Temporary Fencing Requirements in New Zealand
Temporary fencing requirements in New Zealand are not controlled by one simple “temporary fencing standard”. For most construction, demolition, civil, infrastructure, residential, and event-related work sites, the requirement comes from a combination of the Building Code, the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, WorkSafe guidance, manufacturer requirements, council conditions, traffic-management requirements, and the project’s own risk assessment.
The practical question is not only:
“Does the law specifically say I must install temporary fencing?”
The better question is:
“Can workers, visitors, children, pedestrians, vehicles, neighbours, or the public be exposed to harm if the site is not physically separated from them?”
Where the answer is yes, temporary fencing is usually the safest and most defensible control because it creates a clear physical boundary between people and hazards.
Summary
In New Zealand, a PCBU must manage health and safety risks so far as is reasonably practicable. WorkSafe explains that risks must be eliminated where reasonably practicable, and if they cannot be eliminated, they must be minimised so far as reasonably practicable. WorkSafe also states that PCBUs must achieve the highest protection reasonably practicable in the circumstances.
For construction and demolition work, Building Code Clause F5 is directly relevant. MBIE describes Clause F5 as providing protection for people and property during construction and demolition. It specifically refers to preventing unauthorised entry of children to site hazards, requiring barriers to restrict public access, and providing safe routes.
Where construction or demolition work presents a hazard in places the public can access, NZBC F5.3.2 requires barriers. Those barriers must be suitable to prevent site hazards harming traffic or passers-by, be difficult to climb, avoid unapproved openings, avoid gates or doors projecting beyond the site, avoid hazardous projections, and be clearly marked where the barrier itself may create a hazard.
On many sites, it is a core risk-control measure. Importantly though, the main requirement is via risk assessment conducted by the PCBU. It’s up to you to decide what controls are implemented to protect your workers and the public from the onsite risks.
In 1990, Heras produced the first anti-climb steel wire mesh temporary fence, the M90. In Australia and New Zealand the term ‘Heras Fencing’ is often used generically for this style of panel: roughly 2.1 m high, welded anti-climb mesh, tubular steel frame, loose feet/blocks, and top clamps. Heras-style anti-climb mesh panels are the most common temporary fencing system used on New Zealand construction and civil sites. They are widely preferred because they are quick to install, difficult to climb, visually permeable, reusable, and compatible with standard feet, clamps, gates, stays, and scrim. More can be seen on our product page for Temporary Fencing.
The legal framework
1. Health and Safety at Work Act 2015
The Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA) is New Zealand’s primary workplace health and safety law. Under HSWA, a PCBU must ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers and that the health and safety of other people is not put at risk from work carried out by the business or undertaking.
This matters for temporary fencing because “other people” can include pedestrians, visitors, neighbours, delivery drivers, subcontractors, clients, children, and members of the public passing near the site.
HSWA also requires a PCBU that manages or controls a workplace to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, that the workplace, the means of entering and exiting the workplace, and anything arising from the workplace are without risks to the health and safety of any person.
HSWA also makes clear that duties cannot simply be transferred to another party. More than one person can hold the same duty at the same time, and each duty holder remains responsible to the extent they can influence or control the matter. PCBUs with overlapping duties must consult, co-operate, and co-ordinate activities with each other so far as reasonably practicable.
That means a main contractor, subcontractor, client, fencing supplier, installer, civil contractor, traffic-management contractor, and event organiser may all have overlapping duties depending on the site arrangement.
2. Building Code Clause F5: Construction and Demolition Hazards
Building Code Clause F5 is one of the clearest sources for physical site barriers in New Zealand.
Clause F5 is concerned with construction and demolition hazards. Its objective is to safeguard people from injury and protect other property from damage caused by construction or demolition site hazards. The functional requirement includes avoiding the likelihood of objects falling onto people or property, hazards arising on site affecting people off site, and unauthorised entry of children to site hazards.
For public-facing sites, F5.3.2 is critical. Where construction or demolition work presents a hazard in places to which the public has access, barriers must be provided. Those barriers need to be suitable for the risk, difficult to climb, controlled at openings, non-hazardous to traffic and pedestrians, and clearly marked where necessary.
F5/AS1 provides design solutions for work-site barriers, fences, hoardings, water-hazard fences, gantries, and toeboards. MBIE states that F5/AS1 gives a design solution for work-site barriers, fences, and hoardings and provides acceptable barrier options for different site conditions.
This is important because not every site only needs mesh temporary fencing. Some sites may require:
| Site condition | Likely control |
|---|---|
| Low-risk internal site area | temporary fencing, cones, delineation, signage |
| Public footpath interface | temporary fencing or hoarding, controlled gates, signage |
| Falling-object risk | hoarding, gantry, exclusion zone, overhead protection |
| Excavation or water hazard | secure fencing, covers, warning signs, lighting |
| Demolition beside public access | hoarding, gantry, fencing, traffic control |
| High pedestrian area | stronger barriers, hoarding, managed access |
| School / childcare proximity | higher child-access controls |
| Exposed site with scrim | additional bracing, wind review, inspection regime |
F5/AS1 also states that the need for barriers depends mainly on site location, with greater need in areas with high pedestrian traffic than in industrial or rural areas. It lists hazard-evaluation factors including pedestrian counts, nearby car parking, neighbouring buildings, neighbouring work sites or recreation areas, proximity to schools or early childhood centres, proximity to housing, water-hazard depth, how long water will be present, and the accessibility and visibility of the site.
