Previous determinations

This determination concerns the refusal to issue a building consent for alterations to an existing supermarket building because it was believed the proposed work did not comply with the fire safety clauses of the Building Code. The determination considers the requirements of the legislation as it applies to the alteration. The fire engineer initially used a verification method to show compliance, and the determination discusses what this method requires.

This determination considers whether signage is required between the common corridor and guest suites in a hotel in order to satisfy Clause F8 of the Building Code. The determination discusses the risks of the doors being wedged open and whether this constitutes a potential hazard.

This determination considers the requirements under section 116A with respect to fire rating of an inter-tenancy wall. The determination discusses the relationship between the Building Act, the Resource Management Act and the Unit Titles Act in respect of unit title developments and subdivision.

Regarding the installation of a lift without building consent, and a request to remove the compliance schedule, for a multi-unit residential building.

This determination discusses the application of sections 17 and 112 in respect of an alteration to an existing building that has the effect of creating a larger firecell, and the Building Code obligations that are triggered by the increase in size. Also discussed is the fire service intervention time.

N/A

Discussed whether a multi-unit dwelling had adequate fire safety features for the three residential units in the same dwelling, and whether the building was dangerous under section 121 (1)(b) of the Act. Discussed “occupancy” and whether a “change of use” had occurred. Also considered whether the building complied with the Building Code and the threshold at which at a building may be considered “dangerous” when it does not comply.

An appeal was lodged against this determination.

The dispute turned on which Acceptable Solution (C/AS1 or C/AS2) applied to the proposed building work, depending on whether it fell within Risk Group SH or SM. Discussed the relationship between Uses as defined in the Regulations, Risk Groups in the Acceptable Solutions and Classified Uses in the Act. Also discussed “intended use”, and the Risk Groups in relation to household units located above car parks.