies were used to support and reinforce the more general review findings outlined throughout the report.

Initial review

During the initial review, the Department conducted case studies on 15 buildings and nine swimming pools. From these, the Department noted a number of ways the Council could improve its building control activities. The main issues noted in the initial review were as follows.

• The Council was not consistently rejecting consent applications with inadequate supporting information to ensure compliance with the Building Code.
• The Council was not adequately documenting inspection findings and inspection checksheets were not considered comprehensive.
• Areas of non-compliance were identified across a range of areas, particularly in relation to weathertightness and drainage detailing.
• The inspection process did not refer to or reflect consent conditions applied during consent approval.
• The Council was not keeping accurate records of inspections and was not adequately tracking building consent amendments.
• There were no procedures for the use and acceptance of alternative solutions.
• Compliance with the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 was not being achieved.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council

Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review

Improvements were required in: procedures for dealing with consent applications with insufficient information processing and inspection methodology to ensure inspection documentation is complete, and that compliance is consistently achieved for all Building Code clauses, with particular attention being given to improving Code compliance regarding accessibility, fire design, plumbing and drainage, and weathertightness processes for documenting alternative solutions and the basis for their acceptance or rejection training programmes that lift technical knowledge recruitment programmes that meet both short- and long-term staff needs documentation of its decision-making for processing and inspections, including how the Council was satisfied on reasonable grounds that Code compliance was, or would be, achieved for all building construction elements.

The Council had not implemented these recommendations.

Follow-up review

The Council was still facing many of the same compliance issues found in the initial review. In particular, it was found that:

• the Council was still accepting building consent applications that lacked sufficient detail and evidence to ensure compliance with the Building Code (see term of reference 4.1)
• the Council's inspection activities were still characterised by a general lack of formal process and documentation. In particular, it was found that the Council was:

• not consistently recording whether inspections had actually taken place and whether approval had been granted
• not consistently recording all relevant information on inspection sheets
• identifying inspections that were not relevant to the particular project

• the Council was not consistently identifying and verifying all approved consent documentation (ie, no stamps, dates or consent numbers were placed on the documentation)
• the Council was not consistently meeting the requirements of section 35 of the Building Act 2004, relating to the content of project information memoranda.

The Department recommended that the Council should continue to work on implementing the recommendations made throughout the follow-up review report.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Improve its consent procedures to ensure applications with insufficient supporting information are consistently rejected at the vetting stage.	The Council advised that this matter has been addressed in term of reference 4.1 of this review.
Develop a more robust inspection methodology to ensure reasons and justification for decisions are consistently recorded.	The Council advised that training and internal peer review processes implemented through the provision of leadership within teams will facilitate consistency in the content and recording of decisions made using inspections methodology.

Conclusion

The key findings of the case studies undertaken have been reflected throughout the report. While the Department noted some improvements in the Council's building control operations when looking at the case studies across the two review visits to the Council, a number of issues remain outstanding from the initial review.

Back to Top

---

Accompanying personnel during inspections

Purpose

To assess the effectiveness of inspectors' building control processes, how they use the Council's inspection methodology, the level of building compliance achieved, and how inspectors interact on site with consent applicants and builders/contractors.

Background

The inspection processes and the effectiveness of the inspectors are critical to the overall effectiveness of the building control process. This section of the review involved accompanying the inspectors during their normal inspection workload. Observations from the Department often reinforce observations made during the case studies.

Initial review

The initial review identified that:

• there were some limitations in the overall level of inspectors' technical knowledge, particularly in relation to weathertightness detailing, storm water drainage, plumbing and drainage, retaining excavated ground, and smoke detector legislation
• inspectors were not always referring to approved consent drawings on site and thus were less able to ensure any non-compliant items were identified
• inspectors were not referencing appropriate provisions of the Building Act and Building Code on inspection checksheets
• the delegations register did not delegate authority to undertake on-site inspections to building consent officers
• due to heavy workloads building consent officers were not always able to spend sufficient time on site to properly complete the inspection.

Recommendations made and action taken by the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Action taken by the Council before the follow-up review
Enhance its inspection methodology by: developing a comprehensive inspection checklist to ensure Code compliance is achieved and the process is documented ensuring record-keeping of inspection findings and the interfacing back to Council consent conditions is appropriate ensuring on-site amendments are documented and reviewed in a way that clearly demonstrates how Code compliance was achieved undertaking audits of its inspections to determine if Code compliance was demonstrated considering developing a system for recording inspections that would allow a written copy of the inspection outcomes to be left on site.	The Council enhanced its inspection methodology by using duplicate inspection record sheets and ensuring plans were adequately referenced on site.
Review its delegations register to ensure building consent officers are delegated the ability to undertake on-site inspections.	The Council reviewed its delegations register to ensure officers are delegated the ability to undertake inspections.

