Ansary advocates urgent building reforms in the ACT

 

The last decade has seen Canberra building regulations become progressively more byzantine in nature but sadly, the perceived tightening of regulatory controls has not delivered tangible gains to the quality of construction. Whilst there are many success stories around, there are also hosts of anecdotal examples, particularly in the medium density apartment sector where fundamental lapses are occurring in the performance and durability of the finished product. Common complaints include leaking basements, leaking roofs, and excessive cracking.

On October 12, Tarek El-Ansary of Ansary Consulting Engineers participated in a Public Forum held by Engineers Australia entitled Building Legislation and Construction Process in the ACT. Tarek gave a presentation which focused on common structural defects, emerging ‘bad practice trends’, and offered practical recommendations on strategies to make the situation better.

There are particular concerns over the extent of concealed structural defects that go undetected during the building certification process and for the most part, will never be able to be rectified. Increasingly, Structural Engineers are not retained to provide quality control inspections during the construction phase. The Structural Engineers’ fee he stated, “represent typically about 0.5% of project value on residential projects, but accounts for 100% of the durability and 100% of the performance of a building. It also influences up to something like 35% of overall Project Cost.

The ‘hypersensitivity’ and ‘zeal’ with which engineers fees are orbited makes no economic logic at all, he stated. He said he can possibly understand how the early stages of a project can coincide with a developer’s strive for fiscal discipline, but he stated, the structural engineer, in concert with the architect, are the only guys confronting the logic of what needs to be done; and the earlier this can be thought about and properly communicated, as far as I’m concerned, the better!”

He went on to say that in the small to medium domestic residential sector, “there was a pervasive ‘do it yourself culture’ with a tendency to ‘wing it’ wherever possible. This was also coupled with a lack of definition surrounding the role of the Private Certifier. As well, he added, the appointment and payment, in effect, of the Certifying Authority by the builder diminishes the right of rejection and objectivity on which the system relies on as a main pillar”.

The event presented speakers across the full spectrum of specialist disciplines, and provided a forum for question and answers.

  < back