Search

This determination considers whether the building consent should have been issued subject to a section 73 condition, which requires notification of a natural hazard to be placed on the land title. The determination considers whether the land is subject to a natural hazard, and whether the building work was a ‘major alteration’. 

This determination considers the authority's refusal to issue the code compliance certificate for a substantial addition to an existing studio building. The refusal arose from matters related to Building Code Clauses D1, E2, E3, and F4, but the principle issue was an ongoing dispute about the water from neighbouring properties and a small drain that has been installed to divert some of this water. The determination considers whether the drain formed part of the consented work or not.

Discussed whether the building work complied with the Building Code current at the time the consent was issued and whether a code compliance certificate should be issued. Also discussed maintenance to external envelope to ensure it protects the underlying structure for the minimum required life of 50 years, and the modification of durability periods.

Explanatory note This determination contained an error when it was issued on 26 June 2019. At Paragraph 5.6.6 it read, “I note here the torch-on-membrane, which the authority issued a building consent for (refer paragraph 4.5.1), is permitted within the Acceptable Solution as a capping material to parapets". To provide clarity paragraph 5.6.6 is now to be read as follows, “I note here metal, butyl or EPDM membranes are the materials specified in the Acceptable Solution as capping materials to parapets. The authority issued a building consent (refer paragraph 3.7) for the torch on membrane, which established that the authority was satisfied with the compliance of that material as a weathertightness system."This determination considers the compliance of parapet and post...

This determination considers an authority’s decision to issue three successive notices to fix relating to whether a house has undergone a change of use in contravention of sections 114 and 115 of the Building Act. This determination also considers whether the owner has carried out building work on a garage without first obtaining a building consent in contravention of section 40.

This determination considers the authority’s decision to refuse to issue a building consent for alterations to an existing earthquake-prone building.  The alterations were for an internal fitout on the ground floor of the three-storey commercial building.  The determination considers the authority’s policy on earthquake-prone buildings in relation to the proposed work, and some matters in relation to the policy itself.  Detailed discussion on the policy will follow in a further determination. 

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to grant a building consent for the construction of a relocatable building. This determination considers the documentation requirements for a building consent application and reasons given by the authority when refusing the building consent.