Search

This determination involves a number of small structures constructed on a rural property without building consent first being obtained; it was the owners’ understanding that the building work was exempt under Schedule 1. The determination discusses whether the two shepherd’s huts are buildings, and the clauses of the Building Code that apply in respect of the pit latrine, a latrine with a chemical toilet, the showering shed and the water supply system.

Determination arose from repairs carried out as exempt building work by the Project Management Office as established by the Earthquake Commission, and whether the repaired concrete floor slab on ground subject to liquefaction and categorised as Foundation Technical Category 2 (TC2) complies with the Building Code. Discussed whether the work required building consent or was exempt under Schedule 1 (a) and whether the repair work constitutes a “substantial” replacement.

Discussed the definition of “owner” for the purposes of section 75 and whether a section 75 certificate was required. The applicant, an owner of two allotments and cross leaser of one allotment had a building consent suspended for not supplying a section 75 certificate for building work to extend across the three allotments. Also discussed whether ‘part of a building’ is included in the interpretation of ‘building’ where the building work enlarges the building over allotment boundaries.