UDAC_Submission

The Building Designers Association of Australia (BDAA) is aware that the NSW Government wishes to review existing conditions relating to poor design practice in residential flat developments particularly within the greater Sydney Basin. Specifically it has asked the Urban Design Advisory Committee (UDAC) to recommend improvements to the design of multi-unit residential apartment buildings.

The following is a submission by BDAA and its NSW stakeholder BDANSW on this subject following the Premier’s Forum on Residential Flat Design on 24^th March 2000 at Australian Technology Park and the issued communique (copy attached).

It addresses on a by- exception basis several important points raised by this document.

1. About the BDAA

The Building Designers Association of Australia Ltd is a national body representing 7 independent state and territory Building Designer Associations, specifically BDANSW, BDAV, BDAQ, BDASA, BDAWA, BDANT, BDAT. These associations represent some 1300 professional building designers, specifiers and coordinators practicing in a wide range of building activity.

BDAA was incorporated in February 1995, and is managed by an elected Board of Directors, one from each state or territory. BDANSW was incorporated in 1992.

BDA members are practitioners involved in designing projects across the full range of building activity, both residential and non-residential buildings including commercial, industrial or institutional projects. In many cases, they supervise the construction of projects undertaken by them, at their clients' request.

From membership surveys and ABS data we have estimated that BDA members collectively, are involved in upwards of $10 billion worth of construction activity throughout Australia over any 12 month period, thereby representing a significant sector.

The BDA encourages all members in all states to take Professional Indemnity Insurance and participate in professional development. State BDA’s conduct structured ‘Continuing Professional Development Programs’, comprising industry-specific educational seminars, information nights and general meetings, providing members with numerous opportunities to up skill their knowledge on a wide range of issues.

The BDA was pleased to be involved in the recent Premiers Forum and is generally supportive of the recommendations published in the Communique released Friday, March 24^th 2000.

We also agree that the solution lay in a whole of community holistic solution where all parties involved need to review their participation and see how the “process” can be improved. We intend to comment only on a by exception to some points in the NSW Government communique.

The BDA points out that there is a significant omission in the first dot point recommendation versus the recommendation reported both during the plenary session following the break out workshops, and subsequently in the press report - Sydney Morning Herald Article of Saturday March 25^th 2000 (copy attached)

Recommendation: Dot point 1 should be amended to include the terms “ accredited architect or building designer”.

It is not true to say that architects are the only persons trained to design and document buildings and specifically residential flats. The BDA promotes design excellence and believes that building design should be judged on its merits, not upon the qualifications of the designer necessarily.

Choosing an architect because they are qualified as an architect or have the sole right to the term architect is not an automatic guarantee as to the quality of service provided. This statement equally applies to any other profession or vocation.

There are some members of the Building Designers Association who hold qualifications and have the competencies to design and document multi unit residential flat dwellings. Those skills and past achievements need to be independently assessed and recognised.

Equally not all architects are equal, and those used to doing suburban “additions and alterations” are hardly capable of handling multimillion dollar developments.

The point is that an accreditation or licensing system should be in place in NSW that permits architects and building designers to participate in work for which their competencies are appropriate.

What is bad architecture? Who is to be the judge? The councils? The Government? The public? Can you legislate good taste?

“ In this regard, architects and building designers face a particular difficulty. It is often impossible to determine just what architectural incompetence amounts to. Most people can tell when a builder is inept, but the matter of architectural ineptitude is a moot point.

Within the field, architects often argue as to the quality of a building, whether it is successful or a disaster in aesthetic terms. Moreover their assessment of the success of a treatment (building design) is often at variance with the assessment of others. The supposed experts cannot agree, and the public often cannot agree with the experts. In such a situation it is little wonder that architects design so little of the built environment.

If even the occupation itself cannot work out what good architecture is, how can we possibly be protected from bad architecture? ” (3)

Parramatta Lord Mayor, David Borger in a recent interview in The Parramatta Advertiser said his best designed flats nomination for the Parramatta district were on the corner of Macarthur, Mason and Brabyn St. This terrace complex was designed by a building designer and BDA member. Lord Mayor Borger was a key speaker at the recent Premier’s Forum.