That is effectively a risk assessment.
3. WorkSafe guidance
WorkSafe’s construction resources are intended to help the construction sector manage work health and safety risks.
WorkSafe’s excavation guidance is useful because it explains the same risk-management logic that applies to site fencing. WorkSafe says a PCBU that manages or controls a workplace must ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, that the workplace, the means of entering and exiting, and anything arising from the workplace are without health and safety risks to any person. It gives the example that before leaving a site unattended overnight, the site and any plant and equipment should be safe and secure.
WorkSafe also identifies the need to prevent people and materials falling into excavations using barriers strong enough not to collapse if someone falls against them.
For excavation work, WorkSafe says a safe system of work should include assigned responsibilities, task analysis, consultation with a competent person regarding temporary works design where relevant, hazard and risk identification, a risk assessment, how risks will be controlled, how controls will be implemented, monitored and reviewed, accident investigation and reporting methods, and emergency procedures.
That same structure should be used for temporary fencing decisions.
Temporary fencing is not the only option
The correct control depends on the site risk.
Available controls include:
- temporary mesh fencing
- construction barriers
- solid hoarding
- water-filled barriers
- concrete barriers
- pedestrian barriers
- crowd-control barriers
- trench covers
- hole covers
- edge protection
- warning signs
- night lighting
- traffic management
- spotters or gatemen
- exclusion zones
- locked storage
- site cameras or security patrols
- gantries for overhead protection
- council-approved footpath closures or pedestrian diversions
However, where the risk is unauthorised public access, child access, exposed construction hazards, demolition hazards, or after-hours site security, fencing is normally the strongest practical control because it is physical, visible, passive, and continuous.
Impact of the new Health and Safety at Work Amendment legislation
As at 3 July 2026, WorkSafe states that the Government has passed the Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill and that it is awaiting formal sign-off by the Governor-General. WorkSafe says the amendments come into effect on 1 April 2027.
WorkSafe describes the legislation as designed to help businesses focus on critical risks that can result in death, serious injury, or illness. WorkSafe also states it will release guidance, training, and support materials before implementation to help businesses, workers, and other duty holders understand and apply the changes.
The Government’s release says the reforms introduce a stronger focus on critical risks, strengthen Approved Codes of Practice, sharpen WorkSafe’s focus on critical risks and practical support, reduce duplication with other regulatory systems, and clarify serious-incident reporting. The changes are stated to come into force on 1 April 2027.
For temporary fencing, the practical effect is likely to be this:
| Change | Likely impact on temporary fencing decisions |
|---|---|
| Greater focus on critical risks | Public access to construction hazards, falls into excavations, vehicle interfaces, and demolition hazards remain serious risks |
| More emphasis on proportionality | Low-risk sites may justify lighter controls, but higher-risk public-interface sites will need stronger controls |
| Clearer practical guidance | PCBUs should monitor WorkSafe guidance before April 2027 |
| Stronger role for ACOPs | Where relevant codes or guidance apply, following them may become more important evidence of compliance |
| Less compliance for its own sake | Documentation should focus on real risks and actual controls, not paperwork alone |
The new legislation should not be read as reducing the need for temporary fencing. It is better understood as pushing PCBUs to focus on the risks that can cause serious harm. Public access to active construction sites, excavations, demolition zones, mobile plant, and unsecured after-hours hazards fits squarely within that logic.
A PCBU should be able to explain:
- what hazards were identified
- who could be harmed
- whether the public or children could access the site
- what controls were considered
- why fencing, hoarding, barriers, signage, or other controls were selected
- how the fence will be installed
- how gates will be controlled
- how wind, scrim, and bracing were assessed
- how the controls will be inspected and maintained
- when controls will be reviewed
Recommended position
For most construction, civil, demolition, and event sites where the public could access hazards, temporary fencing should be treated as the default control unless the PCBU can clearly justify an alternative.
That position is consistent with:
- HSWA’s requirement to eliminate or minimise risks so far as reasonably practicable
- the PCBU’s primary duty of care
- the duty to manage and control the workplace
- worker engagement and participation duties
- Building Code F5’s focus on public protection, barriers, and child access
- WorkSafe’s risk-management approach
- the incoming 2027 focus on critical risks
Temporary fencing is not automatically sufficient by itself. It must be correctly selected, installed, braced, inspected, and maintained. But where public access, children, excavations, demolition, mobile plant, falling-object risk, or after-hours exposure exists, fencing is usually the safest and most defensible starting point.
Written by Joseph Knights, BE(Hons) Civil, drawing on civil construction, site-delivery, temporary fencing, site-security, and health and safety risk-management experience in New Zealand.
This guide provides general technical information only. It is not legal advice, site-specific engineering design, temporary works design, or a substitute for manufacturer requirements, project-specific risk assessment, territorial authority requirements, or PCBU duties under New Zealand health and safety legislation.