Progress on notice to fix; residents able to remain

The owner of the Winton Lifestyle Building has made progress on some but not all of the...
The owner of the Winton Lifestyle Building has made progress on some but not all of the requirements of its notice to fix issued by the Southland District Council. PHOTO: ABBEY PALMER
A Winton building owner has failed to comply with all the requirements of a notice to fix, despite being given a month to do so.

However, the building’s 24 residents, some of whom are elderly, have not been forced to find alternative accommodation as initially signalled.

The Southland District Council issued a notice to fix for the Winton Lifestyle Building at 54 Church St on September 9, after the owner failed to supply annual building warrant of fitness documents to the council.

At the time, Southland Mayor Gary Tong said the notice was a result of concerns about non-compliance, and the absence of the documents meant council staff were not assured the safety systems in the building were operating correctly.

A subsequent progress inspection of the building at the start of the month found not all safety systems were fully operational.

As the council considered the building a risk, it advised residents and recommended they seek alternative temporary accommodation in case the building owner did not meet the notice-to-fix deadline.

Council manager building solutions Julie Conradi confirmed on Wednesday that during the most recent inspection, on Thursday, October 8, not all the council’s requirements had been met. However, progress had been made.

"Council have received certification that the fire sprinkler and alarm systems have been rectified.

"[It] will continue to work with the owner until a certificate for public use can be issued and a building warrant of fitness is supplied by the owner."

The notice plastered on the entrance to the building states the owner, Charles Edward Francis Kidd, also known as Frank Kidd, had breached Section 363(1)(c)(i) and Section 363(1)(c)(ii) of the Building Act 2004.

The council did not enforce the removal of residents as a result of the absence of the documents, as the building was considered safe enough to inhabit.

However, the legislation states Mr Kidd is responsible for meeting the remaining compliance requirements.

The Otago Daily Times approached Mr Kidd for comment, but he could not be reached.

Add a Comment






Our journalists are your neighbours

We are the South's eyes and ears in crucial council meetings, at court hearings, on the sidelines of sporting events and on the frontline of breaking news.

As our region faces uncharted waters in the wake of a global pandemic, Otago Daily Times continues to bring you local stories that matter.

We employ local journalists and photographers to tell your stories, as other outlets cut local coverage in favour of stories told out of Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch.

You can help us continue to bring you local news you can trust by becoming a supporter.

Become a Supporter