Save

2011/084: The exercise of powers by a regional authority and two territorial authorities regarding dams

Abbreviation
2011/084
Valid from
13/09/2011

Information provider
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Information type
Determination
Format
PDF

Description

The predominant matter for determination is the jurisdiction issue of division of responsibility for building control for dams between ORC and DCC or CDC in relation to a hydro-electric development (the development) known as the Deep Stream Hydro development.

In addition, it is necessary to identify those structures that can be defined as appurtenant structures. ORC has set out the following matters, including the jurisdiction issue, which it considers to be relevant to its application:

  1. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work that is to be regarded as a dam and its appurtenant structures as defined under section 7 of the Act;
  2. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work that is integral to the proper functioning of each dam as defined under section 7 of the Act;
  3. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work for which it has jurisdiction under section 14 of the Act;
  4. whether, by virtue of their function, Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 satisfy the definition of a "dam" under section 7 of the Act, and whether they also satisfy the definition of "large dam" because of their size;
  5. whether Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 should be exempt from the requirement for building consents as allowed under Section 41 and Schedule 1 of the Act;
  6. whether ORC has authority under section 42 of the Act to require the owner of Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 to apply for certificates of acceptance for the two penstocks;
  7. whether ORC has authority under section 96 of the Act to make a decision on whether to issue certificates of acceptance for Penstock 1 and Penstock 2;
  8. the process to be followed in making a decision on whether to issue a code compliance certificate, and the issuing of a code compliance certificate when the corresponding building consent covers building work under the jurisdiction of more than one authority; and
  9. whether the building work carried out on Canal C7 arising from piping failure in October 2008 required building consent.
  10. whether the building work carried out on Canal C7 arising from piping failure in October 2008 could be carried out under building consent BLD/2005/10166 previously granted by CDC for canal 7 (and other structures).

For assistance with locating previous versions, please contact the information provider.
View on Information Provider website Download this resource (PDF, 181KB)
For assistance with locating previous versions, please contact the information provider.
This resource is not cited by any other resources.

2011/084: The exercise of powers by a regional authority and two territorial authorities regarding dams

This document is not CITED BY any other resources:

2011/084: The exercise of powers by a regional authority and two territorial authorities regarding dams

Description

The predominant matter for determination is the jurisdiction issue of division of responsibility for building control for dams between ORC and DCC or CDC in relation to a hydro-electric development (the development) known as the Deep Stream Hydro development.

In addition, it is necessary to identify those structures that can be defined as appurtenant structures. ORC has set out the following matters, including the jurisdiction issue, which it considers to be relevant to its application:

  1. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work that is to be regarded as a dam and its appurtenant structures as defined under section 7 of the Act;
  2. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work that is integral to the proper functioning of each dam as defined under section 7 of the Act;
  3. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work for which it has jurisdiction under section 14 of the Act;
  4. whether, by virtue of their function, Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 satisfy the definition of a "dam" under section 7 of the Act, and whether they also satisfy the definition of "large dam" because of their size;
  5. whether Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 should be exempt from the requirement for building consents as allowed under Section 41 and Schedule 1 of the Act;
  6. whether ORC has authority under section 42 of the Act to require the owner of Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 to apply for certificates of acceptance for the two penstocks;
  7. whether ORC has authority under section 96 of the Act to make a decision on whether to issue certificates of acceptance for Penstock 1 and Penstock 2;
  8. the process to be followed in making a decision on whether to issue a code compliance certificate, and the issuing of a code compliance certificate when the corresponding building consent covers building work under the jurisdiction of more than one authority; and
  9. whether the building work carried out on Canal C7 arising from piping failure in October 2008 required building consent.
  10. whether the building work carried out on Canal C7 arising from piping failure in October 2008 could be carried out under building consent BLD/2005/10166 previously granted by CDC for canal 7 (and other structures).

View on Information Provider website Download this resource (PDF, 181KB)
2011/084: The exercise of powers by a regional authority and two territorial authorities regarding dams
Description

The predominant matter for determination is the jurisdiction issue of division of responsibility for building control for dams between ORC and DCC or CDC in relation to a hydro-electric development (the development) known as the Deep Stream Hydro development.

In addition, it is necessary to identify those structures that can be defined as appurtenant structures. ORC has set out the following matters, including the jurisdiction issue, which it considers to be relevant to its application:

  1. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work that is to be regarded as a dam and its appurtenant structures as defined under section 7 of the Act;
  2. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work that is integral to the proper functioning of each dam as defined under section 7 of the Act;
  3. whether ORC has correctly identified the particular building work for which it has jurisdiction under section 14 of the Act;
  4. whether, by virtue of their function, Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 satisfy the definition of a "dam" under section 7 of the Act, and whether they also satisfy the definition of "large dam" because of their size;
  5. whether Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 should be exempt from the requirement for building consents as allowed under Section 41 and Schedule 1 of the Act;
  6. whether ORC has authority under section 42 of the Act to require the owner of Penstock 1 and Penstock 2 to apply for certificates of acceptance for the two penstocks;
  7. whether ORC has authority under section 96 of the Act to make a decision on whether to issue certificates of acceptance for Penstock 1 and Penstock 2;
  8. the process to be followed in making a decision on whether to issue a code compliance certificate, and the issuing of a code compliance certificate when the corresponding building consent covers building work under the jurisdiction of more than one authority; and
  9. whether the building work carried out on Canal C7 arising from piping failure in October 2008 required building consent.
  10. whether the building work carried out on Canal C7 arising from piping failure in October 2008 could be carried out under building consent BLD/2005/10166 previously granted by CDC for canal 7 (and other structures).
View on Information Provider website Download this resource (PDF, 181KB)
This resource does not cite any other resources.

2011/084: The exercise of powers by a regional authority and two territorial authorities regarding dams

This resource does not CITE any other resources.
Save
Feedback