Q & A: Managing monolithic cladding
MEDIA ADVISORY
4 December 2003
Q & A: Managing
buildings using monolithic cladding
1. Q: What is
monolithic cladding?
A: There are three types of
monolithic cladding systems on the market; traditional
stucco plaster, Proprietary Plaster Systems EIFS and fibre
cement.
“Monolithic” is a term that refers to cladding
with an applied coating so as to appear seamless, often
imitating concrete, masonry or plaster.
2. Q: What are the
national implications from Auckland City’s decision?
A:
At this stage we can’t really say. Most of the country
followed us when we introduced practice notes 13, 13a and
13b. Given all local authorities are facing the same issues
we could expect similar responses.
3. Q: How many
property owners could be affected nationally?
A: We are
not party to other TAs cases or data and we do not have a
clear sense of how they are responding to this issue in
their area
4. Q: Who will be sent to the Building
Industry Authority for a determination and why?
A: Where
we have undertaken an inspection and have doubt that at
completion the building would not be code compliant or that
(in the event of a completed building) that it is code
compliant, then we will issue a notice to rectify. A notice
to rectify is simply the list of actions that we require in
order that we no longer are doubtful of the building’s code
compliance. Owners will be advised they have two
alternatives – either to comply with the notice to rectify –
in that case apply for a variation to their consent, or to
seek a determination from the BIA.
5. Q: What is the
process that the BIA will undertake in these
circumstances?
A: See attached sheet
6. Q: Do you
think this may cause a log jam at the BIA of people seeking
determinations?
A: There is a possibility that the BIA
will have to increase their capacity to handle requests for
determinations but we are aware that they are already
considering ways to expedite the process and to work more
closely with TAs
7. Q: Will CCCs on all monolithic
cladding projects be brought to a standstill
nationally?
A: No - if the buildings comply with the
requirements in the practice notes 13, 13a and 13b then
there should be no problem.
8. Q: Will one
determination by the BIA settle the issues, or several, or
will individual determinations be needed on all
applications?
A: Determinations are undertaken on a case
by case basis.
9. Q: How long have BIA determinations
taken in the past?
A: In the past it has take several
months for a determination.
10. Q: What will the
financial impact be on those waiting for CCCs?
A: We are
unable to say, as it will depend on the specific
circumstances of owner and the building.
11. Q: Why
have you done this retrospectively?
A: Because of the
Kelleway and WHRS data, and other research that has recently
come to hand. The Building Act also requires all TAs to make
decisions using the most recent information available at the
time these decisions are made.
12. Q: What does this
mean for homeowners seeking a CCC in terms of time and
costs?
A: Builders and homeowners may be affected
depending on the building and what work is entailed or
particularly if they decide to approach the BIA for a
determination.
13. Q: Will council be offering
homeowners seeking a CCC any form of compensation?
A: The
duty of care for the council is to discharge our duty
prudently and responsibly – it would therefore seem a
strange thing to offer compensation because we discharge our
duty in this manner. It would also seem strange for one set
of ratepayers to be subsidising another, because Council is
doing their job properly given this new information. We
need to make sure that the amount of building claims does
not get any larger than it already is.
14. Q: Why has
the city waited. Could it have acted earlier?
A: No we
couldn’t have acted earlier. While we have been monitoring
our claims the release of the WHRS information, and the
Kelleway judgement were two decisive moments that meant that
we could not have acted earlier.
15. Q: What is a
‘high risk’ building?
A: ‘High risk’ buildings are
buildings that adopt a "Mediterranean" appearance of plaster
and adobe finishes. Typically the style can be identified by
its flush plaster finishes, lack of eaves, use of parapets
and with balconies both internal and external to the
building's principal form.
16. Q: What is the cost of
rectifying homes already built but not issued with
CCCs?
A: We are not able to say as it depends on the
specific building and what needs to be done.
17. Q:
Are there any multi-unit, multi million dollar properties
affected (and their values)?
A: Unsure at this stage, but
we have processed some claims of properties in these
categories. Yes, if their building consent was issued prior
to December 2002.
18. Q: How do you expect affected
building owners and the industry to react?
A: Like us,
with concern.
19. Q: Will there be any rolling impact
on materials and labour force availability?
A: Already we
are seeing people choosing brick beneath plaster cladding
which means that there is currently a 4 month delay for
bricks.
20. Q: Has the council's risk increased - by an
'effective admission' that the previous policy allowed
potentially leaky methods to be used, are no longer
permitted?
A: No because we have acted so promptly and
decisively. We now have new information, and the Kelleway
decision effectively redefined the extent of council
involvement. In effect Kelleway increased our risk by
creating precedent setting expectations around what and how
we should carry out inspections so that we can be satisfied
on reasonable grounds regarding code compliance. We remain
liable for any work though that we carry out
negligently.
21. Q: Has the BIA been advised, and are
you confident it can cope?
A: We have been working with
the government and the BIA and have been warning for them
for sometime now that we would need definitive judgements on
what would and wouldn’t be code compliant. We cannot
comment on the BIA’s capacity.
22. Q: What's the
impact on the CCC log jam at Auckland City?
A: The whole
building industry has been under immense pressure for
sometime now and Auckland City’s building team is no
different. ACE continues to have difficulty in attracting
staff either in the consent or inspections area and the gap
in technical expertise remains. The shortage of technical
staff is a national problem and we need to look at ways that
we can increase the pool of expertise as well as recruiting
internationally. We are currently using this last approach.
We have arranged accreditation with the immigration service
and are running a recruitment campaign internationally
costing more than
$30,000.
Ends