Big hurdles for tiny houses

When is a building not a building? The short answer is . . . well, non-existent, because it’s just not clear. Three disputes focused on that question are currently headed for court. Tiny houses are big news all over the world, and here. George Clarke, guru of using space efficiently, even hosted a couple of series on the movement in New Zealand. The Canterbury Tiny House Society argued last year its affordable, mobile, compact homes would be an excellent temporary solution to accommodation in parts of Christchurch’s red zone.

Tiny houses are viewed as an obvious part of the solution to the housing crisis – in the words of Green Party building spokesman Gareth Hughes, they’re ‘‘innovative and sustainable’’. However, their viability seems threatened by uncertainty and confusion over the regulations governing them, specifically whether a structure on wheels, which can be moved, should be defined as a building, and hence subject to the provisions of the Building Act.

A mother living with her two children in a house bus in Leeston, Canterbury, has appealed for ‘‘common sense’’ legislation around tiny houses, after two visits from Selwyn District Council officials. Charlotte Murray fears being evicted. She has been told the bus is classified as a building because they live in it fulltime, though she argues she takes it off the site to empty the tanks, which wouldn’t be possible with a genuine building.

Murray is not alone. Jono Voss, who has a tiny house on a friend’s section in Lower Hutt, was in the Environment Court on Tuesday over his failure to comply with a council abatement notice.

A decision is due in about a month. Voss says the house, registered as a trailer by the NZ Transport Agency, should be regarded as a vehicle. Hutt City Council disagrees, and wants him to incur the expense of obtaining resource and building consents as it considers the house a building.

Eric Wood, of North Canterbury-based Cosy Homes, says the goalposts around tiny houses are constantly changing, which means people who built their homes according to the law at the time are getting into difficulties because councils and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) are trying to fit the movement into existing building regulations.

In August, Hughes told RNZ that tiny-house owners should not be burdened with compliance costs they could not afford. But there are safety concerns too. MBIE has said the Government ‘‘wants to ensure the houses are healthy, safe and durable so that the wellbeing of people is safeguarded’’.

Hughes asked Building and Construction Minister Jenny Salesa in Parliament if she would commit to ‘‘investigating a New Zealand standard for small living spaces . . . to provide the guidance local authorities and the building industry needs to deliver’’ such housing. Salesa, who agreed the Government should investigate all options to address the housing crisis, said she was busy with a legislative reform programme around the act, and welcomed his input.

So perhaps there will be a legislative solution that addresses the financial concerns of owners of tiny houses and the legitimate safety concerns of the Government. But until such time, it seems likely more disputes will head to court.

The goalposts around tiny houses are constantly changing ... Councils and MBIE are trying to fit the movement into existing building regulations.