In Australia, BDA estimates that Building Designers design 75% of all residential developments by volume. This is in line with overseas experiences where best estimates are that architects are involved in the construction of between 30% & 50% of the contract value of buildings in the developed world. ( 1)

BDA support the notion of greater community consultation up front in the various LEP/ DCP planning stages. This will produce clear and expected outcomes. These plans should take into account the built environment needs of the greater Sydney basin.

Once approved these should provide only the necessary regulations to ensure the latest concepts in best practice urban living are adhered to. Here it is important to differentiate between best practice in design on the one hand and aesthetic value judgements on the other.

More robust LEP/DCPs will see more predictable approvals where designers are free to submit plans which not only comply with regulations but meet market demands (as represented by the free market …the risk takers…. the developers.

5. Establishing expert panels to provide advice to Councils will not necessarily improve the situation.

BDA supports any initiatives that improve the design appreciation skills of all those involved in the assessment process for residential flat development (eg planners, developers and councillors). This should be a matter of general community education and cannot be argued against.

Here we would also urge greater government involvement and support for design awards and design competitions and subsequent publicity and use as case histories by educators and relevant professional associations.

Panels of external “experts” exist now in many local government jurisdictions. Anecdotal evidence suggests these have not successfully added any certainty to outcomes for developers or anything new to the atheistic arguments over design. Refer to argument above on “ Who is to be the judge of good design? ”.

BDA does not wish to speak on behalf of architects or the RAIA except to say that any contemplated accreditation process must be seen to treat architects and qualified building designers fairly in terms of restriction of trade matters.

Restriction of trade considerations has been fully canvassed in the BDA’s submission to the Productivity Commission on potential repeal of the various states Architects Acts. (2)

BDA supports the introduction of an independent and transparent scheme of accreditation based on skills of building designers for design of multi residential flats design and documentation. This to be based on real market place proven competencies however they were obtained, not necessarily on academic qualifications.

Concerning Building Designers, two states currently have some form of licensing or regulation covering building designer activities-Victoria and Queensland.

In Victoria, under the Building Act 1993, building designers and/or draftspersons must be registered with the Building Practitioners Board as Building Practitioners under the various classes of Draftspersons.

In Queensland members are licensed under the Building Services Act 1991. In both states, building designers are required to comply with the Acts, which includes having the minimum level of Professional Indemnity Insurance.

In NSW, the BDA has unsuccessfully lobbied the NSW Government for several years to consider the introduction of similar regulation and accreditation for Building Designers such as exists in Qld and Vic.

An accreditation process for multi flat residential development would be seen as a part of a wider range of competency assessment regulations which seeks to register all NSW building designers for appropriate classes of work. BDA are currently involved with other industry stakeholders in the preparation of nationally uniform competency standards for architectural technologist employees. This project is due for completion June 2000, after over 2 years negotiation with industry.

Important further self-regulation initiatives are planned by BDA, which would involve identifying and assessment of Building Designer practitioners. The objective of these initiatives will be to provide clear and transparent guidelines for the accreditation of only those building designers with the correct skills and competencies for particular areas. Accreditation for Residential flat development would be part of this process. BDA are currently seeking funding assistance to appoint consultants to complete stage 1 of this project.

BDA believes there should be a nationally recognised registration regime for all Building Design Practitioners quite separate from Architect registration.

The Victorian Building Practitioners Board scheme appears to us to be the closest existing preferred model.

Architects would then presumably continue to be registered in the existing way by the established Architects Boards. Building designers registration assessment would be by a separate and independent Building Practitioners Board.

For Building Designers this process would foster a greater propensity for development of more self-regulatory codes of practice. BDA believes such registration should ensure all building designers undertake compulsory professional development through an approved association. It should also mandate that building documentation has an authorship certification by a registered building designer as well as evidence of current professional indemnity insurance.

The BDA believes these combined initiatives would contribute significantly to ensuring those designing residential flat development posses the competencies, skills and resources to successfully design to marketplace requirements.

1. See R. Verges- Escuin, “ Present & Future Missions for the Architect” Fifteenth World Congress of The International Union of Architects 1985.

2. “ Review of Legislation Regulating the Architectural Profession” December 1999, submitted by Building Designers Association of Australia Ltd. www.bdaa.com.au

3 “Repealing the Architects Act…a Sociological View ” Submission to Productivity Commission Dec 1999 by Garry Stevens PhD MscSoc DipArchComp BSC (Arch)

1. Introduction

1. About the BDAA