Search

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to grant a building consent. The determination considers the authority's reasons for the refusal and whether sufficient information was included in the building consent application for the authority to be satisfied that the provisions of the Building Code would be met if the building work were properly completed in accordance with the plans and specifications under section 49 of the Building Act.

This determination considers the code compliance of a proposed steel-framed house that uses rigid foam insulation board to insulate the walls and roof: the house was the subject of an application for building consent.  The determination considers whether the insulation board satisfies certain clauses of the Building Code, and also whether the documents submitted in support of the application for building consent were adequate.

This determination considers the authority's decision to issue a notice to fix for a container arch structure that was constructed without building consent. The determination considers whether there was a contravention of section 40 of the Building Act 2004, which turns on whether the building work was exempt from the requirement for a building consent under clause 3A of Schedule 1. The determination also considers whether the owner is a specified person that has contravened the Building Act.

This determination considers the compliance of a domestic garage and driveway with Building Code Clause D1 Access routes, including whether their dimensions are appropriate for the intended use. It also considers whether the building consent authority was correct to grant the building consent and code compliance certificate, and whether a proposal to widen the garage doorway (from 2.31 m to 2.8 m) would result in compliance.

This determination considers whether a surface water drain complies with Building Code Clause E1 Surface water: the drain collects water from a roof and is connected to a kerb sump and not directly to a surface water drain.  The authority considers the connection to the sump was contrary to the means of compliance stated in the building consent, being the Acceptable Solution for Clause E1, and that approval should be sought for the work as a minor variation to the consent.

This determination considers the authority’s refusal to grant building consent for a house designed with modular units that are manufactured off-shore.  The design of the modular units was not supported by a MultiProof certificate at the time the application for building consent was made, but the authority maintained its refusal after a MultiProof certificate was issued.  The determination discusses the range of information available on which the authority could rely in making its decision.