Implication of Change of Use in the Building - 1
Unanticipated Challenges: Transitioning from Retail Shop to Bakery
Have you ever encountered a building project that turned out to be more complicated than anticipated? We experienced such a scenario during the conversion of a retail shop into a bakery. In this cautionary tale, we discovered the significant implications of "Change of Use" in building compliance regulations.
At first glance, the project seemed straightforward. The existing structure was a simple two-level building with direct egress to the outside on both levels. Many would assume that the change from selling goods to foods would not greatly impact base-building compliance. However, the local council had a different perspective and requested a base building review.
Understanding the Intricacies of 'Change of Use' in Building Compliance Regulations
It is considered the fit-out as a "Change of Use." According to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), a change of use occurs when the use of a building or part of a building changes from one use to another, accompanied by more onerous or additional Building Code requirements.
To fully comprehend the implications, we need to understand the concept of "use" as defined by the Building Act. The use of a building is categorized and specified in Schedule 2 of the Regulations. However, simply changing the "use" does not automatically trigger a "Change of Use" under section 115 of the Building Act. The new use must also have more onerous building compliance requirements.
In this specific case, the addition of a commercial kitchen led to a technical change in use, despite the fire risk remaining the same. The purpose group shifted from CS (Community Services) to CL (Commercial/Industrial), which had implications for compliance. Further investigation revealed that the main compliance requirement affected by the change was the structural loading, which increased from 4kPa to 5kPa due to the transition to a bakery with a commercial kitchen. The existing floor was only designed to withstand 2.5kPa, indicating the need for potential upgrades.
Under the Building Act, a building owner must not change the use of a building unless the territorial authority provides written notice that the building, in its new use, will comply with relevant provisions of the building code. These provisions encompass various aspects such as fire safety, protection of property, sanitary facilities, structural performance, fire-rating performance, and accessibility for people with disabilities.
However, considering this was an old building, achieving full compliance with current structural code requirements would involve significant costs and time. Fortunately, the Building Act requires territorial authorities to assess change of use cases based on the "as nearly as is reasonably practicable" (ANARP) principle. This involves weighing the sacrifices and difficulties of achieving full compliance against the benefits of upgrading.
To navigate this complex situation, knowledgeable compliance consultants played a vital role. They conducted a thorough "Gap Analysis," carefully examining the cost and sacrifices involved in achieving full compliance and comparing them to the benefits. By presenting a strong case to the council, these consultants successfully demonstrated that a complete base building upgrade was not reasonably practicable.
This case underscores the importance of understanding the implications of change of use in building compliance. It also highlights the crucial role of experienced consultants in navigating the complexities of compliance assessments. Stay tuned for our next newsletter, where we will continue exploring intriguing topics in the realm of building regulations.
Refer to our post for more insights regarding this matter!
https://lnkd.in/gUwW6ekS