Refocusing the earthquake-prone building rules is a welcome sign that the Government is willing to tackle inconsistencies in the current system, says the New Zealand Institute of Building Surveyors (NZIBS).
However, saving money cannot come at the cost of public safety.
“Safety has to remain the top priority,” Darryl August, NZIBS President, says.
“If reforms speed up work and cut costs without compromising people’s safety or creating unintended consequences, then that’s a win for everyone.
“But we need to be careful not to overlook other critical building code requirements, such as fire safety, disability access, and façade changes. The devil, as always, will be in the detail.”
August notes that while removing the need to automatically upgrade certain systems may sound like a new measure, in practice, building professionals already take this approach using section 112 within the Building Act.
This allows the professional to access existing building code compliance as near as reasonably practicable when assessing remediation options.
“These pathways have always existed, it’s now about ensuring that they are applied consistently and without unintended consequences,” he says.
“We cannot treat seismic safety in isolation from fire, access, external moisture and facades.”
He points to a Wellington apartment building as a case in point.
Multiple engineers gave conflicting advice on seismic remediation. The seismic remediation affected the façade, and because of the building height, this added major cost and complexity.
“That case shows how complex remediation can be, and that you can’t deal with seismic strengthening in isolation.
“Every building code clause, whether that be structure, fire, accessibility, or external moisture, needs to be coordinated,” August says.
In saying that, August strongly supports the proposal to adopt a more regional approach to earthquake strengthening.
“This is a sensible change and will save money. But how it plays out in practice, again, remains to be seen,” he says.
“We back any system that delivers faster, more affordable strengthening, so long as people remain safe inside and outside those buildings. That’s the bottom line.”