BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

Transcription

1 BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 1

2 MARKET BUILDING VIEW A SAFER SPRING FUTURE 2018 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT OUR PART IN BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE The final report of the Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety, chaired by Dame Judith Hackitt and entitled Building a Safer Future, has exposed deep weaknesses in accountability, oversight and enforcement relating to the design, construction and operation of high risk residential buildings. The scale of the Grenfell tragedy gives the Review genuine momentum, creating the expectation that the industry must address shortcomings alongside the development of legislation. Combined with other changes in design and procurement, the implementation of the Review s findings is an opportunity for the industry to improve performance and reputation. 1

3 OUR PART IN REACHING BUILDING A TURNING SAFER FUTURE POINT WHAT HAS THE REVIEW SHOWN? Building a Safer Future is a damning assessment of the performance of building owners, designers and constructors. The report describes a cultural race to the bottom where ignorance, indifference and lack of clarity over how building safety works and who is responsible created the pre-conditions for the Grenfell fire. It also highlights the complexity and shortfalls in regulation. The scale of the disaster and the nature of the industry shortcomings means there is powerful momentum behind full implementation. As Dame Judith Hackitt states, It is the least we can do. The problems uncovered by the Review have been hiding in plain sight for years unclear roles and responsibilities across the team, complex and hard to apply regulations, weak controls over as-built construction and poor tracking of critical safety competences. When combined with construction s fragmented structure, the risk that critical safety issues will be overlooked increases even more. There are other crucial findings regarding the residents voice over safety. Irrespective of tenure, residents in Higher Risk Residential Buildings (HRRBs) defined as residential buildings over 10 storeys - will be given a new relationship with building owners and new rights of consultation around building safety. This implies a more hands-on relationship with occupiers than many building owners presently have. In summary, the Review calls for a system-wide overhaul of the management of building safety for HRRBs. There are between 2,000 and 3,000 HRRBs in the UK. The overhaul will apply to existing buildings as well as new and will cover operation, design and construction. Many of the recommendations are likely to be applied across the industry to improve overall safety performance. As a result, the implications of the Review extend well beyond the residential sector. 2

4 BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT POTENTIAL IMPACTS FOR THE INDUSTRY The Review is focused primarily on Fire Safety but will have wider impacts on culture and behaviours. The operating model it envisages will go beyond the scope of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations (CDM) regime, which deals with Construction Health and Safety. The implementation of an effective Health and Safety (H&S) culture in construction has been a major success story, but we must go much further. The Safety Case regime proposed is wellestablished in highly regulated industries including rail, oil and gas and nuclear, placing a much more rigorous demand on assuring and demonstrating safety. Going forward, as new statutory duties are created, the challenge is to deliver safe, compliant, affordable buildings which meet the wider needs of stakeholders over their full lifecycle. Looking beyond the specific recommendations, there are several themes that point towards behavioural shifts that the Review will drive: 3

5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS FOR THE INDUSTRY Adoption of a systems-approach to building safety. Hackitt highlights silo-thinking, for example when changes are made to specifications without a full understanding of the implications, as a real problem for the industry. Joined-up thinking will deliver far better results. Incentives and penalties for compliance and non-compliance. The proposed incentives are permissions to build and occupy completed buildings. The commercial imperative for right-firsttime design and construction is obvious, whereas penalties could extend to criminal sanction. Design, procurement and construction prioritised to meet Building Regulations. The aim is to deliver high safety, low-risk and best lifetime cost, rather than lowest build cost and fastest construction programme. Design and construction so that all stakeholders have the information they need. This describes the digital thread that has focused on the potential use of BIM but also highlights the potential for information gateways at planning, start on site and completion which will become central not only to the new compliance regime, but also to a wider push for industry transparency. Design and construction to facilitate lifetime safe management. This demands that both design and construction meet safety case requirements, as well as highlighting that the owner will retain an active, longterm responsibility for the safety of the building. This is likely to create new relationships with residents and new considerations around transactions and disposals. 4

6 BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT Whilst all parties engaged in the commissioning, design, construction and operation of HRRBs will need to respond to the findings of the Review, the greatest impact is likely to be felt by Duty Holders. Duty Holders will be established by Statute. Rather like CDM, roles covering the Owner, Principal Designer and Principal Contractor are planned. The duties are yet to be established, but will cover: Management of building safety risk. Management of information and records. Engagement with residents. Handover of information to a new Duty Holder. Based on the experience of CDM, the demands upon Duty Holders should be proportionate. However, the areas of focus, including managing information and demonstrating compliance, are not always industry strong-points. Duty holders will be driving change. 5

