¶1concurring in part and dissenting in part: I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion which finds the structure here constituted a building under our burglaiy statute.
¶2State v. Alvis, 30 Kan. App. 2d 889, 53 P.3d 1232 (2002), dealt with this issue in detail and determined that basic habitability was the key issue. I do not believe the majority opinion validly distinguishes Alvisfrom the instant case. The issue was essentially the same. I will not reproduce the rationale of Alvisbut believe it would be controlling.