A BUILDING PERMIT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXI, Issue 174, 25 July 1890, Page 2

A BUILDING PERMIT.

A CURIOUS REQUEST. V: ■ ■ GITY COUNCIL AND BUILDERS, ~ Messrs BuKKowsAiTDMiTCHEriiiiJfirchitecfra,; on thi 30fch April laeb forwarded to the , City Council plans and specifications for a ' new building in Elliott-street, adjoining tho Albert Brewery. The construction of tho north wall of the building was not in ac eordahce vl-ifch the Building Regulations, 3 and .they asked for a permit to erect the building as designed. Mr Anderson, City Engineer, reported on , • this application that it was nob strictly in accordance with' the BuiSding Regulations, bub that a similar permit had been granted to Messrs McArthur and Co. shortly before. , „• t On the 9bh July, in-.reply to a memo ; from the Town Clerk, Superintendent Hughes, the Building Inspector, states tbafe . he does nofe know if the building was erected in conformity with conditions of ' . permit, as he does not know what thofse j | conditions were;» bub he does know thai • , they do hob coiiie " within the modification clause V.O of the Building Regulations," and by the granting of this special permifc™ «»| the risk of fire to adjoining premises has been considerably increased,-and will, no doubt, catiise an increase in any future premiums paid for insurance by the proprietors of those premises. Then oh the 15th July R.Whitson and Co. call the Council's attention by letter •.;■ to "the fact that owing to the building at present in course of construction next to oar brewery being built contrary to the Building Regulations Acb, the Insuranco * Companies have notified that there will be an increase of ehe premiums for all adjoin- ' ing property," and theyaskthat the Council will be good enough to refund the amount, of increased premiums. ; On Chis application the City Engineer re- > v ported that he did not see how the erection of an iron wall should increase the fire risk of adjoining premises. The Building AcO permits iron buildings to be erected within ten feeb of adjoining-buildings, and'tbii wall is fifty feet away from any other siH-- , building. Whitson and Co.V appHcatun came up for discussion at> the City Counc.l meeting last evening , . Cr. Farrell said he had drawn the attention of the Engineer to the fact thab:;thffiHß building was nob in accordance with tlgmH regulations. He 3hould like to know the Building Inspector was aboub. • ■ ■The Mayor then read the report of t!»o Building Inspector as given above. : \ Cr. Hewson said that the Council Iμ , * granted* the permit, and need not nlaina I anybody else. Cr. Crowjther said there were buildings of something the same character. in other parts of the town. The building required to be ten feet of brickwork, amthen could be of corrugated iron when itfronted a street. < ; Cr. JFarrell moved that the matte , . , ' " referred to the Streets Committee. Cr. Lennox seconded .the motion, and in doing so said he thought the Council should either change the regulations or adhere to them s bfictly. . The Engineer was called in, and ei< plained to the Council the position of affairß He said that he understood the permit had' . been cranbed under the regulations relating to iron buildings, and in thab case wae quita within the regulations. There was no wooden building within ten feet of this, one." In reply to Cγ. Crowther, Mr Anderson said that in strict accordance with tho building regulations the wall should be of bribk. The regulation with regard to at iron wall strictly referred to a building en tirely of iron. The Mayor said he thOHghb there should. '„, be more steadiness in the enforcement of the regulations. It would be well to refer .;, the matter to the Committee. Cr. Warren said that insurance rates had generally rigen throughout the city, ana it was ridiculous for' Whitson and Co. to ask the Council ,-to become insurers for them. Cr. Cooper thought the matter was not Worth sending to a committee. The r» quest should be declined. The Council had no liability in the matter. He moved a* amendment to thab effect. ' ' ' Cr. Swales seconded the amendment). , Cr. Crpwbher also thought the matter was not worth referring to a conimlttee. On being pub to the meeting the amendment was carried. .- /.,;;,„