Defective building permits issued

Press, 10 November 1983, Page 1

Defective building permits issued

Two Cashmere propertyowners may have to raise their newly laid house foundations after being issued defective building permits. The permits did not meet Christchurch Drainage Board requirements, the chief engineer, Mr H. P. Hunt, told a meeting of the board’s finance committee yesterday. Somehow the permits were not checked properly when they were referred, to Drainage Board staff from the Christchurch City Council, he said. Three permits had been issued for buildings in a new subdivision at Ashgrove Terrace, in the . upper reaches of the Heathcote River. However, the houses were being built at levels lower than the flood safety requirements of the board, said Mr Hunt.

Two of the owners had started building, and had poured the concrete foundation slabs, and one had begun the actual building structure.

The floor levels for the buildings would need to be raised — one by four metres and one by two metres — to meet the board’s standards, he said. The third owners would have to be advised of the suitable level for building. The Drainage Boards required level, recommended by the board last year in accordance with 50-year flood level predictions, was two metres above that of

the statutory plumbing and drainage regulations. One of 1 the properties was at the < lower level. ; The board’s chairman, Mr i Newton Dodge, said it was ! “imperative” that the s foundations be raised. ( “One hopes that we can do it by persuasion and encouragement rather than i clobbering the owners with 1 orders,” he said. ‘1 Mr Hunt said he was not 1 sure if the board had the ’ legal power to order the ] raising of the foundations to I the board’s recommended t level if they met the statu- I tory regulations. _j

The committee decided to leave the matter to its chairman, Mr R. E. Wilton, and Mr Dodge to discuss the matter with the board’s solicitors and to work something out with the owners. The raising of the new foundations would be a “considerable cost,” said Mr Hunt. Because it was a Drainage Board mistake, it would obviously have to pay, but the percentage of the total cost would be up to the chairman, the solicitors, and the owners to work out.