Previous determinations

This determination considers the authority's purported refusal to grant a building consent for proposed building work because the authority did not agree with the importance level proposed by the structural engineer. The determination discusses whether the subject building should be classified as Importance Level 2 or Importance Level 3 as set out in Australian/New Zealand Standard 1170.0. This standard is referenced by Verification Method B1/VM1, which is a means of compliance with Building Code Clause B1 Structure.

This determination considers the authority's decision to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate for a new dwelling because it was not satisfied that the completed work complied with the Building Code. The compliance decision rested on the authority's view it was unable to accept producer statements from an engineer who had inspected the completed work; the statements are in respect of the verification of the ground bearing and the completion of a surface water soakage trench.

This determination considers the stability of an existing slope after a dwelling was built along the top edge of the slope. The application for determination was sought by an owner of a property down-hill of the slope who considered the slope was unstable because the house had been built on fill material.

The determination considers whether the foundations to the dwelling comply with Clause B1 Structure with respect to the provisions that apply to the protection of other property.

This determination considers the authority's decision to issue a code compliance certificate in respect of a mechanical ventilation system for the fitout of a restaurant; the extract from the restaurant's kitchen exits the building via existing exhaust ductwork, and other building occupants consider the kitchen’s exhaust discharge to be a nuisance.

The determination considers the compliance of the kitchen ventilation system as designed and as built, and the compliance of the existing exhaust ductwork and discharge point.

This determination considers the compliance of a washing machine with Clause G13 Foul water of the Building Code. The determination also considers the compliance of an instantaneous water heater without a safe tray with Clauses E3 Internal water and G12 Water supplies.

This determination considers whether some of the fixings in the subfloor framing to a house meet Building Code Clause B1 Structure. The house was built under a building consent in respect of work described in a national multiple-use approval issued under section 30F of the Act. The matters in dispute arise from the on-site substitution of galvanised rolled steel bearers that have a different profile to that described in the building consent, and the location of bolt fixings that connect the steel bearers to the timber piles.

This determination considers the compliance of a recently-completed eight-storey steel framed building. Specific aspects of the completed frame had been brought to the notice of the authority, and the authority also questioned work carried out that varied from the approved consent. The determination considers the compliance of these matters in respect of Building Code Clause B1 Structure

This determination considers whether galvanised steel bearers used in subfloor framing to four houses meet the required minimum 50-year durability period described in Building Code Clause B2.3.1(a). The building consents for the houses were in respect of work described in national multiple-use approvals issued under section 30F of the Act. The houses have been built and the authority has refused to issue the code compliance certificates for the as-built work because it is of the view the bearers do not comply with Clause B2 Durability.

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 an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 17-year-old house principally due to concerns about its compliance with Clause E2 External moisture.  The building owners had commissioned an assessment of the building’s performance which the authority had declined to accept.