KiwiBuild a chance to rethink industry
Opinion: Picture a construction environment where consent authorities could simply rely on builders and manufacturers, writes Gordon Buswell.
There has been a lot written about the residential construction industry over the last few months. It is an industry that is critical to our future and one that is crying out for some commonsense solutions.
Although innovation is important, getting the basic settings right is also critical to improving performance and productivity.
KiwiBuild has been identified as a catalyst for a re-engineering of the industry and prefabrication is seen as having potential here.
Few doubt that KiwiBuild has the potential to have a dramatic and positive impact on the industry. Its impact will be driven by the Government’s intense interest in the success of the initiative.
This degree of interest will result in the Government gaining a greater insight into the challenges of product assurance, design complexity, compliance hurdles, construction skills and, most importantly, affordable land.
Prefabrication is already prevalent in the industry from the more than 80 prefabricated frame and truss plants throughout the country to panel manufacturers, window and door manufacturers and the more intensive factory house plants recently established.
The reality is that the very factors that support the cost-effectiveness of prefabricated housing – standardised design and large-scale subdivisions – also support the cost-effectiveness of the predominantly onsite industry.
The discussions about the benefits of onsite versus offsite construction are partly a distraction because they are each like fish in a pond. At the moment everyone is swimming in dirty water and we need to get it right for everyone.
A number of ideas need attention and underpinning each of them is the principle of ‘‘appropriate accountability’’. It is a truism that risk is best allocated to those most able to manage it, and this principle needs to be rigorously applied across the industry.
Imagine if all designers produced code-compliant designs – why should we pay building consent authorities (BCAs) to second-guess professionals?
Or if builders built to design and had warranties backing their workmanship and ability to complete (workmanship failures would render poor builders uninsurable).
Or if all manufacturers’ and importers’ products were assured as fit for purpose.
Such an environment would mean that BCAs could issue consents and file documentation without having exposure to design, product and workmanship liability because those liabilities were successfully allocated to those best able to manage them.
Compliance costs could be significantly reduced.
Many professional builders fly through the compliance processes because of the quality of their designs and information in support of consents. This needs to become the standard.
Affordable housing has its challenges, the greatest being land cost. But imagine a KiwiBuild programme that could bring the benefits of scale and standardisation.
This process would start with a standardised design and optimise the use of building materials.
This, in turn, would maximise standardisation opportunities for manufacturers and produce efficiencies.
The use of accredited builders and land developed to remove site complexity and risk would create significant potential for economies.
I see KiwiBuild as a wonderful opportunity to boost not only the number of affordable homes but also to bring a sharpened focus on eliminating the existing barriers to better productivity in residential construction generally.
Gordon Buswell is chairman of the New Zealand Building Industry Federation, deputy chairman of Construction Strategy Group and chairman of Platinum Homes.