Progress towards identifying potential earthquake-prone buildings 2022

Last updated: 30 November 2022

• Print
• Share
• Save

Using this report

Readers should always refer to subpart 6A of Part 2 of the Building Act 2004 (special provisions for earthquake-prone buildings), the earthquake-prone building guidance, methodology and register, as well as education and training provided on the building.govt.nz website.

Questions about this report and management of earthquake-prone buildings can be emailed to EPB_TA_monitoring@mbie.govt.nz

ISSN (online) 2703-3058
Published November 2022 (first edition)

Executive summary

Territorial Authorities (TAs) are required to report on their progress in identifying potential earthquake-prone buildings (EPBs). This was the fifth year that TAs have reported on their progress to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) since the national system for managing EPBs came into effect on 1 July 2017. Reporting began on 21 July 2022 and was completed by all TAs by 23 August 2022. The main findings of this report are:

Identification of non-priority potential EPBs was mostly complete

All TAs with high seismic risk areas were required to identify non-priority potential EPBs by 1 July 2022. The majority of TAs (95%) have met this deadline to complete their identification of non-priority potential EPBs in their high seismic risk areas. Of the two TAs that were in the process of completing their identification work as at the time of reporting, one of them has since completed the identification work. MBIE is following up with the other TA that has not met the deadline to ensure this process is completed as soon as possible. So far, 2,709 buildings have been identified as non-priority potential EPBs.

TAs progressed well post-identification of EPBs

As at 1 July 2022, TAs have notified the owners of 713 priority buildings and 2,047 non-priority buildings that their building may be earthquake prone and required them to undertake a seismic assessment. TAs make determinations as to whether buildings identified as potential EPB are earthquake prone based on the seismic assessment. So far, TAs have determined a total of:

• 647 priority buildings as EPB
• 1,908 priority buildings as not EPB
• 1,087 non-priority buildings as EPB and
• 3,566 non-priority buildings as not EPB.

The next progress report will be in 2023

The next report will cover progress from 37 TAs with medium seismic risk areas. It will also provide information on whether TAs met the 1 July 2022 deadline for identifying all priority potential EPBs. TAs with high seismic risk areas will no longer be required to report under the current national EPB system. Future reporting will look at whether remaining deadlines are being met and how TAs are handling any issues that arise from the remediation process.

Background, purpose and methodology

Background

On 1 July 2017, a national system came into effect that introduced new provisions for managing earthquake-prone buildings (EPBs) in Aotearoa New Zealand. These provisions affect building owners, territorial authorities (TAs), engineers, building professionals and building users.

The Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 introduced major changes to the way EPBs are identified and managed under the Building Act 2004. It uses knowledge learned from past earthquakes in Aotearoa New Zealand and overseas. The new national system for managing earthquake-prone buildings is consistent across the country and focuses on the most vulnerable buildings.

How the EPB system works:

• TAs identify potential EPBs
• owners who are notified by their TA must obtain engineering assessments of the building carried out by suitably qualified engineers
• TAs determine whether buildings are earthquake prone, assign ratings, issue notices, and publish information about the buildings in a public register
• owners are required to display notices on their building and to remediate their building.

The EPB system also divides Aotearoa New Zealand into three seismic risk areas – high, medium, and low. Each has their own reporting schedule. TAs with high seismic risk areas are required to report every year until 2022. Those with medium seismic areas are required to report every two years until 2027, and TAs with low seismic risk areas are required to report every three years until 2032.

They also have their own timeframes for action as seen in Table 1 below. Additionally, priority buildings must be identified in a shorter timeframe than non-priority buildings and owners are given a shorter time in which to carry out work on priority buildings.

Table 1: Timeframes for action

Purpose

This summary report informs all stakeholders about the progress that has been made by 38 TAs with high seismic risk areas towards identifying potential EPBs in their districts during the period of 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022. It gives the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) an annual update and evidence in terms of:

• how TAs have tracked in achieving their deadlines
• TAs' progress towards meeting future deadlines
• which TAs are not tracking as expected and may require support.

This report also gives Aotearoa New Zealanders assurance that risks to public safety from existing buildings in the event of an earthquake are being identified and managed.

Progress at individual TA-level is not provided. TAs may choose to publish their progress but are not required to do so.

