Summary of comments received on �Proposal for a definition of by paperboy

VIEWS: 9 PAGES: 8

									                  SUMMARY OF COMMENTS ON

              PROPOSAL FOR A DEFINITION OF
               RESTRICTED BUILDING WORK




Department of Building and Housing
October 2008




Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work   1
                       SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
                  ON THE PROPOSAL FOR A DEFINITION
                    OF RESTRICTED BUILDING WORK

Introduction
This report contains the Department of Building and Housing’s summary of
comments following the public consultation on the proposed definition of restricted
building work.


Background
Launched in November 2007, the Licensed Building Practitioner Scheme is one of
the key changes introduced by the Building Act 2004. Since then, practitioners in the
building industry have been able to apply to be licensed in a range of classes
depending on the type of work they do.

From November 2010, it is intended that some design and construction work will only
be able to be done or supervised by licensed practitioners. This is called ‘restricted
building work’.


Consultation process
The Department of Building and Housing (the Department) was tasked with
conducting consultation on the proposed definition of restricted building work. The
Department worked with key organisations in the building and construction industry
to develop the proposal. A discussion document on the definition was then published
on 12 August 2008. The period for making comments on the proposals ended on 11
September 2008.


General information
The Department has considered all comments made on the proposed definition of
restricted building work. A total of 50 comments were received, broken down as
follows:

       13 individual building practitioners
       10 companies that carry out building work
       17 industry representative organisations or associations
       8 councils or council staff
       2 central government agencies


Responses to questions
Most of the comments received on the discussion document agreed with the
proposals. This document therefore only summarises suggested changes to, or
criticisms of, the proposals. It does not record in detail the individual comments.
Where the same comment was made by more than one person, the number of
people making the comment is stated in brackets at the end of the comment.




Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                       2
Question 1: Do you think these proposals generally focus on the correct areas
of work for restricted building work?
Question 3: Do you think there are other areas of building work that are
‘critical’ and not covered by proposals and should be restricted building work?

The responses to these two questions are grouped together as people suggested
additional areas of restricted building work in response to both questions.

Three comments suggested all building work that requires a building consent should
be restricted building work.

Other suggestions of building work that should be considered critical and/or restricted
building work were:

   Amenity
   Hygiene (2 people)
   Installation of underfloor heating (2 people)
   Outbuildings should not be exempt
   Internal moisture (eg, shower installations) (7 people)
   Penetrations in roof and wall cladding for service pipes and wires (3 people)
   Decks over a certain size (longer than 1 metre)
   Commercial interiors (eg, means of escape, safety barriers, access and facilities
    for people with disabilities, ventilation)
   All specified systems, in particular lifts and backflow devices
   Off-site fabrication of structural elements
   Accessible routes and facilities (design only)
   Private swimming pools (including spa pools) (2 people)
   Insulation
   Re-roofing
   Public toilets should not be exempt
   Work where untested products or processes are used


Question 2: Do you have a view on whether there are any non-residential
buildings of a temporary nature that should be exempt from restricted building
work?

No comments were made in opposition to non-residential temporary buildings being
exempt. The following non-residential buildings were considered appropriate to
exempt:
 Stage sets in the film industry
 Grandstands at sporting events
 Scaffolding

Some comments took the opportunity to suggest some of the other [non-temporary]
buildings proposed to be exempt should not be: farm buildings and bridges (3
people), dams, water tanks and [other] bridges.


Question 4: What are your views on the benefits of this proposal compared to
the costs that will be involved?
Question 7: Can you provide any information on any likely additional costs
that may be incurred if this work [structure] is required to be carried out or
supervised by a licensed building practitioner?

Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                         3
Question 13: Can you provide any information on any likely additional costs
that may be incurred if this work [external moisture] is required to be carried
out or supervised by a licensed building practitioner?
Question 18: Can you provide any information on any likely additional costs
that may be incurred if this work [fire protection – design only] is required to
be carried out or supervised by a licensed building practitioner?

The comments on all the above questions about the costs and benefits of the
proposals are summarised below.

Benefits
 Better control with building and better consumer confidence
 Should improve quality of housing stock
 The balance is about right
 Consumer protection in the construction of critical aspects of building work
 The benefits exceed the costs (3 people)
 Peace of mind for client should outweigh cost
 Less future failure and ultimately a lowering of insurance and compliance costs –
   repair costs can exceed original costs of buildings
 Small insurance cost to ensure that a ‘leaky home crisis’ does not happen again
   (3 people)
 Building inspection regime is adequate and additional costs [of restricted building
   work] are not likely to provide further benefits for consumers
 The benefits are obvious in that the risks of building failure are minimised
 The consequences of inadequate workmanship are plain to see with
   weathertightness failures. Additional costs associated with training of operatives
   and increased wages/salaries being sought as a result can be offset by
   fundamental changes in mindset of building owners to realise that the nature of
   the work is so critical that appropriate training and recompense to the operatives
   is paramount and should never have been/be compromised.

