Shiny, Renovated—and Still Contained Asbestos

A building that did not look like an asbestos risk

A recent asbestos demolition survey took me into a high-end European vehicle dealership. It was exactly what you would expect from a luxury brand: polished floors, modern lighting, immaculate wall finishes and a clean, upmarket presentation.

At first glance, it did not look like a building where asbestos would be found. Most of the visible materials appeared relatively new, and the premises had undergone previous renovations.

That led to a reasonable question: why was an asbestos demolition survey necessary at all?

The answer became clear during the inspection. Although most of the dealership had been modernised, not every part of the original building had been replaced.

The survey was a legal requirement

The building was constructed during the 1990s and was being prepared for demolition. Its polished appearance and previous renovations did not remove the legal requirement to identify asbestos before demolition work began.

Under New Zealand’s Health and Safety at Work (Asbestos) Regulations 2016, asbestos must be identified before demolition begins in a workplace building constructed before 1 January 2000. WorkSafe’s current guidance states that anyone carrying out demolition or refurbishment work must commission an asbestos survey before the work starts.

The survey was therefore not an optional precaution and it did not become necessary only because asbestos was eventually found. It was required from the outset because of the building’s age and the proposed demolition work.

Renovation can make a building look completely different without removing every original material. New plasterboard, paint, ceilings, flooring and decorative finishes may be installed while isolated sections of older building material remain in place.

Two walls among an otherwise modern interior

In the rear staffroom, I identified an older fibre-cement wall lining that was visibly different from the surrounding modern materials. A representative sample was collected and submitted for laboratory analysis.

A second section of fibre-cement wall lining was identified elsewhere in the building. This was limited to a single wall in a hallway leading towards the toilets. The other walls around it were plasterboard.

This was not a building filled with obvious asbestos materials. The suspect material was confined to two isolated walls within a much larger, modern-looking dealership.

Laboratory analysis confirmed that both fibre-cement wall linings contained asbestos.

Why isolated materials are easily overlooked

Buildings are rarely made from materials installed during only one period. They evolve through extensions, repairs, alterations, tenancy changes and partial renovations.

One room may have been completely stripped and relined, while an adjoining wall was left untouched. A hallway may look uniform after painting even though different wall-lining products remain beneath the surface. Two walls that appear similar from a distance may have been installed years apart and be made from entirely different materials.

In this case, most of the walls were modern plasterboard. However, two retained fibre-cement walls remained within the proposed demolition area. Their limited extent did not make them unimportant.

If a survey had been based on the building’s polished appearance or renovation history, those walls could easily have been missed.

What if demolition had proceeded without the survey?

Proceeding with demolition without first completing the required asbestos survey would have breached New Zealand’s asbestos requirements.

It would also have placed workers at risk. If the two asbestos-containing walls had not been identified, they could have been broken apart using ordinary demolition methods. That could have released asbestos fibres and contaminated workers, equipment, surrounding areas and demolition waste.

The discovery of previously unidentified asbestos during demolition would also have required work to stop while the material was assessed, tested and removed under appropriate controls. That can cause delays, additional costs and disruption that should have been planned for before demolition began.

The survey allowed the asbestos to be identified in advance, included in the demolition planning and removed appropriately before the walls were disturbed.

The survey was required regardless of the result

An asbestos demolition survey is not justified only when it returns a positive result. For this pre-2000 commercial building, the survey was required before demolition could lawfully begin whether it identified extensive asbestos, two isolated materials or no asbestos at all.

The purpose of the survey was to locate asbestos-containing materials within the proposed demolition area so they could be dealt with before ordinary demolition work commenced.

In this case, the findings were limited to two isolated fibre-cement walls within a much larger, predominantly modern interior. That did not make the findings insignificant. It demonstrated how small sections of original material can remain hidden among newer finishes.

The dealership looked new, clean and highly renovated—but the survey confirmed that appearance alone could not establish that the building was asbestos-free.

Planning demolition or refurbishment?

If a building was constructed or renovated before 1 January 2000, its appearance should never be used as evidence that it is asbestos-free.

Asbestos Safe Consultancy provides independent asbestos demolition and refurbishment surveys across Hawke’s Bay, Gisborne, Taupō and the Manawatū. We identify suspect materials, arrange laboratory analysis and provide clear reporting so asbestos can be dealt with before work begins.

If you are planning demolition or refurbishment work, contact Asbestos Safe Consultancy to discuss the appropriate survey for your project.