Free The Sheds.
Common-sense shed reform for residential and rural New Zealand
New Zealanders should be able to build safe, engineered, low-risk sheds without unnecessary building consent cost and delay.
We are calling for two practical reforms:
Residential and lifestyle-zone sheds up to 70m² - extend the existing consent-free shed rules so low-risk, single-storey, non-habitable sheds, garages and workshops up to 70m² can use the existing 1m setback rule, provided they comply with the Building Code, district plan and safety requirements.
Engineer-certified rural structures without arbitrary floor-area and unsupported-span caps - replace arbitrary floor-area and unsupported-span caps with rules based on actual engineering risk, where the structure is single-storey, non-habitable, no more than 6m high, set back at least its own height from boundaries and other buildings, and designed or certified by a New Zealand Chartered Professional Engineer.
Free The Sheds is not asking to remove safety standards. We are asking for qualifying low-risk, single-storey, detached, non-habitable sheds and engineer-certified rural structures to be building-consent exempt where clear conditions are met. The Building Code, district plan, stormwater, setbacks, fire separation, site coverage, height controls, neighbour protections, and engineering requirements still apply.
Keep the Standards · Cut the Red Tape · Match the Rules to the Risk
A 70m² minor dwelling is building-consent exempt.
A 35m² shed is not.
New Zealanders can build a standalone dwelling up to 70 square metres - with bedrooms, a kitchen, a bathroom, and people living in it - without building consent. Yet a basic 36m² double garage still requires the full council process. No plumbing. No habitation. Full consent. This is not a coherent approach to risk.
Building-consent exempt
A 70m² minor dwelling - a habitable home with full plumbing, a bathroom, a kitchen, and bedrooms. People living in it full-time. Built by licensed professionals, council notified.
Building consent required
A 36m² double garage - steel or timber frame, corrugated iron, no plumbing, no one living in it. Nothing complex. Full building consent still required.
A system that lets you build a home without consent but not a shed has lost sight of what building consent is actually for.
Keep the standards. Cut the red tape. Match the rules to the risk.
What we are calling for
These are targeted, practical reforms. Both keep safety and engineering requirements. Both match the regulatory burden to the actual risk of the structure.
| Area | Current issue | Proposed reform |
|---|---|---|
| Residential / lifestyle zones | Consent-free detached sheds are generally restricted to smaller sizes, even when low-risk and non-habitable | Allow low-risk, non-habitable sheds up to 70m² using the existing 1m setback rule |
| Rural zones | Rural structures are limited by arbitrary size and span restrictions | Replace arbitrary floor-area and unsupported-span caps with rules based on actual engineering risk, where the structure is engineer-certified, maximum 6m high, and set back at least its own height from boundaries |
| Safety | The public may think this means no rules | Keep Building Code, engineering, district plan, stormwater, setback, fire separation and safety requirements |
Residential and lifestyle-zone sheds up to 70m²
We are calling for the existing detached shed exemption to be extended so that low-risk, single-storey, detached, non-habitable sheds, garages and workshops up to 70m² can be building-consent exempt where:
- The building is at least 1m from any legal boundary or residential building
- It contains no sleeping accommodation, kitchen, bathroom, sanitary plumbing or potable water storage
- It complies with the New Zealand Building Code
- It complies with district plan, fire separation, site coverage, stormwater and height rules
- The design is carried out or reviewed by a suitably qualified professional where required
This mirrors the framework already used for consent-free minor dwellings - keeping professional oversight and standards while removing unnecessary council paperwork for structures that pose minimal risk. Consent-free does not mean rule-free. Building Code compliance, district plan rules, setbacks, stormwater, fire separation, height limits, and professional design requirements may still apply.
Engineer-certified rural structures
In rural zones, we are calling for the current arbitrary floor-area and unsupported-span caps to be replaced with rules based on actual engineering risk. Keep the Chartered Professional Engineer requirement, keep external-risk controls, and keep the maximum height at 6m and setbacks at least equal to the building’s own height. Provided the building is:
- Single-storey
- Non-habitable
- Not accessible to the public
- Not used to store hazardous substances
- No more than 6m high
- Set back at least its own height from any legal boundary or other building
- Designed or certified by a Chartered Professional Engineer registered in New Zealand
- Compliant with the Building Code, district plan, RMA, stormwater and site-specific requirements
This is the same standard already applied to consent-free pole sheds and hay barns - engineering oversight is the appropriate safeguard. We are calling for that principle to apply consistently to all engineer-certified rural structures. Consent-free does not mean rule-free. The Building Code, district plan rules, RMA compliance, stormwater, and site-specific requirements still apply.
What still needs building consent
Free The Sheds supports the current building consent process for industrial buildings, habitable sheds, public-use buildings, and complex structures where the risk, use, occupancy, plumbing, fire safety, or structural requirements justify formal council oversight.
We do not support removing building consent requirements for:
- Industrial buildings and workshops with significant structural requirements
- Habitable sheds - any building intended for people to live or sleep in
- Public-use buildings and buildings accessible to the general public
- Hazardous-substance storage facilities
- Buildings with significant plumbing, fire-safety, or services requirements
- Complex structures where formal engineering and council oversight is appropriate
We support building consents in their current form for those buildings. They carry higher risk and need proper engineering, fire safety, durability, access, services, and compliance checks. The consent process exists for good reason - it just needs to match the actual risk of what is being built.