Costs
 No additional costs (8 people)
 Increased charges by LBPs for their services (4 people)
 Licensing and fees (eg, including cost of registration and continuing professional
   training) (3 people)
 Will be passed onto owners/consumers (3 people)
 Costs/fees for building consent application and council processing/inspection
   fees (4 people; 1 of those people said the cost of administration time can be
   several thousand dollars for a large project and $1000 for a relatively
   straightforward project)
 Major impact is insurance liability costs
 Risk that by changing the controls, the currently high level of reliability in fire
   safety systems will be diminished and the costs increased
 On a building with value over $10 million, say, expect the cost of engaging the
   necessary LBPs etc for structure work would be at least $50,000; for external
   moisture work might cost $20,000; and for fire protection LBP work might cost
   $20,000.
 No benefits, only complication and reduction in building standards
 Additional cost in repair of sub-standard buildings not constructed by LBPs
 Likely to add significantly to the cost of buildings. However, the lack of training in
   the building industry justifies the cost increase.




Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                        4
Question 5: Do you agree that design and construction of ‘primary structure’
is critical to the integrity of a building?
Question 6: Do you think the definition of ‘primary structure’ captures all the
critical elements?

Comments in response to both of these questions suggested the following changes
to the proposed restricted building work – structure:
Additions:
 Structural connections (2 people)
 Installation and protection of intumescent fire protection coatings for structural
    elements
 Ventilation systems
 Concrete slabs (eg, floor in parking building) that are not structural elements
 Pre-cast concrete panels
 Structural design that falls outside 3604
 Off-site fabrication
 Secondary/internal structure (eg, wall items over 4 metres or suspended items
    over a certain mass)
 Fixing of external cladding and other appendages that could be dangerous in an
    earthquake
 Water storage tanks in high rise buildings
 Elements made of ‘composites’ of varying materials

Amendments/changes:
 Change ’bracing‘ to ’bracing element’
 Foundations – include reference to ground stability
 Wall elements – include reference to ‘Balustrades – restraint from falling’
 Bracing – include reference to seismic restraint to heavy mechanical plant and
  equipment
 Primary is the wrong word


Question 8: The design restricted building work will be required to be carried
out by a person licensed in the Design 1, Design 2 or Design 3 class
(depending on the category of building the work relates to). Do you agree these
licensing classes are the correct ones for the work?
Question 9: The construction restricted building work will be required to be
carried out by a person licensed in the Carpentry class. Do you agree this
licensing class is the correct one for the work?
Question 10: Where the material used for construction is concrete or steel,
there are other licensing classes relating to the coordination and oversight (ie,
not the actual ‘doing’) of that work. Do you think people licensed in those
classes should be required to coordinate and oversee the construction work?

The following comments were made on the licensing classes relating to proposed
restricted building work – structure:

   Design 1 class has too limited restrictions
   There will be a lot of simple work for highly qualified people to do
   There should be a limit to the number of people supervised by one person
   Carpentry must be superior over other sub trades (ie, tanking, electrical,
    plumbing especially where they interface
   There are many specialised trades beyond Carpentry LBP competencies



Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                        5
   Concrete and Steel Specialist should be included
   Clarify the role of frame and truss designer
   What happens if design is done by someone licensed in Design 2 class, but the
    building consent authority then says it should have been done by someone
    licensed in Design 3?
   Site class should be included
   Two building categories should be enough: (1) private/stand alone residential
    buildings in line with NZS 3604 and (2) multi-unit/multi-storey residential and
    commercial buildings
   Steel Structure and Brick and Blocklaying classes should be included
   Only CPEng should be able to design category 2 and 3 buildings
   The competencies for the Design classes are not defined
   Concrete and steel work needs to be done by people other than carpenters
   There must be someone who oversees the work
   Carpentry class is OK for concrete work but not steelwork. Steel Structure LBP
    with support from Site LBP.


Question 11: Do you agree that design and construction of an ‘external
moisture management system’ is critical to the integrity of a building?
Question 12: Do you think the definition of ‘external moisture management
system’ captures all the critical elements?

Comments in response to both of these questions suggested the following changes
to the proposed restricted building work – external moisture:
Additions:
 Penetrations through the building envelope
 There should be internal moisture restricted building work as there is for external
    moisture
 Re-roofing has not been captured

Amendments/changes:
 Use the words ’resistance, management and expulsion of moisture’
 There needs to be a word that describes the function of the partical (sic) barrier in
  question
 Use words that people know like ’moisture proofing‘ or ’moisture resistance’.


