Issues with district plan compliance

Forums › Home Workshop DIY › Issues with district plan compliance

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#278507 20-Oct-2020 11:56

Just after some non-legal opinions or war stories.

Our neighbour has started construction of a 2 storey 400m2 shed (yes 400m2). It's about 5m from the boundary.

The council are saying it meets the district plan while I think it violates several rules including the height plane. The council aren't being very helpful at the moment.

Has anybody ever had any similar issues with their council and or district plan?

As construction has already started I don't know whether anything can be done.

1 | 2

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#2588260 20-Oct-2020 12:12

Can you prove it violates the height plane?

Mike

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2588263 20-Oct-2020 12:14

MikeAqua:
Can you prove it violates the height plane?

Yes, I've done the math

Bung

6489 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2588278 20-Oct-2020 12:42

If you can't approach the neighbour's directly you could always approach the council.

"Building Consent: if a person is doing a building project, its highly likely this required a building consent. A building consent is a public record and will include plans and specification details; as a public document you can request to see this. The plans will show you exactly what is being built, where, materials and what it will look like. There may however be administration charges associated with obtaining a copy of the building consent documents."

A group of people on Mt Vic Wellington could see that an apartment block was going higher than the plans and managed to get the roofline lowered so never too late.

BlinkyBill

1443 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2588286 20-Oct-2020 12:51

If it violates the rules, then there should have been a notification and an opportunity to submit and objection to building consent (in general - you haven’t specified which district it is). The council could well have issued a non-compliant building consent.

However, it is likely that the council has followed a process and issued a consent after an assessment of the plans, tested against their district plan. You may have done the maths but they are professionals, and they know the rules.

If you can genuinely prove that the building consent has been issued incorrectly, then you can make an appeal to the council and stop building.

Lastly, if it is compliant to the rules then there’s nothing you can do just because you don’t like it.

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2588287 20-Oct-2020 12:52

Bung: If you can't approach the neighbour's directly you could always approach the council.

"Building Consent: if a person is doing a building project, its highly likely this required a building consent. A building consent is a public record and will include plans and specification details; as a public document you can request to see this. The plans will show you exactly what is being built, where, materials and what it will look like. There may however be administration charges associated with obtaining a copy of the building consent documents."

A group of people on Mt Vic Wellington could see that an apartment block was going higher than the plans and managed to get the roofline lowered so never too late.

Thanks, this is good to know. I already have the plans from the council so know the final dimensions. Cheers for the reply.

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2588291 20-Oct-2020 13:01

BlinkyBill:

If it violates the rules, then there should have been a notification and an opportunity to submit and objection to building consent (in general - you haven’t specified which district it is). The council could well have issued a non-compliant building consent.

However, it is likely that the council has followed a process and issued a consent after an assessment of the plans, tested against their district plan. You may have done the maths but they are professionals, and they know the rules.

If you can genuinely prove that the building consent has been issued incorrectly, then you can make an appeal to the council and stop building.

Lastly, if it is compliant to the rules then there’s nothing you can do just because you don’t like it.

Good to know. They havent mentioned non-compliant consent. They did say it didnt require resource consent (becuase it didnt breach the DP) so thus no need for notification.

I have an civil engineering/surveying background so Im pretty confident in my measuring/math skills.

wellygary

8329 posts

Uber Geek

#2588345 20-Oct-2020 13:38

A 400m shed tends to imply you have pretty big section sizes, - so I'm presuming its potentially rural....

Are you sure the regression plans are standard??

Where are you?

My math says 5 metres from the boundary + 2.5 fence height gives him 7.5m to play with.... but some councils exclude things like gable ends etc, so its gets murky....

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2588359 20-Oct-2020 13:53

wellygary:

A 400m shed tends to imply you have pretty big section sizes, - so I'm presuming its potentially rural....

Are you sure the regression plans are standard??

Where are you?

My math says 5 metres from the boundary + 2.5 fence height gives him 7.5m to play with.... but some councils exclude things like gable ends etc, so its gets murky....

@wellgary its Upper Hutt. It is residential (and zoned as such on the DP) but you are correct, the sections are big.

The structure is 7.8m high (without the roof) and the ground its on is roughly 2m higher than 1.9m fence on the boundary. So its at least 10m higher than the top of the fence line.

Because of the way its facing it falls into the 35 degree height control plane.

wellygary

8329 posts

Uber Geek

#2588387 20-Oct-2020 14:21

tchart:

wellygary:

A 400m shed tends to imply you have pretty big section sizes, - so I'm presuming its potentially rural....

Are you sure the regression plans are standard??

Where are you?

My math says 5 metres from the boundary + 2.5 fence height gives him 7.5m to play with.... but some councils exclude things like gable ends etc, so its gets murky....

@wellgary its Upper Hutt. It is residential (and zoned as such on the DP) but you are correct, the sections are big.

The structure is 7.8m high (without the roof) and the ground its on is roughly 2m higher than 1.9m fence on the boundary. So its at least 10m higher than the top of the fence line.

Because of the way its facing it falls into the 35 degree height control plane.

You are going to need to find a lawyer who is up to date with "Aitchison"

The issues about "ground level" is exactly the topic of this......