Methodology

On 21 July 2022, 38 TAs with high seismic risk areas in Aotearoa New Zealand were asked to complete their 2022 reporting requirements. This was the fifth year that TAs have reported on their progress in identifying potential EPBs to MBIE since the national system for managing EPBs came into effect on 1 July 2017. All TAs reported by 23 August 2022.

Some TAs are wholly one seismic risk area, but some are a mix of seismic risk areas. Twenty-five TAs were in the high seismic risk area only; 10 had a mix of high and medium seismic risk areas; and three had a mix of high, medium, and low seismic risk areas. Those TAs with a mix of seismic risk areas were only required to report on their high seismic risk area this year. Among all TAs which reported, 22 were in the North Island and 16 in the South Island.

They were asked to provide information on their progress from 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022 on various topics such as:

• their progress in identifying the non-priority potential EPBs in high seismic risk areas
• how many requests for engineering assessments were sent
• how many EPBs were published on the national register
• how TAs monitored progress of EPB work post-identification.

Disclaimer:

The findings in this report and MBIE's interpretation of the answers is based on the information provided by TAs at the time of submissions, as well as any follow-ups MBIE was able to do with Councils (where applicable)

As MBIE works with TAs regularly, site and training visits and discussions with TAs may update these answers. If this happens, these changes will be shown in the next progress report with revised figures and interpretations. However, under the current national EPB system, TAs with high seismic risk areas will no longer be required to report in future.

Table 2: Territorial authorities which have reported in 2022 by seismic risk area

Table note: Territorial authorities for "Medium/High" and "Low/Medium/High" risk areas are only required to report on their high seismic risk area this year.

Table 3: Summary count of territorial authorities which have reported in 2022 by seismic risk area and location

Summary Findings

Almost all TAs in high seismic risk areas have identified non-priority potential EPBs

All TAs with high seismic risk areas were required to meet the 1 July 2022 deadline to identify non-priority potential EPBs.

Most TAs (95%) completed this process. Of the two TAs that were in the process of completing their identification work as at the time of reporting, one of them has since completed the identification work and another TA is still in the process of identifying its non-priority buildings. MBIE is following up with that TA to ensure this process is completed as soon as possible.

There were 2,709 buildings identified as being a non-priority potential EPB in high seismic risk areas, of which 1,988 were in the North Island and 721 were in the South Island.

TAs made good progress in their role supporting the national system for managing EPBs after identifying potential earthquake-prone buildings

Notification

Following the identification of potential EPBs, TAs are required to notify the building owners that their buildings are potentially earthquake prone and require them to obtain an engineering assessment of their buildings.

TAs with high seismic risk areas were asked the number of buildings that were issued notifications requesting an engineering assessment. Table 4 below shows the number of buildings whose owners were sent letters of notification. The numbers are broken down by priority level of the buildings.

Table 4: Number of buildings for which TAs have issued letters as at 30 June 2022

Outcomes of determinations

Once owners are notified by their TA that their building may be earthquake prone, they must get an engineering seismic assessment of the building. After the seismic assessment is given to the TA, the TA makes a determination as to whether the building is earthquake prone or not.

The outcomes of these determinations are shown in Table 5 below. Note that the table is for determinations of buildings which have been issued notification letters as at 30 June 2022, and not only those notified for the period 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022 (in Table 4).

Table 5: Total number of priority and non-priority potential EPBs where the TA made a determination as at 30 June 2022

Monitoring of EPB information

Once a building is determined to be earthquake prone, the TA issues an EPB notice, and records information about the building in the EPB register.

TAs were asked whether they had published this information on the EPB register. More than half of the TAs responded that they had updated EPB records on the register. TAs that were not able to update their records on time were waiting for more information, delayed by staff shortages and/or had records of determined buildings that did not come up yet against EPB deadlines.

Table 6: Percentage of TAs that have published all buildings determined EPB on the EPB register, as at 30 June 2022

Table note: n=38

Active monitoring of EPB notices issued generally depended on the number of EPBs and the TAs’ resourcing. TAs updated EPB records on the register and assigned compliance officers to conduct regular checks and ad hoc site visits and to update on-site notices. Some used IT systems to help them record changes, update work done and track against upcoming deadlines. Others followed-up with building owners regularly.

Some of the key challenges that TAs faced included managing upset and concerned owners with initial apprehension towards notices that might put off users in utilising their premises. Another problem was notices becoming obscured. It was difficult for some to place notices prominently due to wear and tear and weathering throughout the long duration of remediation.

