Johannesburg's Building Development Management department vetted in storm damage probe

Due to an update on the technical aspects of houses which were destroyed by a storm in December last year‚ a number of irregularities have come to the surface.

"Following the mayor’s commitment to launching an investigation into the construction of homes which were damaged by a major storm on December 30 2017‚ [Johannesburg mayor Herman Mashaba] met with the city’s Group Risk and Assurance Services (Gras)‚ alongside independent quantity surveyors and engineers who were part of the investigation‚ in order to receive a report on the status of their work.

This is after the mayor provided an extension on the finalisation of the report at the end of February‚” Mashaba’s office said on Thursday.

Last week‚ Mashaba released preliminary findings in relation to this investigation after the December storm destroyed a number of houses in parts of the city.

The findings showed a number of discrepancies in the structures of the affected houses.

Gras found that among the two developers responsible for housing construction in the affected areas‚ one was not registered with the regulatory body.

The possible implications of this is not only the alleged non-compliance with Section 10 of the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act but the alleged questionable building standards used at some of the affected properties.

The city is now in the process of addressing the matter with the NHBRC who carries the duty of ensuring that these developers registered. There was poor record-keeping at the city’s Building Development Management.

Gras noted that there was no proper filing system at the Building Development Management‚ resulting in challenges to produce records timeously.

There were incomplete applications for approval of building plans. During the review of BDM’s approval of building plans‚ Gras found instances where incomplete application forms were accepted and captured into the city’s system.

No proof of home pre-inspection during the construction of some properties was found in the files. The Housing Consumer Protection Measures Act of 1998 makes provision for the inspection of properties whilst in construction‚ so as to ensure proper quality control.

When perusing files in relation to the violent storm in‚ Gras noted that there were no reports or photos in the files as proof that inspectors had visited the site or conducted the prescribed inspections before and during construction on trench and foundation‚ wall and structure‚ drains‚ concrete slabs and the roof.

There incomplete files. Instances where some of the files had no record of the date on which the application for the approval of the plan was submitted. There was inconsistency in the dates of plan approvals in relation to the occupancy certificates. GRAS found that a date for the planned approval on an occupancy certificate differed with the approval date by the chief plan examiner in their respective files.

Some stand numbers had two different plan approval dates. No certificates of occupancy were found in the files of the Lufhereng area. Some dates on certificates of occupancy differ from stamps issuing said certificates.

Gras noted that the dates at which inspectors have issued the certificates of occupancy differ with official stamps on the documents‚ making it difficult to establish the correct date at which the certificates of occupancy were issued.

Mashaba is expected to release the final report soon.