Performance is not a dirty word

In NSW, planning and building requirements for new development on Bushfire Prone Land have been in force since 1989 with the release of Circular C10 Planning in Fire Prone Areas issued by the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning in 1989. This was followed by the first version of Planning for Bushfire Protection in 2001.

Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 (PBP 2006) was a significantly revised document on the back of a Joint Parliamentary Inquiry and over two years of deep industry engagement and workshops by the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) that resulted in the introduction of a range of updates including the option of acceptable solutions or performance based solutions.

PBP 2006 notes that:

Key features of the revised edition include the emphasis on a performance based approach to development through focusing on safer outcomes rather than simply meeting prescriptive requirements.

This approach to planning allows for considerable flexibility and innovation that links the bush fire hazard for a site with the implementation of appropriate bush fire protection measures.

Planning for Bushfire Protection 2019 (PBP 2019) continues the approach of acceptable solutions or performance based approaches (which is in keeping with the National Construction Code approach) with key instruction (PBP 2019 p. 12) of how to use PBP 2019 including:

Planning and PBP uses a performance based approach, and identifies objectives and detailed performance criteria to satisfy desired outcomes and meet the Aim and Objectives. Ultimately, any performance based approach must demonstrate that bush fire protection is afforded to a proposed development commensurate with the assessed level of bush fire risk and the characteristics of the occupants.

This can be achieved by either applying the identified acceptable solutions, or by preparing a performance based solution.

A performance based solution must be designed to achieve the appropriate level of protection by tailoring a package of measures which meet the intent and performance criteria relevant to the proposed development.

Understanding the difference between a Performance Solution and an Acceptable Solution is key when navigating PBP 2019 and the National Construction Code, especially when safety is at stake. PBP 2019 identifies objectives and detailed performance criteria to satisfy desired outcomes for Bushfire Protection Measures (BPM) which are at Figure 1. For each BPM in PBP 2019, a broad intent is outlined. The ensuing performance criteria and acceptable solutions are designed to ensure that the general intent for each BPM is met.

Bushfire Protection Measures – source Planning for Bushfire Protection 2019 p. 26

Performance criteria are the outcomes that need to be achieved to satisfy the intent. The performance criteria can be satisfied in one of the following ways:

  • acceptable solutions; or
  • performance based solution; or
  • the combination of the above (PBP 2019 p. 12).
NCC 2022 Governing Requirements A2G1

PBP 2019 (p. 12) does identify acceptable solutions which are considered by the NSW RFS as meeting the performance criteria. As such, the acceptable solution and performance go hand in hand when considering and demonstrating bushfire safety for new development in Bushfire Prone Areas.

The NCC provides four Assessment Methods and any combination can be used. These include:

  • Evidence of suitability
  • Comparison with the DTS Provisions
  • Verification Methods
  • Expert Judgement.

Assessment Methods are used when determining if a Performance Solution or Acceptable Solution/ Deemed-to-Satisfy (DTS) Solution complies with the relevant Performance Requirements.

Over recent years, there has been reluctance by the RFS to consider or accept performance based solutions from specialist bushfire consultants who are Bushfire Planning and Design (BPAD) level 3 practitioners and other specialists in their field including fire engineers, BCA experts, architects, ecologists and climatologists. A performance solution does not diminish the safety provided and specialists are required to document how a project meets the minimum safety standards.

Acceptable Solutions are prescriptive methods directly outlined in PBP 2019 or  NCC such as the Australian Standard for Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas 2018 (AS3959). They provide clear, step-by-step pathways to compliance, ensuring that planning and building designs or construction meet all code requirements. For many standard projects, these solutions are reliable and straightforward, guaranteeing a known pathway and safe outcome.

Performance Solutions, however, offer greater flexibility without compromising safety. They allow specialists to meet the Performance Requirements of the PBP 2019 or the NCC in innovative or non-traditional ways. The critical point is that a Performance Solution must demonstrate that it achieves the same level of safety and performance as the more prescriptive Acceptable Solution. This often involves modelling and calculations by BPAD level 3, risk based approaches or engaging fire engineers or other specialists, backed by thorough documentation, testing, or assessments, ensuring the safety outcome is never diminished.

Acceptable Solutions provide a rigid path to compliance which often does not reflect the bushfire risk for a site (i.e. small remnant patches of bushland or riparian areas), while Performance Solutions enable a risk based approach, innovation and flexibility—without sacrificing safety. This makes them ideal for complex or unique projects that require tailored approaches while still meeting the highest safety standards in PBP 2019.

Comments : Off
About the Author
Lew Short is a recognised expert in bushfire and emergency management, land-use planning, risk mitigation, consequence management, environment and the working of government.