Single building code envisaged

Press, 19 March 1984, Page 9

Single building code envisaged

By 1986 the welter of regulations governing New Zealand’s building industry may have been welded into a single code endorsed by law.

Mr Jack Searle, from the Office of the Review of Planning and Building Controls, is one of two men appointed by the' Government to bring order out of chaos. The other was the late Mr Peter Scoular, former city engineer.

Mr Searle said in Christchurch yesterday that the review had identified more than 500 documents, issued by “agencies of all shapes and sizes,” to which builders and developers were subject.

The multiplicity of controls bred confusion, inconsistency, time loss and unnecessary expense — “in excess of $lOO million a year,” he said.

“We want to shift all the inertia of regulation out of the picture so that the industry can respond to technological change.”

As it stood, the benefits of standards had been whittled away by inhibitions and complexities. A uniform code; simple, clear, concise, understandable and performance orientated, was needed. It should contain as little technical detail as possible to return some judgment to professionals in the field, and it should be administered by one agency, Mr Searle said.

The review put out a document last year outlining its brief and inviting submissions. It received 70 of substance, he said. Most pointed to the need for coordination and rationalisation.

He had since prepared a new report identifying the issues and listing options worthy of consideration. He expected that it would be tabled in Parliament before August.

Mr Seale said that as the Government had indicated its support for a national building code, the next step

would be to appoint a commission to draft one. This would be “an enormous job,” but as much of the work had already been done, it might be completed within 18 months, he said. Alternatively, the Australian Model Uniform Building Code might be adopted. Either way, he said, it would need to be given statutory authority. It was extraordinary that the building industry which invested more than $2 billion a year and employed more than 50,000 people, should be ruled by by-laws. Mr Searle said that, as he saw it,/the code would be introduced through an Act of Parliament providing that it become binding on a certain date by order of the Governor General in Council.

“It would have to happen on one day; the repeal of all the existing controls,” he said.

“Of course, there would have to be some exemptions.”