Previous determinations

This determination concerns the compliance of a 24-year-old townhouse. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate and whether the townhouse complies with the requirements of the Building Code.

This determination concerns the compliance of a 13 year old house with monolithic cladding. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate, and whether the house complies with the requirements of the Building Code.

This determination concerns an insanitary building notice issued for a dwelling without potable water supplies or sanitary facilities and where the cladding was left incomplete for 10 years. The determination discusses who the notice should have been issued to, the remedies provided for in the notice, and whether the building is insanitary and on what grounds.

This determination considered the detailing of the window and the surfaces required to comply with Clauses E3.3.2 and E3.4.5 of the Building Code, and the compliance of the window as a whole with Clause E3.3.6.

This determination concerns two notices to fix: one issued in relation to foundations and flooring constructed for a shed without building consent and the other for work to reclad a relocated house. The determination discusses the scope of the building work covered by the building consent for the relocated house, the extent of compliance required by the Act, and whether the building work complies.

This determination is concerned with the compliance of repairs proposed to the external building envelope and considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to grant an amendment to the building consent. The determination also considers the authority’s refusal to issue the code compliance certificate.

This determination concerns the retro-fitting of blown mineral fibre insulation into an existing house and the authority’s decision to refuse to grant building consent.  The determination considers the grounds for the authority’s decision, and whether there are now reasonable grounds to be satisfied that the building after the alterations will comply with the Building Code to the extent required by section 112 of the Act.

This determination considers the compliance of space saver stairs to a mezzanine level in a house. The determination discusses how the intended use of the mezzanine level will affect the Acceptable Solution design requirements, and whether the stairs comply with Clause D1 as an alternative solution.

This determination was sought by the authority in regards to whether a notice to fix was correctly issued to the designer as a specified person, and whether the sprinkler system is a specified system for the purpose of the compliance schedule and building warrant of fitness.  The determination also considers the compliance of particular features of the building, and discusses the various contraventions listed in the notice to fix.

This determinatino considers whether an accessible route is required for a deep water pool that is part of a public swimming pool facilties. The determination discusses the requirement for an accessible route, both in terms of the deep water pool only and also in terms of it being one of a number of pools within the facility, and the normal activities carried out in those pools.