Council considers looser farm shed building controls

RULE REVIEW: Building a hay barn or farm shed in CHB may no longer require a building consent, as long as the structures are no bigger than 150 square metres and meet other criteria. PHOTO/FILE

The CHB District Council is to consider a proposal to exempt farm buildings from needing building consents if they meet specified criteria, in an effort to reduce the time and cost that's historically been involved with gaining such consents.

The proposal will be considered at a full council meeting this Thursday, and follows the review of the CHB Building Consent Authority (BCA), where auditors Morrison Low recommended that the council considered its risk policy and determine the level of risk that the council was willing to accept when it came to certain structures.

"On occasion farmers have complained about the time and cost of obtaining building consent for farm buildings such as pole sheds and hay barns," regulatory services manager Te Aroha Cook said.

"In particular, concerns have been expressed about the little value added through the consenting process given that the majority of farm buildings are of a standard design prepared by certified professional engineers."

The Building Act allowed exemptions when building work was considered minor or low-risk, and where the benefits of requiring a consent exceeded associated compliance costs, she said.

If it wanted to the council could consider exemptions for farm buildings as they tended to be designed by engineers specialising in this type of construction, were simple and low-risk in rural settings, and were not likely to suffer structural failures.

Other criteria for exemptions could include the building only being used for farm storage, being no more than 150 square metres in total, located in the rural zone (as defined by the district plan), is single storey, and not used for human habitation.

If adopted, people seeking exemptions would be charged $250 (non-refundable) for the application, which would be granted on condition the completed work complied with the Building Act, the Building Code and any other relevant legislation.

The council would retain the overriding discretion to approve or decline applications.
If the proposal was accepted, and most applicants took advantage of the exemption, it would see at least $30,000 in revenue lost to the council, Ms Cook said.

The exact budgetary implications, however, would not be known until the proposal had been in place for at least 12 months, she said.

If adopted, applications for exemptions would start to be considered from November 1 this year.