Previous determinations

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 weatherboard cladding to a house complies with Clauses E2 External moisture and B2 Durability. The vertical weatherboards were installed over a cavity but double-nailed. The authority refused to issue the code compliance certificate because of the double-nailing.

This determination considers the compliance of consented work for the relocation of an existing building onto a new site and alterations to the building.  The authority refused to issue the code compliance certificate for the work because of concerns over the performance of a membrane roof to a new extension built as part of the relocation consent. 

This determination considers the authority’s decision to issue a building consent that was issued in error. A building consent was granted for building work that had already been completed or was near completion when the consent was issued. 

This determination considers the use of glue-laminated timber as framing to the walls and roof trusses of a house.  The glue-laminated framing was substituted during construction for solid timber described in the approved building consent without approval being sought.  The determination considers the compliance of the glue-laminated framing and whether the substitution could be considered a minor variation to the approved consent.

This determination considers the level of sound attenuation to a wall between two units in an apartment building.  The level of sound attenuation is less than that required in the relevant Verification Method for Clause G6 Airborne and impact sound of the Building Code.

This determination considers the compliance of proposed carpet flooring to a laundry space within an attached garage. The authority refused to issue the building consent for the proposal because of concerns the use of carpet in a laundry does not prevent water from penetrating behind linings, and does not avoid the likelihood of fungal growth or the accumulation of contaminants.

This determination considers the compliance of a proposed pool barrier with Clause F9 – Means of restricting access to residential pools of the Building Code. The determination considers whether the area enclosed by the proposed pool barrier should be included within the immediate pool area.

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for 18-year-old additions and alterations to an existing house.  The cladding had been changed from what was consented and the changed cladding had also been applied to the remainder of the existing building.  The determination considers the authority’s reasons for the refusal and whether the items identified by the authority are compliant with the Building Code.

Note: This determination is subject to clarification

This determination considers the lifting of an insanitary building notice and whether the building in its current state is insanitary or dangerous.  The determination also considers whether two building consents should have been granted subject to notification of the natural hazard inundation, and whether a notice to rectify should have been for building work that was not compliant with the Building Code and for building work carried out without building consent.