Search

Note: This determination is subject to clarification.

This determination discusses the assessment required under section 115 when there is a change of use to only part of a building, particularly in respect of Building Code clause B1 Structure and whether a detailed seismic assessment is required for the whole building.

The decisions in this determination were confirmed on appeal to the District Court. See: Beattie v Far North District Council (District Court, Whangarei, Judge de Ridder, 26 November 2010, CIV-2010-088-000109). Appeal judgment [PDF 1.74 MB, 8 pages]

This determination considers whether a section of a residential pool barrier located on a property boundary complies with Building Code Clause F9.3.1. The determination looks at whether the barrier in combination with an automatic pool cover can comply as an alternative solution.

This determination considers an authority’s decision to refuse to grant an application for a building consent for the construction of a new dwelling. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for the refusal, and whether the proposed timber piled foundation design complies with Building Code Clause B1 Structure.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to issue a notice to fix for three modified shipping containers transported to site and joined together to form a shed. The determination considers the definition of "building" and "building work", and discusses the content of the notice to fix.

This determination relates to the construction of a new residential building. The determination considers three matters: the issue of a building consent, whether the authority failed to exercise a power of decision to issue a notice to fix, and compliance with Clause B1 Structure of proposed remedial building work.

This determination considers whether part of a proposed pool barrier on a property boundary complies with Building Code Clause F9 – Means of restricting access to residential pools. The barrier consists of a 1.2m high timber fence on top of an existing retaining wall.

This determination is concerned with the compliance of 19-year-old additions and alterations to a house. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate and whether the building work complies with the requirements of the Building Code.

This determination considers an authority’s purported refusal to grant a building consent for a proposed skillion roof design on an extension to an existing dwelling. The roof design is intended to comply with E2.3.5 by way of acceptable solution E2/AS1 for ventilation to this roof space.