Design Documentation Practice Guide for Class 2 residential buildings

Design documentation standards have been broadly reported as being poor and deteriorating over time. The Compliance and Enforcement, Proactive Inspections Program and Building Documentation Audit Programs all provide evidence to support this.

The Working Group, led by our team, sets out to address the correlation between poor building permit documentation, the approval process, and non-compliant building work in Class 2 buildings.

The Practice Guide seeks to provide guiding principles and methodology to elevate the standard of the drawings, information and details that is intended by our legislation to satisfy Building Regulation 24, and that is assessed on application to the relevant building surveyor for a building permit for Class 2 buildings.

The Practice Guide was developed thanks to the expertise provided by a working group of key industry stakeholders. These included:

• Australian Institute of Architects (AIA)
• Australian Institute of Building Surveyors (AIBS)
• Architects Registration Board of Victoria (ARBV)
• Association of Consulting Architects Australia (ACA)
• Design Matters National (DMN)
• Department of Transport and Planning (DTP).

Several other industry stakeholders were consulted in the development of the Practice Guide. These included:

• Engineers Australia (EA)
• NSW Fair Trading – Building & Construction Compliance
• Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)
• Australia Institute of Waterproofing (AIA)
• Building Surveyors and Inspectors Group (BSIG)
• Victorian Municipal Building Surveyors Group (VMBSG)
• Master Builders and Mechanical Services Association of Australia (MPMSAA)
• Housing Industry of Association (HIA)
• Master Plumbers and Mechanical Services Association of Australia (MPMSAA)
• Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC)
• Victorian Managed Insurance Authority (VMIA)
• Domestic Building Dispute Resolution Victoria (DBDRV)

 The Building System Review noted that building designs are often refined or altered substantially during construction. This is not necessarily a concern as many factors can influence how a building is constructed that could not be foreseen during initial design stages. However, the current regulatory framework does not provide for adequate regulatory oversight of changes to design documentation after the issuing of a building permit. The Panel proposed a suite of recommendations, including introducing improvements to design documentation.

The Building Confidence Report (BCR) highlighted the fact that many building surveyors accept and approve designs based on documentation that is ‘often poor’. This can create significant risks and issues throughout the construction phase and beyond.

The BCR also found that architects and engineers are often engaged early in a project to prepare initial documentation. Detailed construction documentation is then prepared by other practitioners who may not be aware of the assumptions underpinning the original design. This may lead to specific products or design aspects being substituted in a way that compromises the integrity of the original design. This can have a significant impact on the performance and compliance of the built product.

The BCR made three recommendations (13-15), related to the standard of design documentation and the design practitioner’s duty to prepare documentation that demonstrates the proposed building will comply with the NCC.