Kia ora koutou
This edition of Communique covers a range of topics beginning with a roundup of some good old ‘tales of woe’. Please note that the specific details of these tales are sometimes altered to prevent the identification of the member or so that relevant key messages are conveyed more clearly.
Otago-based board member Matt Mitchell has written an article with some useful tips on the use of Insulated Roof Panels.
Board member John MacDonald has contributed a detailed article on scaffolding which, no matter what scale of project you’re involved with, is a useful reminder of the importance of some knowledge on this topic.
We also have brief news on NZACS academic prizes, seeking interest in membership of the Claims Committee, a reminder about making claims, and a website update.
As always, if there’s an issue that you’d like an article on, or you want to share your own story about risk management please feel free to make contact.
Ngā mihi
Although not specifically listed below, a recurrent theme of notifications arises from clients who are disgruntled about the mismatch of actual costs to original budgets. Managing client expectations about costs at all stages of the project with the input of a quantity surveyor is a good idea. You might think you’re saving the client money by not spending it on an independent QS (rather than a builder), but you may be creating a problem for yourself. Unfortunately QSs can also get their estimates quite wide of the mark, particularly in the early stages of a project and so it’s worth making this clear to the client early on too. We will have a more detailed article on this in the next edition.
Only a BCA can issue Building Consents. To keep things moving on site a member issued documents confirming that they had been consented, when this was in fact still in progress. The member was very confident that the documents would be consented but this misrepresentation – even with good intent – could be considered fraudulent and get you in some strife. Lesson – don’t misrepresent anything.
Compliance with Resource Consent conditions. A coloured stain used on a residence was not the same as the one specified in the Resource Consent conditions. The consenting authority wants the house re-stained to the approved colour. Lesson – try to negotiate for Consent conditions that allow for some leeway, or make sure you follow them to the letter.
Colour limitations for cladding. A paint colour used on a cladding product is darker than the maximum allowable Light Reflectance Value set out in the product literature. The cladding is failing and so the member is being looked to for remediation. Lesson – remember to read and follow the requirements of product information.
Access to replace air conditioning unit. An in-ceiling air-conditioning unit has failed prematurely (probably due to its coastal location). Replacement requires considerable demolition and reconstruction of a feature ceiling which the client believes the member should be paying towards because replacement at some time could have been reasonably foreseen. Lesson – either design in access or removal points or make sure you explain their absence and the consequences thereof to your client.
Failure to check existing roof falls. The member assumed that the existing roof slope was to a fall suitable for the re-roofing product when in fact it was too shallow a pitch. Unfortunately this was discovered after the re-roofing had been carried out. Lesson – doing a proper survey of an existing building is always a good idea, especially where a dimensional aspect is critical.
Boundary wall waterproofing. A precast boundary wall was changed to blockwork when craneage rights over the adjacent land were denied. The blockwork could not be waterproofed at the exterior face, and leaked. The owner sees this as the member’s fault. Lesson – make sure you clearly set out the risks of a reduction in specification to your client.
Sagging beam. A steel beam is installed over a wide sliding door. Once the beam is fully loaded up with wall and roof loads it deflects such that the sliding door is difficult/impossible to open. This issue regularly crops up and the lesson is that in these situations consult with an engineer and either oversize or put a positive camber on the beam. Also, if there are packers between the top of the slider and the beam, they should be removed.Sales brochure vs actual build. The architect assisted with marketing material which the client used to pre-sell a number of residential units. During design development there was a change to the arrangement of some items, which was not communicated back to the buyer. When the owner moved in, there were difficulties in resolving the differences between their expectations and what was built. Lesson – keep the client informed of changes as the design progresses so that they can be negotiated and agreed prior to actual construction. Also have a QA step to check any differences between the marketing set of drawings vs the construction set of drawings.
With the recent changes to Building Code section H1 Energy Efficiency there are increasing numbers of members considering Insulated Roof Panel construction, in particular for commercial and industrial buildings, to achieve compliance.
Like any construction system there are several aspects of these panels to be aware of and to design for, to ensure not only a compliant installation but that site and programme-specific aspects are also considered. The following is not an exhaustive list, but provides useful topic areas to guide the design and detailing of these systems.
Panel length
Fire Considerations
Durability
Other Internal Environmental Aspects
Installation
In line with the above, New Zealand-specific supplier advice and input should be sought when designing detailing and specifying insulated panel roofs…and keep a record of that advice!
Recent anecdotes suggest that incidents with scaffolding are being encountered by some members on site, and we know from Worksafe data that accidents involving either falls from height or falling objects remain a serious problem. As architects observing the works, what should we be worrying about?While the core responsibility for the scaffolding lies with the contractor, architects are going to use the scaffolding to observe the works, and for our own safety and that of others working on site, we should know what might indicate that scaffolding is or isn’t safe. For employers, when your practice sends staff out on site to observe, you also need to be confident that they aren’t going to put themselves at risk.The easy answer, for larger scaffolding installations at least, is to look for the “green tag” before getting up on any scaffolding. This tag should be somewhere obvious close to the point at which you access the scaffolding. The plastic tag holder and the tag itself are quite distinctive once you know what you’re looking for. For larger scaffolding installations, the simplest rule is “no tag, no access”. This means that the only people on untagged scaffolding should be scaffolders.
