Daily Express Subscriber
Sign in to your account.

AN Inanam ratepayer risks being taken to court if he/she does not remove the illegal extension which has been made to his/ her home, off Lorong Viewpoint 4.

A spokesman for City Hall’s Building Control Department (BCD) said a check revealed that no prior permission had been given for the house to be modified.

“No building plan was submitted to us for this work,” he said. 

“Even if we had received one, however, there is no way the plan would have been approved.”

He said the individual would have been advised against proceeding, as he/she did not have enough land to accommodate the modification. 

“The structure, which has been added to the back of the house, encroaches into the setback which homeowners are meant to abide.”

A 10-foot (3.04 metres) buffer zone had to be maintained behind homes within the agency’s rating area, according to him. 

The spokesman said the homeowner had been instructed to dismantle the extension and given a grace period in which to comply with this instruction.

“Should he/ she fail to do so, legal action will be taken against him/ her.”

He said a notice to this effect had been served to the served to the offender.

The spokesman did not rule out the possibility of the agency moving in to dismantle the extension.

“Such action can be taken in extreme circumstances. If we do this, the ratepayer will have to bear the cost of this demolition. He/she will be liable for the expenses incurred by us under section 4 of our Building Bylaw 1951 (Amendment 1987).”

The spokesman was responding to feedback from an Inanam ratepayer who couldn’t understand why City Hall had failed to crackdown on the catering businesses being run out of two homes in Taman Viewpoint.

She said one of these residences had been extended into the common area behind her own, with an extractor fan installed on the back wall that blew oily vapours into her unit. 

The homeowner was made to understand that inspections had been carried out after she first highlighted these goings-on to the agency six months ago. Nevertheless, despite its personnel corroborating some of her concerns in each instance, she said the problems still persisted.

She provided Hotline with the pertinent details which were forwarded to City Hall

The spokesman refuted the suggestion that the authority had been lackadaisical about the ratepayer’s grievance, saying that action had been taken to verify her claims, even before the BCD was contacted by the media.

A check of its records revealed that she had lodged two complaints with the agency in October, according to him, with only one house mentioned in both reports.

“Two inspections were made after we learned about the ratepayer’s grievance,” he said. 

“The first check was carried out three weeks after we received her complaint. A follow-up was done less than a month later.”

He said its personnel took note of the illegal extension on both occasions.

“A friendly warning was formally given to the homeowner who did this. He/ she was notified about having the modification dismantled last week. A second notice was issued to the individual at this time, instructing him/her to take down extractor fan.”

The spokesman said both notices were placed in the individual’s post-box as no one was home when these documents were delivered.

On the allegation about the nuisance caused by the large-scale cooking taking place there, a spokeswoman for City Hall’s Environmental Health Department said two of its officers went to Taman Viewpoint shortly after learning from the press about the complainant’s concerns.

They checked on the goings-on at the two homes which she mentioned, according to her. 

She said no evidence was found that the kitchen at either residence was being used to carry out catering or to perform mass cooking of any kind.

“Our personnel did, however, observe the presence of a pipe, extending from the kitchen to an exhaust fan which had been put into a wall outside, in one of these homes. 

“They talked to an occupant of the house, who admitted that no approval had been sought from City Hall before the extension was built.” 

The spokeswoman said the BCD was apprised about these findings some time afterwards.