Publications
FYI
Naturally Resourceful
14 Aug 2009
The Building Amendment Act 2009 and beyond – cutting costs, red tape and time
A media release from the Building and Construction Minister on the recent Building Amendment Act describes the amendments as speeding-up the building consent process and reducing costs, although he also acknowledges that it is only a first step and there is more to be done.
Interestingly, the speeding up process is not going to happen very fast - very few sections in the Act are in force immediately. For most of the sections we have to wait until 31 January 2010, and longer, until an Order in Council brings them into force.
So what can be acted on straight away? Not much - the purpose of the Act, the regulation making power and the requirement for the Minister to review regulations. The regulation making power is necessary to support the new national multiple-use approvals regime, and to define the minor variations that can be made to a building consent, without a formal process.
The new multiple-use approvals regime does not come into force until an Order in Council is passed. This regime gives the DBH additional functions and powers to allow it to issue national multiple-use approvals for dwellings and buildings that are to be replicated on a substantial scale.
The reasoning behind introducing such a system relates to perceived efficiencies in providing a streamlined approval process for buildings that are to be replicated several times on a nationwide basis. Under the scheme, the building design will be approved/consented on a national level, although a building consent will still be required for each new building at a local level to cover off unique aspects of each building and site such as ground conditions, foundations, connections to water and other utility services. Each building still has to be inspected by the local council of building consent authority to ensure the building work complies with the building consent, but the decision-making for the local consent will be limited to site specific matters and any variation of a multiple-use consent.
The view is that this should reduce the time and effort required to process building consents for these buildings, but it is not clear that the desired result will eventuate, except in the most simple cases. An important feature of the process will be ensuring the smooth integration of the national and local processes, so that time spent by a consent applicant with both bodies is minimized. However, where variations to the multiple use consent are sought, then it is doubtful there will be any substantial "speeding up" compared to the current building consent timeframes.
The other main amendments introduced by the Act relate to project information memoranda. These amendments come into force next January. The Act currently requires that a project information memorandum (PIM) must be obtained before any building consent is issued. The amendment means a PIM must only be obtained if a building consent authority that is not a territorial authority receives the application for building consent. Otherwise whether or not a PIM is obtained is a matter of choice for the owner.
In terms of the work which is done by the Council when it processes a building consent, whether or not it has to issue a PIM, is unlikely to make the process much quicker or cheaper. The Council still has to check the same information that would be provided in a PIM, and assure itself of details about the land before it can finish processing the building consent.
It is quite clear from this that a great deal more legislative reform will be required to truly provide the streamlined and efficient process the Minister desires. In providing an indication of future plans, he has mentioned a wider review of the Act that will consider:
- what needs to be consented based on levels of risk and complexity, with the aim of reducing the amount of work requiring a building consent;
- looking at the underlying risk and liability framework in the building sector and the role that home warranty insurance might play;
- whether more responsibility can be transferred to builders, designers, and consumers away from building consent authorities;
- examining self certification for licensed building practitioners; and
- removing unnecessary building control regulation (although there is no indication on what is regarded as unnecessary).
Other non-regulatory methods being looked at to improve the workings of the building regime, include helping councils work smarter by using technology that could also be used to reduce building costs, better information and education for the public and improving trade training as well as providing incentives to councils to consolidate and rationalise their functions.
Without any detail behind these proposals it is hard to gauge whether a new and improved building consent system will be achieved in practice.
Authors
Padraig McNamara
Partner - Public Sector
DDI: +64 9 977 5095
Mobile: +64 21 924 350
Email:
View Profile
James Winchester
Partner - Public Sector
DDI: +64 4 924 3503
Mobile: +64 21 303 700
Email:
View Profile
Judith Cheyne
Senior Associate - Public Sector
DDI: +64 3 365 0961
Mobile: +64 21 925 958
Email:
View Profile
Ann Maddox
Senior Associate - Public Sector
DDI: +64 9 977 5032
Mobile: +64 21 899 772
Email:
View ProfileWhat next?
In This Article:
The new multiple-use approvals regime does not come into force until an Order in Council is passed.