7 POTENTIAL IMPACTS FOR THE INDUSTRY 6

8 BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT RADICAL THINKING OR NEW PRACTICE? Early responses to Hackitt described it as a missed opportunity, possibly because, from the outset, it did not recommend the prohibition of some construction products. However, it is a mistake to underestimate its impact and the power that the safety imperative will have on the design, construction and management of HRRBs. Many of the recommendations are no more than good industry practice and should not represent a huge burden. The reality is that the proposals may appear radical only because levels of competence and performance are inconsistent. There are some fundamental changes outlined in the recommendations that need to be highlighted, given their potential to drive change: 7

9 RADICAL THINKING OR NEW PRACTICE? Application of the principles of health and safety to building safety the risk is owned by those who create it. This will encourage a more safety conscious and risk averse culture. Systems approach to design, construction and building operation. The Review envisages a layer-based strategy to prevent and mitigate safety risk. This implies that the detail of the design will need to be completed at an early stage so that all elements of the system are understood and tested. Use of safety cases at stage gates to test compliance. A much tougher approvals process is envisaged, managed by a tri-partite Joint Control Authority, comprising Building Control, Fire and Safety Authority and Health and Safety Executive. Gateway reviews at planning, start of construction and handover will need to demonstrate the Safety Case, again implying the need for earlier design development and good quality information. Traceability and transparency to demonstrate that what is designed is built and that buildings are safe. Recommendations covering four information products, including the digital record, set out to address issues around ambiguity and fragmented information. These proposed changes address the fragmentation of the industry. Far from being a hurdle that needs to be crossed, the Review could form a critical component of the step change to better outcomes. Their exclusion from more detailed review in this note does not mean that these are not critical parts of the solution, but that they are less actionable by clients in the immediate future. There are other significant changes proposed in connection with regulation, competence, products and people s voice. 8

10 BUILDING A SAFER FUTURE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIENTS AND NEXT STEPS It is inconceivable that anyone involved in construction will have acted deliberately to create safety risks like those which contributed to the Grenfell tragedy. However, points of failure which create risk have become deeply embedded. The recommendations of the Review aim to eliminate these. By using the methodology of the Safety Case to design, deliver and operate HRRBs that are Safe by Design, clients can take pro-active steps to mitigate risk. Looking forward, clients with a short-term interest in the development of an HRRB will not only have to undertake the role of client Duty Holder during design and construction, but will need to ensure they can pass over the necessary information so that a future owner can fulfil their role. Prudent clients may assume, from an investability perspective, that these recommendations will apply retrospectively to projects under design or construction and take the necessary steps to develop this information set. Clients and owners who intend to retain a longer-term interest in HRRBs will have additional roles in ensuring safety. This will not only cover assessing and acting on risks associated with existing buildings, but will also involve consulting with residents as well as managing the building so that resident actions do not compromise safety. Although the Review will be subject to wide consultation before its key recommendations are embedded in law, there is plenty that owners and industry can do in advance. Owners have an economic interest in mitigating risks that have been exposed by the Grenfell tragedy, as well as a moral duty to keep people safe. Furthermore, many of the considerations apply to all buildings in multiple occupancy, not just buildings over 10 storeys high. At the heart of the review findings are key aspects of industry culture. These are issues that can be addressed in advance of statute and which are the responsibility of the industry, not government. Accordingly, as clients seek to future-proof their business in response to Hackitt, they could consider the following priorities: 9

11 CHALLENGE AND OPPORTUNITIES Adopting systems-wide thinking to design, construction and management rather than thinking in silos. Working with project teams to create a culture which prioritises safety as well as performance by making safety an integral part of design. Promoting the digital thread, using models and data to demonstrate compliance and traceability. Challenging project teams to demonstrate they have the required safety competences. Ensuring that what is designed is built, so that long-term liabilities are managed. The Hackitt Review is only the first step of a post-grenfell process but, by taking cues from the Review, clients and their teams can take steps to demonstrate that lessons have been learned and they are taking an active role in Building a Safer Future. 10

12 CONTACT EDEL CHRISTIE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BUILDINGS SIMON RAWLINSON HEAD OF STRATEGIC RESEARCH & INSIGHT JAMES KNIGHT HEAD OF RESIDENTIAL STEF SCANNALI ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY & RISK MANAGEMENT Arcadis Our world is under threat - from climate change and rising sea levels to rapid urbanisation and pressure on natural resource. We re here to answer these challenges at Arcadis, whether it s clean water in Sao Paolo or flood defences in New York; rail systems in Doha or community homes in Nepal. We re a team of 27,000 and each of us is playing a part. Arcadis. Improving quality of life. Disclaimer This report is based on market perceptions and research carried out by Arcadis, as a design and consultancy firm for natural and built assets. It is for information and illustrative purposes only and nothing in this report should be relied upon or construed as investment or financial advice (whether regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority or otherwise) or information upon which key commercial or corporate decisions should be taken. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the material in this document, neither the Centre for Economics and Business Research Ltd nor Arcadis will be liable for any loss or damages incurred through the use of this report. Arcadis United Kingdom 2018 Arcadis