2 Comments

1. Tony Coote
   Posted July 19, 2010 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

   Gee this heckler hits the spot. There is also the problem that arises when builders of the cowboy persuasion do not follow approved plans.

   There is nothing worse for an architect than to watch on as the building gradually rises out of the ground and to see the design hopelessly compromised by a builder who chooses to ignores much of what was on the DA and CC drawings and gives himself the authority to make significant design changes?

   One weeps as the exposed-rafter eave detail is turned into a boxed eave, the symmetrical front gable made unsymmetrical, the bagged brick finish becomes smooth render, fake wood grain weatherboards are substituted for plain weatherboards, the colour scheme is ignored, high-front gutters are used instead of standard quad, pressed metal fascias instead of timber and large clunky architraves are fitted to the windows where none were detailed.

   One looks at ways to ensure that one’s name is never associated with the final product and struggles with whether or not to report the builder to the PCA for the his failure to comply with the approved drawings (apart from wondering how come the PCA let these things go unnoticed and/or unmentioned).

   Tony

2. Caroline Bannon
   Posted July 28, 2010 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

   Dear Tony
   Please refer to HH Council website link to OIC site which provides that for $30, community members can request council information within 20 days.
   In discussion with Dept of Local Government- this may assist in obtaining Steve’s independent legal advice re Section 96 on Council’s behalf.
   Insh Allah this will clarify this issue and encourage Mr Kourepis to request an amended DA
   Regards
   PS Great Letter!