Question 14: The design restricted building work will be required to be carried
out by a person licensed in the Design 1, Design 2 or Design 3 class
(depending on the category of building the work relates to). Do you agree these
licensing classes are the correct ones for the work?
Question 15: The construction restricted building work will be required to be
carried out by a person licensed as follows:
       • for ground elements – in the Carpentry class
       • for cladding elements – in the External Plastering, Brick & Blocklaying
         or Carpentry class as appropriate to the type of cladding being used
       • for roofing elements – in the Roofing class
Do you agree these licensing classes are the correct ones for the work?

The following comments were made on the licensing classes relating to proposed
restricted building work – external moisture:
 Site supervisor may be able to oversee the entire work
 Carpenter should be able to lay a corrugated iron roof


Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                         6
   Carpenter should not do EIFS
   Metal clad building should be covered by the Roofing class
   For ground elements the Concrete Structure class should be included (2 people)
   Licensed plumbers and gasfitters should not need to be licensed again in the
    Roofing class to do their work
   There are several other specialist trades that may penetrate the roof (eg, AC
    units, aerials, solar water heating connections). How will that work be managed?
   Licensing should not be required except for category 3 buildings


Question 16: Do you agree that design of ‘fire safety systems or features’ is
critical to the integrity of a building?
Question 17: Do you think the definition of ‘fire safety systems or features’
captures all the critical elements?

Comments in response to both of these questions suggested the following changes
to the proposed restricted building work – fire protection:
Additions:
 Ongoing maintenance work
 Fire hazard systems
 Fire dampers
 Emergency warning and intercommunication systems
 Signage systems
 Inter-operability/integration of variety of systems is essential (3 people)

Amendments/changes:
 ’Lighting systems‘ to ’emergency lighting systems‘ (3 people)
 ’System or feature‘ needs clear definition, use ’active and passive‘ as these terms
  are understood in the industry


Question 19: The design restricted building work will be required to be carried
out by a person licensed in the Design 1, Design 2 or Design 3 class
(depending on the category of building the work relates to). Do you agree these
licensing classes are the correct ones for the work?

The following comments were made on the licensing classes relating to proposed
restricted building work – fire protection:
 Design to C1-C4 acceptable solutions could be done by Design 1 class, specific
    fire design by Design 2 or 3 class
 Active fire protection systems should be covered by a specific LBP class
 Carpentry and Concrete Structure classes should be able to do passive fire
    protection at level 2 and 3
 Applied fire protection systems may require a new class
 Only Design 2 or 3 should do the work
 Industry self-regulation should continue
 Building Services class need to be developed to cover this work


Question 20: Do you think construction of any fire safety systems or features
should be restricted building work? If so, why? And please also describe the
competencies you think would be required to do the work and what existing
occupational groupings there are who could be licensed to do the work.



Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                     7
Twenty people commented that construction of fire safety systems and features
should be restricted building work. One of them qualified their comment by saying it
should only apply to category 2 and 3 buildings. One person said the work should
not be restricted bulding work.

The following occupational groups/qualifications were suggested as being suitable to
carry out the work:
 Plumbers and electricians (5 people)
 Practitioners licensed in Site 2 or 3 classes (2 people)
 Practitioners licensed in the Carpentry class
 HVAC Engineer
 Should be done under the control of the designer
 People who have industry developed qualifications
 Self-regulation


Question 21: Do you have any other comments you wish to make on these
proposals?

Some of the comments made in response to this question have been included in the
summaries of the previous questions they were relevant to. Further additional
comments were as follows:

   The LBP classes and restricted work definition should reflect and recognise
    current building and construction practice.
   Frame and Truss industry designers and qualified fabricators should be
    recognised for their specific skills and competence areas as a separate licence
    class.
   The means and method of determining what RBW is or when it exists must be
    very clear so that there is no room for BCAs to make subjective judgments.
   There is an anomaly within the Building Act around consents and re-roofing.
    Section 7(a)(i) says restricted building work is the building envelope, which is the
    roof. Section 7(c) says restricted building work is not work for which, in
    accordance with section 41, a building consent is not required. A consent is not
    required for re-roofing, unless it has failed the durability requirements of the
    Building Code. Who knows how long the roof has been installed for? Does a
    previous repair constitute a replacement? Does maintenance consist of 49% of
    replacement – what about a 2-stage maintenance programme? How do you (or
    the BCAs) make up your mind? The roof is ‘critical to the integrity of a building’
    whether it is 15 or 50 years old and therefore must remain restricted work
    irrespective of whether a consent is obtained or not.




Summary of comments on a definition of restricted building work                            8

								
To top