The Buildings Regulations Problem

Recommendation "e" of the Select Committee Inquiry into the Autumn 2000 floods, gave the government a deadline of July 2001 to produce tougher building regulations for flood hazard areas in England and Wales . There is still no sign of these tougher regulations at the time of writing.

Instead, the report "Preparing for Floods" (referred to earlier) has been produced. It outlines some measures that can be taken to reduce vulnerability by making changes in construction and materials and to this extent it supplements the excellent report produced in 1996 by the Building Research Establishment in Scotland.

There seems to be no sign of any sense of urgency on the part of the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC) in England and Wales about adapting building regulations to produce buildings that are more resilient to flooding or the other impacts of climate change. Nor do they seem interested in seeking advice from loss adjusters or insurers, or in looking at what is happening overseas. Time and again, events have shown that just a small increase in the severity of a flood or storm event can generate multiple increases in the amount of damage, and this is likely to increase dramatically with climate change. Conversely a small increase in building resilience could have big and continuing savings in costs, not just to insurers but to society. Some more enlightened architects are starting to realise this.

In her recent book, Sue Roaf, an eminent professor of architecture, has along with colleagues, given an excellent, up to date, and comprehensive guide to social and environmental indicators, aimed at architects and their clients. She emphasises the importance of resilience as a key factor in sustainability, and discusses the implications of climate change and growing demands for the use of renewable energy. She also contrasts the approaches in England and Scotland on issues such as flooding and resilience, along with a consideration of insurance aspects.

As part of their sustainable development strategy, government is trying very hard to reduce the amount of waste which is sent to landfill, yet after a flood or storm, buildings are gutted and much of the fabric ends up in landfill. Sustainable development must include an element of resilience for it to be effective.

Meanwhile there is a distinct impression of complacency amongst those responsible for building regulations in England and Wales . Efforts seem to be concentrated on energy conservation and disabled access. These are "nice to have" but of little relevance if the building is going to be severely damaged whenever there is an extreme flood or storm.

A likely outcome of this type of complacency has already been seen in the USA and Australia . Insurance companies and mortgage lenders simply get together and produce their own set of building standards. A good example of this is the "Blue Book" in Australia . Originally produced by the Commonwealth Savings Bank of Australia , it is now used by most insurers and mortgage lenders in Australia and is regarded as the standard for new building and upgrading of residential cottage style property. The author understands that it is very hard to get a mortgage or insurance for such houses unless they have been constructed or upgraded to the Blue Book standards.

As a result, Government standards have become irrelevant to the construction industry for this type of housing: builders follow the Blue Book instead. Perhaps the insurance and mortgage lending industry should forget about lobbying the government for better standards, and get together with the National House Building Council to produce their own form of "Blue Book" for better flood and storm resilience?

«back to top«