Consent-free does not mean rule-free. Building Code requirements, district plan rules, setbacks, stormwater, fire separation, height limits, and professional design or engineering requirements may still apply. This campaign is about low-risk, single-storey, detached, non-habitable sheds and engineer-certified rural structures - where the regulatory process should match the actual risk.
What we are not asking for
This campaign is about matching rules to risk - not removing them.
- Removal of the Building Code
- Removal of engineering requirements for rural structures
- Unsafe or poorly built sheds
- Ignoring district plans, setbacks, stormwater, fire separation, site coverage, height controls or neighbour protections
- Bypassing health and safety standards or council oversight where it is still required
- Habitable buildings, public buildings, hazardous-substance storage or plumbing-heavy structures to be treated as simple sheds
- Low-risk sheds and rural structures regulated according to actual risk, not arbitrary size limits
- Engineer-certified rural structures without arbitrary floor-area and unsupported-span caps
- Qualifying low-risk, single-storey, non-habitable residential sheds to be building-consent exempt where conditions are met
- A consent process proportional to the complexity and risk of what is being built
Keep the standards. Cut the red tape. Match the rules to the risk.
Industry-led. Open to all.
Free The Sheds was started by Waikato Sheds to support practical, risk-based reform for New Zealand shed owners, farmers, lifestyle block owners, and the wider shed-building industry. This is an industry reform campaign, not a sales page for any one supplier. We welcome feedback and support from shed companies, builders, farmers, business groups, councils, MPs and members of the public across New Zealand.
This campaign is not anti-council and not anti-regulation. We support the Building Code, engineering requirements, safety standards, and professional oversight. We support building consents for industrial, habitable, and complex buildings where proper scrutiny is warranted. We are calling for the consent process to match the risk - so that Kiwis can build qualifying low-risk sheds without unnecessary cost, delay, and bureaucracy.
Councils still have an important role. District planning, stormwater, site coverage, height controls, fire separation, neighbour effects, records, and enforcement remain council responsibilities. This campaign is about removing unnecessary building consent processing for qualifying low-risk structures - not removing council oversight where it is needed.
Free The Sheds is an open industry and public-interest campaign. Supporter details are used for campaign advocacy, not for sales leads, and no supporter information is shared with commercial supporters without consent.
For shed companies, builders, and suppliers
Free The Sheds is an open industry campaign. We welcome support from shed companies, builders, engineers, rural suppliers, farmers, and business groups across New Zealand. This is not a promotion for any one company - Waikato Sheds initiated the campaign, but it is designed to benefit the entire shed-building and rural construction industry.
Supporter details are used for campaign advocacy only and are not used as sales leads. No supporter information is shared with commercial parties without consent.
How your company can support
- Share customer stories about consent cost or delay
- Add your company name as a campaign supporter
- Share the campaign with clients and local MPs
- Provide examples of low-risk sheds caught by disproportionate consent requirements
- Give feedback on the proposed reforms
- Forward the campaign brief to industry contacts, suppliers, and business groups
Contact: info@freethesheds.org.nz
Tell us your story
Share your experience with shed consent rules. Your story helps us show the real impact of the current rules and build the case for practical reform.
Your details will be used for campaign advocacy only. We will not sell your information, use it as a sales lead, or share your identifiable story publicly without your permission. Privacy Policy
Frequently asked questions
Does this mean unsafe sheds?
No. The campaign keeps the Building Code, engineering requirements, district plan compliance, stormwater controls, fire separation, site coverage, height controls, setbacks, and neighbour protections. The reform is about whether a full building consent process is proportionate for qualifying low-risk, non-habitable structures - not about removing the standards that make buildings safe.
Does “building-consent exempt” mean no rules at all?
No. Building-consent exempt means the formal council consent process is removed for qualifying structures - not the Building Code, not engineering requirements, not district plan rules. The 2020 exemption for 30m² sheds already works this way: the consent process is removed, but Building Code compliance remains mandatory.
What happens to councils under this reform?
Councils retain their role in district planning, stormwater, site coverage, height controls, fire separation, neighbour effects, records, and enforcement. This campaign is specifically about removing unnecessary building consent processing for qualifying low-risk structures - not removing council oversight where it is genuinely needed.
Why does the rural reform keep the 6m height limit?
The 6m maximum height is a sensible external-risk control that protects neighbours and boundaries. The campaign supports keeping it. What we are calling to remove are the arbitrary floor-area and unsupported-span caps that bear no relationship to actual risk when a Chartered Professional Engineer has designed or certified the structure.
Does the campaign support building consents for industrial and habitable sheds?
Yes, explicitly. Free The Sheds supports the current building consent process for industrial buildings, habitable sheds, public-use buildings, hazardous-substance storage, and any complex structure where the risk, use, occupancy, plumbing, fire safety, or structural requirements justify formal oversight. Those buildings carry higher risk and need proper compliance checks. This campaign is specifically about low-risk, single-storey, detached, non-habitable sheds - where the consent burden is disproportionate to the actual risk involved.
Let's build a New Zealand full of sheds
just like our grandparents did.
Keep the Standards · Cut the Red Tape · Match the Rules to the Risk