Scaffold tags are not a one-off: the scaffolder should be returning periodically to inspect, fix any problems, and if necessary update the tag. In theory, a tagged scaffold should have both adequate integrity (such as bracing and attachment), provide a safe access and working platform (for example ladders, planking, rails, kickplates, hatches), and be sufficient for the imposed loads (what’s known as the “Scaffold Duty”).A good habit is to take a photo of the scaffold tag at every site visit, for the record. This ensures staff actively review the tag before using the scaffold. A red or absent tag can also be highlighted to the contractor if appropriate, and a photo also provides a record of why it wasn’t used for your inspections.
Is it that simple? As ever, no not quite.
First of all, the tag itself does not guarantee protection. Often, as the works progress, scaffolding gets modified by the contractor and their subcontractors, without the supervision of a qualified scaffolder. This is quite likely if an attachment, kickplate or bracing are in the way of, or attached to the “wrong” part of the works. Any such modification without scaffolder’s supervision invalidates the tag and could make the scaffold unsafe. Typical signs of modification are misplaced or “single” planks, or mysterious loose components on or under the scaffolding. Temporary removal of a kickplate to access weatherboards for painting might not be hazardous, especially if no-one is working underneath, but removal of attachments or diagonal bracing, removal of support to footings, or obvious gaps in planking, are not a good sign and suggest you should withdraw from the scaffolding and have a conversation with the contractor.
Second, not all scaffolding is required to be tagged. According to Worksafe guidelines, a certified scaffolder is only compulsory for scaffolding over 5m tall (from lowest to highest point). Therefore you may come across residential scaffolding, perhaps owned and erected by the contractor themselves, which has no tag, and a contractor insisting that this is fine. They are not necessarily wrong, but in this case you will have to make a judgement about your own willingness to get on that scaffolding for observing the works. We can suggest three options:
Third, if there are serious deficiencies in scaffolding that lead to injury or death then Worksafe may well ask us why we as architects didn’t spot it and/or do something about it. The multi-disciplinary consultancy WSP Opus found itself in this uncomfortable situation after the Panmure Bridge scaffold collapse of 2017. Although we are not scaffolders or structural engineers, under the Health & Safety at Work Act 2015, we can’t just hand over all responsibility for temporary works to the contractor. For example, as part of our Health & Safety by Design processes, we could identify whether certified scaffolding is either essential or highly desirable, and incorporate that requirement in our contract documents. Similarly, few of us would be able to review the detail of a scaffolding design with competence, but we could identify high complexity or risk that might merit requesting details of the designer’s credentials, or even a peer review, of the design. If the design wind zone is SED, might not that suggest something about the scaffolding required?
Fourth, scaffolding is getting ever more sophisticated, for example weather-protective “tents” are increasingly common, especially for re-cladding or re-roofing work. These tents can massively reduce weather risks, but a look at the maximum wind speeds for which the tent is rated can be educational. We may need to understand the opportunities and limitations of modern scaffolded weather protection systems when reviewing contractor’s proposals and advising our clients.
Finally, when you are up on scaffolding, spellbound by your own architecture, keep at least a few brain cells dedicated to your own safety. This sounds obvious, and then the occasion arises when we can get the photo if we just hang on to the post here, and lean out…For more reading, you could start here.
In February Board member Matt Mitchell presented the inaugural Otago Polytechnic NZACS Prize for Professional Practice to Meaghan Christensen (pictured above).
NZACS also provides funds for prizes to other tertiary institutions for the best student/students in the Practice Management or equivalent paper in the course, including:
UNITEC’s 2024 Academic year recipients were:
For Excellence in Professional Business Management 2024 – Sinead McClay
For Excellence in Professional Studies 2024 – Arlene Sisarich
Victoria University of Wellington’s 2024 winners were:
Logan Kendall – SARC 461 Professional Practice 2024
Richie Green – SARC 362 Intro to Practice and Management 2024
NZACS would be keen to hear from any members that might have an interest in becoming a member of the Claims Committee. There are currently three members including a convenor and an observer. The role involves reviewing the information provided by a member when notifying of a possible claim, and then assisting Aon with communications with the insurer and the member. It sometimes also includes direct communication with the member to more fully understand the detail of the notification, and often to help the member get some perspective on the situation. For those of you that are interested in risk management it can be fascinating to get to understand the issues, and in many cases be able to provide solace to the member.Please contact the current convenor Alec Couchman.
Since we’re on the topic of claims, just a reminder that you need to notify your insurer immediately about a possible claim.
To do this, contact a member of the Aon Claims team without delay and provide them with the details of the circumstances.Call 04 819 4000 or Email nzacs@aon.com.
A number of members regularly access the password protected Members Area of the website – usually for previous Communique articles. The platform that we use for the website is no longer supporting membership passwords and so we will be moving to Memberstack for this process. This will happen early in May 2025. Once in place, when you go to the Members Area you will need to click 'Forgot Password' and then you'll be able to create a new password. Please note that there is usually only one membership email address per member organization, and you will have to use that email address to be able to set up this access.