Search

This determination concerns the authority’s refusal to extend the specified intended life of a straw-bale house.  It considers whether the authority had the power to consent to the extension when written notice from the owner proposing to extend the life of the building was not received until after the previous specified life had expired.  The determination discusses the conditions on the consent and the reasons for the specified intended life, the form in which the authority may choose to give consent to extend that life, and the evidence available on the building’s performance.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to grant a building consent. The determination considers whether sufficient information was included in the building consent application.

Discussed as title and whether a comparison to the wharenui (marae buildings) exemption is appropriate. Also provides a general framework for modifications or waivers under section 67 of the Act, and methodology for deciding whether it is “reasonable” to grant a modification, for example, by reviewing the extent and possible consequence of the non-compliance with a specific performance clause, or reviewing for consistency with the purpose and principles of the Building Act.

This determination considers two houses damaged in the Canterbury earthquake sequence and whether the information provided in support of the building consent for the repair of the buildings was sufficient for the authority to be able to grant the consent.  

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to grant an amendment to the building consent for the substitution of one roofing membrane product for another. This determination also considers whether this substitution would have constituted a minor variation to the building consent.