Strong calls for fire safety change in construction

“More than 100 organisations, businesses, and individuals across New Zealand shared their insights during the consultation. I want to thank everyone who took the time to make a submission. 

“Since the last update of the Building Code fire safety regulations in 2012, building uses, technology, materials and construction methods have evolved rapidly – adding new complexities to fire safety in our buildings and to firefighting. 

He said many submitters agreed that the current framework is overly complex, with confusing building classifications and unclear language. Adding that these issues are causing inconsistent compliance decisions, consenting delays and challenges for owners trying to maintain buildings. 

“Respondents agreed that it is essential for all building occupants to be able to evacuate safely, including people with disabilities and those in accommodation like hotels, motels and boarding houses. 

“Others agreed the rules should target specific fire hazards to ensure requirements are fit-for-purpose and cost-effective. 

There was also support for ensuring fire safety provisions in the Building Code align with the realities of modern-day firefighting to protect firefighters while doing their jobs, said Penk.  

Mike Reid, Senior Advisor Risk Reduction from Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Counties Manukau) said, “As New Zealand’s urban landscape evolves, so too must the regulations that govern building safety. Increasingly, we are seeing multi-storey conversions and high-occupancy dwellings such as boarding houses and subdivided homes outpace the clarity and applicability of current fire safety regulations.  

Reid states key challenges include: 

Ambiguity in classification: Boarding houses with fewer than six occupants may not trigger the same regulatory scrutiny as larger dwellings, despite similar risks. 

Insufficient evacuation guidance: Clauses such as C4 (Movement to Safety) and D1 (Access Routes) provide broad objectives but lack specific performance metrics for high-occupancy residential buildings. 

Vulnerable occupants: Elderly, disabled, or non-English-speaking residents may require additional support during evacuation, which current regulations do not adequately address. 

“We also observe significant variation in how engineering firms interpret and apply the building code during the Engineering design process. The FEB is a vital early-stage consultation tool used to guide performance-based fire safety designs. It allows stakeholders, including Fire and Emergency NZ, Building Consent Authorities (BCAs), and engineers to agree on design assumptions and criteria before detailed work begins. This inconsistency often leads to gaps in design documentation, particularly around hose run suitability, firefighter access and attendance points, firefighter tenability and water supply issues (amongst others). 

“These elements are critical to ensuring that occupants can evacuate safely, and that emergency services can respond safely and effectively. A more consistent regulatory framework would allow for a more streamlined process and greater understanding. 

“The NZ Building Code remains a robust and flexible framework, but its effectiveness depends on consistent interpretation and timely updates. As our housing stock diversifies, so too must our approach to fire safety. By addressing current gaps and promoting best practices, we can ensure that all New Zealanders, regardless of where or how they live, are protected in the event of an emergency.” 

Penk added, “We have a clear mandate to strengthen protections for New Zealanders by updating our fire safety requirements for buildings. 

“I have instructed the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment to incorporate this feedback into proposed Building Code changes for Cabinet to consider early next year.”