Join the Fight! DIA advocacy for the Interior Design profession
Hundreds of Interior Designers from across Australia joined the fight for their expertise to be officially recognised by construction regulators at an emergency meeting held online last week.
The DIA called the meeting to collect evidence from the sector of the unique contribution Interior Designers make to projects in all building classes. This is now compiled into a comprehensive report detailing the competencies and experiences of designers that calls on the NSW Government to allow them to register as Design Practitioners and lodge regulated designs into the approvals system.
Prior to the introduction of the current building regulations many, if not the majority, of interiors projects were designed and led by Interior Designers. Some projects were designed by architects, some by building designers and the remainder by builders or others.
With the introduction of restrictions on which professions could lodge regulated designs, the share of that work that was legitimately being delivered by Interior Designers was effectively assigned to architects and building designers.
Interior Designers who work on Class 2 buildings are already experiencing losses.
[the reforms have] forced me to spend over 300K in [architect] salaries in 2023 alone, where once upon a time, it was a task I was able to do myself. I can no longer move an electrical point in a class 2 building, without incurring costs to my own firm and it also brings about an additional 10K to my clients for review and sign off of all sets now, not to mention blows out building programmes now as well, as we have to build in review times with architects at particular milestones.
As a profession Interior Designers are continuing to trade because similar restrictions have not yet been introduced to other building classes. If they are further restricted and unable to continue to provide the full range of their services it is not an overstatement to say that an entire profession will be rendered obsolete.
If Interior Designers are not registered with NSW Construct, it would be viewed by clients that there is an element of risk associated with the interior design industry as we are not 'registered'. Our ability to operate a business would be largely undermined.
For decades Interior Designers have been preparing the equivalent of regulated designs but the new approvals system does not accommodate them. The available workaround of engaging others to lodge regulated designs is creating complexities in a challenging insurance market and is unlikely to be sustainable.
Without registration I am unable to lodge my own drawings with the council which creates gaps in the process of working with my clients. This also limits my earning potential and can feel like a discredit to the honours degree that I hold. Particularly when others who do not hold a tertiary degree are able to do this. My designs are then passed onto builders and draftspeople to simply put their logo on to then lodge them under their business name.
Understandably, the sentiment expressed above is widely felt within the profession. The discrepancy between how their qualifications are viewed by government compared to those of others working in the construction sector who are permitted to lodge regulated designs is difficult to reconcile.
I teach into an Interior Design Honours Bachelors degree program. My graduates have 4 year degrees compatible with undergraduate architecture degrees…Notably, building designers…are allowed to be design practitioners with a one year Diploma. Why would the govt risk 'building work' being designed by a group of 'design practitioners' who do not have the requisite design skills of undergraduate architects when interior designers already do?
The new system has created an additional anomaly in the regulatory framework. Interior Designers are engaging trades on behalf of clients and supervising works. Those performing the construction work are all required to be licensed and to deliver the works as specified by the Interior Designer – an unregulated professional.
Interior Designers provide an important, albeit unrecognised, contribution to the quality assurance framework for buildings and construction in NSW.
Published investigations into construction defects in newer buildings regularly find materials substitution and failure to comply with fire safety systems standards. Many of these defects concealed within walls remain undiscovered until they are revealed by unrelated rectification work.
As Interior Designers are on site during construction to monitor the carrying out of their designs it is not uncommon for them to encounter non-compliance. This can include instances where unsafe practices would otherwise go unchecked and where incorrect or substituted installation would lead to latent defects not observable at final inspection. Their expertise in Australian standards and codes and understanding of construction methods means they are performing a de facto quality assurance role in the sector by routinely identifying and resolving problems on site.
We were engaged on a project which had already commenced without any consents. Live wires were left lying around and unsafe practises of demolition that impeded on the apartment below had commenced. We immediately stopped any further works on the site until such time that we had obtained the proper consent orders. We also insisted that the electrician be removed from the project and one that utilised safe work practises was engaged. This project was a full-scale disaster waiting to happen not just for the client but also for the neighbouring apartments. We not only mitigated the risk of danger and hazards we ensured that the project only continued with safe work practises.
These issues occur in a wide range of residential and commercial projects across all building classes.
It is very common in all facets of the Construction Industry for the contractors to attempt substitution of the specified materials with cheaper and often inferior materials.
Having a professional on site during construction to assess whether works are progressing as specified protects the interests of not only the client but also future occupants.
We are the gate keepers for our clients at keeping the poor quality builders and suppliers out.
A central aspect of the interior design discipline involves building a solution around the needs of the user. Interior Designers bring together an understanding how the space will be used by those particular clients and the relevant codes and standards, bounded by the constraints of the site and budget, to deliver functional and pleasing environments. They are working for the client and issue instructions to trades on behalf of the client.
Whilst working on a home (class 1) we were consistently advocating for our client to protect them from builder's variations that they were not entitled to. The risk to these clients was the constant pressure they received from the builders to pay extra costs. We were able to identify these costs (as we are fully versed in the documentation and process) and therefore able to show each time, that the client was not responsible for extra costs.
Construction and renovation projects in any class of building are a major expense. For homeowners, the most minor interiors project costs tens of thousands of dollars, and as most people will only embark on these projects infrequently they are usually at a knowledge disadvantage when making a significant investment.
CLASS 1- A major residential renovation in Sydney ran the risk of coming to a complete standstill as the builder had been lodging progress claims and then not paying the subbies. He then went on to charge exorbitantly and unreasonably for variations that were actually not variations at all but part of the original contract. We advocated and intervened on behalf of the client. Without our intervention and knowledge of construction and the contract the project would have stopped.
Our goal is for Interior Designers to be permitted to lodge regulated designs and make design compliance declarations.
The Interior Design qualifications and experience that the DIA is proposing would be the minimum required to achieve Design Practitioner status are sufficient to create compliant designs. Generally speaking, Interior Designers registered as Design Practitioners would be permitted to create designs for interior fitouts including coordination of structural, fire and waterproofing changes and all other consultant services.
The regulation framework covering the execution of designs is already in place, for example by specifying that wet areas work is completed by licensed waterproofing specialists. When completing design compliance declarations Interior Designers would include evidence of specialist input from, for example, a structural engineer, in the same way that other registered Design Practitioners or Principal Design Practitioners do.
The DIA wants Interior Designers to be recognised as professionals and given the authority to lodge regulated designs and make design compliance declarations because the sector demonstrates that:
Interior Designers augment the quality assurance framework for buildings and construction
It is common practice for trades to substitute specified materials and alter plans
All projects require Interior Designers to apply their deep knowledge of Australian standards and building codes
Clients need advocates who understand construction
Interior Designers are qualified to lead interiors projects
Clients for projects in all building classes enjoy better outcomes when they use Interior Designers
Interior Designers have different expertise to architects and building designers
The reforms are unreasonably restricting legitimate trade
In summary, the expertise that Interior Designers bring in understanding how different standards and codes come together in a project, together with their understanding of client needs, means they are better placed than any other individual working on an interiors project to deliver quality outcomes, which is the primary aim of the building reforms. This contribution should be recognised and accounted for in the regulatory and broader quality assurance frameworks for buildings and construction.
If the profession continues to be restricted without avenues for registration their unique contribution to the quality assurance framework will also be lost. Surely this is counter to the aims of building reform.
Written by
Denise Ryan
Senior Policy Advisor