The issues he identifies link closely to many of the findings and recommendations of this research.
Peter has identified an interesting contradiction between building construction controls, strata repair & maintenance obligations and what's good for strata corporations and strata owners. We've seen this in the Griffith University & NCCARF research we're doing on climate change impacts on strata buildings.
Building standards are [as you point out] mostly focused on structural integrity and human safety which don't necessarily equate to more durable and sustainable buildings. But, strata corporation's have never ending obligations to maintain and repair the buildings [regardless of cost] and when they deteriorate or are destroyed [usually by adverse weather] to replace them.
What strata corporations and strata owners ideally need are more durable, low maintenance and resilient buildings. But that's not happening at the development phase for many reasons and strata owners are reluctant to invest in improved building durability and sustainability. And, when the building is damaged and repaired using insurance proceeds, it's not usually possible to improve the structures since that's 'betterment' and not covered under most policies.
There have already been and are more changes coming to improve building sustainability but they are more focused on energy use than durability, they will take a while to filter into strata buildings and they won't address existing strata stock.
So, strata corporations and strata owners will likely continue to suffer the problem of long term obligations to maintain, repair and replace buildings that were designed to be strong and safe but not, necessarily, durable.