TAs followed-up on buildings that had passed EPB deadlines

Some TAs began identifying potential EPBs before the current system started in 2017 and would have buildings which have passed deadlines to strengthen or demolish. TAs were also asked whether any of the buildings they published on the EPB register had passed EPB deadlines for strengthening or demolishing, based on the notices issued.

Only 13% of TAs responded that they have buildings recorded in the register which passed their deadline to strengthen or demolish. As at 1 July 2022, there were 21 buildings reported to have passed the due date.

Table 7: Number of TAs that have buildings recorded in the EPB register which also passed the deadline to strengthen or demolish, as at 30 June 2022

Table note: n=38

Most TAs (66%) responded that they have been monitoring the progress of buildings with EPB notices posted on them. The remaining 34% of the TAs either did not monitor or had not issued any EPB notices.

Table 8: Number of TAs that monitor posted EPB notices attached to buildings, as at 30 June 2022

Table note: n=38

TAs generally communicated with owners between 1–2 years before remediation deadlines, followed by regular communications to reduce deadline risks. TAs engaged and discussed with building owners any remediation intentions the building owners have on their buildings. TAs provided relevant information; worked with owners to progress their strengthening, demolition or rebuild; and helped address or resolve any issues. Some TAs assigned a Technical Advisor to perform a monthly check-in and seek updates from building owners.

Some TAs with buildings that went over the deadlines have taken enforcement actions, while others worked with owners to ensure timely building remediation work. TAs carried this out by serving building owners with formal warnings in consultation with their legal teams. TAs began by requiring building owners to secure the riskiest elements and cordon-off public areas, like footpaths, to ensure public safety. They then worked through other requirements to remediate on a case-by-case basis. MBIE will be contacting all TAs to find out what they intend to do about buildings that have passed remediation deadlines in relation to meeting their obligations to enforce the requirements of the Building Act.

Conclusion and next steps

Conclusion

Most of the 38 TAs met the deadline to identify non-priority buildings for their high seismic risk areas. However, with post-Covid 19 constraints, TAs continued to face staffing and resource issues, which delayed some of their EPB work. Those affected TAs expressed confidence in catching up with EPB deadlines.

MBIE has contacted the TA that has not met their deadlines to work with them and provide the support they need to fulfil their EPB roles and responsibilities.

In general, TAs have also made good progress beyond identifying EPB buildings, by notifying owners that their buildings are potentially EPB and have requested engineering assessments. Of the buildings which have proceeded further through the EPB system, TAs have also made determinations on whether the buildings are earthquake prone.

Next steps

The deadline to identify all potential earthquake-prone priority buildings in medium seismic risk areas and non-priority buildings for high seismic risk areas was 1 July 2022. Attention for these TAs will now switch to making determinations on whether a building is an EPB, based on a seismic assessment, and remediation.

Future reporting will look at whether remaining deadlines are being met and focus on identifying any issues that arise from the remediation process.

In 2023, 37 TAs in medium seismic risk areas will be required to report. These TAs must have identified all priority potential EPBs by 1 July 2022, and non-priority EPBs by 1 July 2027. Table 9 below lists these TAs and their reporting requirement by seismic risk area.

Table 9: Territorial authorities required to report in 2023 by seismic risk area

Territorial authorities for "Low/Medium/High" and "Low/Medium" risk areas are only required to report on their medium seismic risk area in 2023

Definitions

District

An area managed by a territorial authority (defined in section 7 of the Building Act 2004)

Earthquake-prone building (EPB)

A building, or part of a building, is earthquake prone if it will have its ultimate capacity exceeded in a moderate earthquake, and if it were to collapse, would do so in a way that is likely to cause injury or death to persons in or near the building or on any other property, or damage to any other property.

Earthquake-Prone Building (EPB) methodology

The document used by territorial authorities and engineers to identify, assess, and make decisions on potentially earthquake-prone buildings. It is set by the Chief Executive of MBIE under the Building Act 2004.

High seismic risk

An area that has a Z factor that is ≥ 0.3. Z factor is the seismic risk factor of an area determined in accordance with Standard NZS 1170.5:2004.

Medium seismic risk

An area that has a Z factor that is ≥ 0.15 and < 0.3.

Low seismic risk

An area that has a Z factor that is < 0.15.

Priority buildings

Buildings in high and medium seismic risk areas that are considered to present a higher risk due to their construction, building type, use or location.

Territorial authority (TA)

Defined under the Local Government Act 2002 as a city or a district council.