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/wellington-city-council-loses-appeal-over-meaning-of-ground-level-in-case-of-view-blocking-fence-in-roseneath/IKZ7T72TWSIF4CRLRUOWZOP6RY/

Edit: On reflection, there needs to be a wall near the boundary for Aitcheson to be in play,

if the land just slopes up, you will probably need to argue it has a "more that minor" impact....

BlinkyBill

1443 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2589467 20-Oct-2020 18:26

That case in Roseneath was shocking on behalf of the dickhead who built the fence, and also the council didn’t cover themselves with glory in terms of doing their job properly. With no facts to base it on, I think they took the court case on ground levels to cover their arse and prevent precedents for future actions relating to slackness. Wellington City Council and many others are really poor when it comes to common sense and doing more than simple tick-the-boxes management of the District Plan.

Slight rant there haha, but it annoyed me hugely when my next door neighbour built a compliant monstrosity next to me that completely ruined the vibe of the cul-de-sac I live in. The council wouldn’t engage with that at all.

To the OP, a 400m2 double story shed in a residential area? Is the usage of the shed compliant - that sounds like it might be a commercial or semi-commercial intent, and that might be non-compliant in and of itself.

wellygary

8329 posts

Uber Geek

#2589523 20-Oct-2020 21:00

BlinkyBill:

Slight rant there haha, but it annoyed me hugely when my next door neighbour built a compliant monstrosity next to me that completely ruined the vibe of the cul-de-sac I live in.

Is that you Dennis? :)

WinNZ90

196 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2589533 20-Oct-2020 21:06

Hi I have found this thread to be extremely interesting since I am currently studying Construction Management and Building Consent is what I am tackling this trimester.

I have read the District Plan that the Council has online and some other information that the council provides. Now there is an update from April this year that says a height of a building in a Medium Density Residential Activity Area, the height of a building is allowed to be up to 10 metres plus 1 more metre for a roofline so 11 metres off the ground in total.

You said that it is sitting around 5 metres off the boundary line, the minimum is 1.5 and from a building on an adjoining property wall is 3 metres, so the “neighbour” is covered there.

Though I have noticed that in the district plan dating 2004, that the ground level is taken into account, so if the boundary line was 2.7 metres lower than the base of the building, that allowed for another 2.7 metres and then whatever the roofline height was after that depending on an angle of 45 degrees from the top of the 2.7 metre height off the boundary line.

You have said that the fence is 1.9 metres high and the land is about 2 metres high from the bottom of the fence which would be the boundary line, so in my opinion he would not be allowed to build higher than 9 metres and that includes the height of that roof.

Unfortunately I have also found that if your in a Suburban Mixed Use Activity Area, the “neighbour” is allow to build up to a 4 storey building. But by the sounds your not in a Suburban Mixed Use Activity Area.

And I am afraid it just gets worse from there, as of the 31st August 2020 the updated the building consent process...

“From 31 August 2020, additional building consent exemptions have been added to the Building Act. Building consents are no longer be needed for a number of new or expanded types of low-risk building work, like sleep-outs, sheds, carports, outdoor fireplaces and ground-mounted solar panels.

The new exemptions will save building owners time and money, by not having to go to their local council for consent for common building projects. This reduction in building consents will also allow Councils to focus on building work that is higher-risk, helping to boost productivity.”

So yes he might have been able to get it built without needing consent so long as he is having it built to code, he can build it.

BUT

My understanding of the building code, the change in August is only for one storey buildings.

If he is going to have two floors and its not just a shed that stands two storeys high, it is not exempt and it’s especially not if its going to have its own sanitation area since that would class it as a second dwelling.

Hope I have not rained on you to much, I do hope this information helps

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2589575 20-Oct-2020 21:16

BlinkyBill:

To the OP, a 400m2 double story shed in a residential area? Is the usage of the shed compliant - that sounds like it might be a commercial or semi-commercial intent, and that might be non-compliant in and of itself.

That is one of the issues we have brought up.

WinNZ90

196 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2589576 20-Oct-2020 21:16

Also if you believe that consent has been given and it does break consent, you can follow up with the regional council or go right to the top and make a formal compliant to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

tchart

2380 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2589579 20-Oct-2020 21:23

WinNZ90:

And I am afraid it just gets worse from there, as of the 31st August 2020 the updated the building consent process...

“From 31 August 2020, additional building consent exemptions have been added to the Building Act. Building consents are no longer be needed for a number of new or expanded types of low-risk building work, like sleep-outs, sheds, carports, outdoor fireplaces and ground-mounted solar panels.

The new exemptions will save building owners time and money, by not having to go to their local council for consent for common building projects. This reduction in building consents will also allow Councils to focus on building work that is higher-risk, helping to boost productivity.”

So yes he might have been able to get it built without needing consent so long as he is having it built to code, he can build it.

BUT

My understanding of the building code, the change in August is only for one storey buildings.

If he is going to have two floors and its not just a shed that stands two storeys high, it is not exempt and it’s especially not if its going to have its own sanitation area since that would class it as a second dwelling.

Interesting, thanks for the information. The new (August) rules AFAIK only apply up to 30m2.

Building consent has been given from the council but no resource consent was needed since the council believe it meets the rules as per the DP.

1 | 2