Follow-up review

The Department accompanied the Council's inspectors on eight inspections during the course of the review. The main findings were that:

• the Council had enhanced its inspection methodology by:
• using duplicate inspection record sheets to better record decisions
• ensuring that plans are adequately referenced on site
• the initial review's recommendation concerning the Council's delegations register had been addressed
• the Council did not have an on-site peer review process for its inspection work
• inspectors were not always adequately recording inspection findings and taking adequate notes
• inspectors were not always being provided with adequate access to the equipment necessary to fully complete inspection activities
• some inspectors had not been provided with sufficient regulatory building compliance training opportunities
• in some cases it was clear, from checking the approved documentation on site, that the building consent arguably should not have been issued by the Council because the consent documentation was incomplete or not have demonstrated compliance with all relevant clauses of the Building Code.

Recommendations made and response from the Council

Recommendations made to the Council	Response from the Council
Continue to strengthen its inspection methodology by: developing further policy and procedures to guide its inspections and ensure they are being carried out consistently (eg, introducing a peer review process of inspection work) ensuring that inspectors have adequate access to appropriate equipment ensuring inspectors are provided appropriate training in regulatory building compliance matters ensuring that inspectors are adequately recording all inspection findings.	The Council advised that the new Policy and Procedures Manual: provides further policy and guidance on inspection methodology includes a training plan includes the adequacy of inspection reports. The point regarding equipment has been addressed under part 13 of the terms of reference.
Strengthen the linkages between the Council's consent- processing functions and its inspection functions (eg, providing feedback to processing staff if inspection staff find deficiencies in on-site copies of consent documentation that has been approved by processing staff).	The Council advised that regular staff meetings and training sessions take place together with service management meetings between the team leaders and the building compliance manager.

Conclusion

Some improvement in the Council's inspection methodology was observed and there had been work to implement the Department's recommendations. However, the Council needs to continue improving its inspection processes consistent with the recommendations outlined below. Ongoing work has occurred as part of the Council's preparations to be accredited as a building consent authority. However, this was not considered as it occurred after the Department's visit.

International Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ) will be assessing the Council's compliance with the Building (Accreditation of Building Consent Authorities) Regulations 2006 in late 2007, as part of Council's work to become an accredited and registered building consent authority.

Back to Top

---

Feedback from the Council

Under section 276(2)(a) of the Building Act 2004, the Department, when carrying out technical reviews, must give territorial authorities a reasonable opportunity to make written submissions on the review. In accordance with this, the Department provided several opportunities for the Council to submit feedback and, at each stage of the review process the Department has sought feedback from the Council. Where feedback has been provided, it has been incorporated under each of the terms of reference used as the basis for the review.

Council Statement

The Council has noted the content of the Summary Report, provided feedback on specific recommendations, (as described in tabled sections throughout), and has no further comment to make.

Back to Top

---

Next steps

Further reviews

The Department will continue to carry out technical reviews of territorial authorities and building consent authorities, including further reviews of Porirua City Council, in accordance with its statutory requirements under the Building Act 2004.

New system of accreditation and registration

The Department's technical reviews are an important tool for territorial authorities and building consent authorities to assess their readiness and assist their preparation for the new regulatory system introduced by the Building Act 2004. The Building Consent Authority Accreditation and Registration Scheme will regulate building control provided at the local level. This will bring about significant changes to regulatory building control in New Zealand.

Accreditation in the building control sector aims to help strengthen the decision-making processes at the critical building consent and inspection stages of the building process. Successful implementation will help bring about greater consistency in regulatory building control across New Zealand. It will help lead to performance improvements, raised standards in the sector, and greater consumer confidence in the consenting and inspecting system.

Under the Act, any organisation that wishes to undertake building control functions must be a registered building consent authority. In order to be registered, an organisation must be accredited by the Building Consent Accreditation Body (International Accreditation New Zealand) as a building consent authority.

The Department's Consent Authority Capability and Performance Group is leading the work to design and implement this new system. The accreditation process will involve prospective building consent authorities being assessed by the independent accreditation body against a set of standards and criteria Building (Accreditation of Building Consent Authorities) Regulations 2006 covering key components of good practice in regulatory building control.

