While the investigation in to the Lacrosse fire found that the cause of the fire was due to an unextinguished cigarette on a balcony, the MFB also found that the external cladding used in the construction of the Lacrosse building had not been tested to comply with Australian Standards and contributed to the spread of the fire. The MFB had a sample of the panel from the Lacrosse building tested for non-combustibility at the CSIRO and it failed the test as required by the Australian Standards.

The VBA has written to all building surveyors, including municipal building surveyors, and commercial builders, domestic builders, architects and building designers asking to clarify the extent of the use of non-compliant cladding products.

A Class 2, 3 or 9 building of three or more storeys and a Class 5, 6, 7 or 8 building of four or more storeys are required by Volume One of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) to be of Type A construction and have external cladding that is non-combustible as specified in the BCA.

The non-compliant cladding used in the Lacrosse building is an aluminium composite panel known as Alucobest. It has been reported in the media that this product has been used as cladding on other buildings in Victoria over a number of years. If this or other non-compliant products have been used as cladding on buildings required to be of Type A construction then, in the event of a fire, it may present additional risk to the occupants of the building.

If you are aware that you have been involved in a project for the construction of a Class of building mentioned above, please review your files to determine the type of cladding used in these projects. If the cladding is Alucobest or any other non-compliant product, please notify the VBA as soon as possible with the details of the building including the address so that further analysis can be undertaken to ensure that there is no health or safety risk.

The Institute is working closely with Government and industry groups to understand the scope of this issue and determine what actions will be appropriate once it is known. As stated earlier, we see greater oversight of the role of the project manager in the construction cycle as one of the key mechanisms for ensuring compliance in procurement. We will continue to provide updates to members on this issue.