The accreditation assessment process will incorporate many of the critical regulatory building control components of the Department's existing technical review process. The Building (Accreditation of Building Consent Authorities) Regulations 2006 have a strong industry focus and cover three key areas.

• Formal policies, systems and processes
• Technical competence
• Quality assurance

Further information

Further information about both the technical review programme and the building consent authority accreditation and registration scheme can be accessed on this website.

Relevant Guidance Information

Under section 175 of the Building Act 2004, the Chief Executive (of the Department of Building and Housing) has a statutory role in the publishing of guidance information for territorial authorities and building consent authorities. The Department has published a range of guidance information to assist territorial authorities and building consent authorities in understanding how to comply with the Building Act 2004 and their building control responsibilities. This includes:

• Building Officials' Guide to the Building Act 2004 (August 2005, second edition)
• Building Consent Authority Development Guide (February 2006)
• Building Officials' FAQs (August 2005)
• Earthquake-prone building provisions of the Building Act 2004: Policy guidance for territorial authorities
• Dangerous and insanitary building provisions of the Building Act 2004: Policy guidance for territorial authorities
• External moisture - a guide to using the risk matrix
• External moisture - An introduction to weathertightness design principles
• Critical requirements for the Assessment of 'Monolithic Cladding' (April 2004)
• Practice Advisory 6: Achieve best practice - every step of the way
• Practice Advisory 5: Allow for movement
• Reinforcing steel in New Zealand - A quick guide for designers, building consent authorities and contractors
• Guide to applying for a building consent (simple, residential buildings) (January 2007)
• Building Consent Authority Accreditation Preparation and Self-assessment Guide (February 2007)
• Building Consent Authority Management Processes and Procedures Guide (February 2007).
• Building Consent Authority Accreditation Update (October 2006, December 2006, February 2007, April 2007, June 2007, August 2007, October 2007).

This and other guidance information is available online. The Department also hosts or participates regularly in training workshops, seminars and conferences to provide guidance, advice and information to the sector.

Back to Top

---

Notes

1 The points summarised for territorial authorities and building consent authorities are similar to the functions described in section 24 of the Building Act 1991, which has now been repealed.

2 Section 12(1)(d) of the former Building Act 1991 provided that one of the functions of the former Building Industry Authority was to undertake reviews of the operations of territorial authorities and building certifiers in relation to their functions under the Act. Section 15(1) empowered the former BIA to undertake a review of the operation of territorial authorities' functions under the Act. These sections were revoked on 31 March 2005 by the Building Act 2004.

3 Sections 11(h), 204 and 276 of the Building Act 2004 are the key sections.

4 Available in hard copy from the Department by calling 0800 242 243 or in electronic form via the Department's website.

5 Section 78 of the Building Act 1991 previously covered the delegation of powers of territorial authorities.

6 Sections 33 and 34 of the Building Act 1991 previously covered the application and processing of building consents. The prescribed timeframe was previously contained in clause 6 of the Building Regulations 1992. Building consents under the value of $500,000 were required to be granted or refused within 10 working days. The building consent had to be granted or refused within 20 working days if it was valued at over $500,000.

7 This decision is at the heart of section 49(1) of the Act which is about granting consents. Under this section councils must grant a building consent if they are satisfied on reasonable grounds that the provisions of the Building Code would be met if the building work were properly completed in accordance with the plans and specifications that accompanied the application.

8 Sections 30-31 of the Building Act 1991 previously covered applications for and processing of PIMs.

9 Previously covered under section 33(3) of the Building Act 1991.

10 This was previously covered under section 34 of the Building Act 1991.

11 This was previously covered under section 33(4) of the Building Act 1991.

12 This was previously covered under section 34(2) of the Building Act 1991.

13 This was previously covered under section 34(8) of the Building Act 1991.

14 A prescriptive document produced by the Department of Building and Housing that specifies a means of compliance with a particular clause of the Building Code.

15 This document is available at http://www.dbh.govt.nz/compliance-docs-get-copies

16 This was previously covered under section 36 of the Building Act 1991.

17 These were previously covered under sections 38 and 46 of the Building Act 1991.

18 This was previously covered under section 64 of the Building Act 1991.

19 This was previously covered under section 66 of the Building Act 1991.

20 This was previously covered under sections 38 and 46 of the Building Act 1991.

21 This was previously covered under section 27 of the Building Act 1991.