MOSTAFA YOUSUF

Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha (Rajuk), the capital’s building-regulation authority, has found that 683 buildings in eight zones of the capital are using their basements to store flammable items, violating building-construction rules.

Rajuk asked its eight zone offices to conduct a survey soon after the blast in Gulistan’s Siddikbazar, which left 25 dead on March 8. The report was submitted to the Rajuk chairman yesterday. The eight zones of Rajuk inspected a total of 2,204 buildings.

This newspaper has obtained a copy of the report with the survey findings. It mentions that 683 buildings are using their basements as storehouses of various flammable goods, while 750 are using basements for purposes other than parking.

“During the inspection, owners of 1,944 buildings could not show their building design. Around 1,163 buildings are using their basements as parking spaces,” the report finds.

However, when asked about the numbers not adding up, a Rajuk official involved with the survey said they are trying to sort the issue.

Tonmoy Das, member (development control) of Rajuk, said they received the report.

“We have already started issuing notice to the building owners to remove the flammable goods on an emergency basis. We will allow them a maximum of a week or two to comply with our notice. If they fail to comply, we will launch drives against the building owners,” he added.

Tonmoy also said the drive against shopping centres using their basements to store goods will be conducted after Eid, as they don’t want to create panic during Ramadan when the Eid shopping spree is gaining pace.

Adil Mohammad Khan, a faculty member at urban and regional planning department of Jahangirnagar University, told The Daily Star that the core responsibility of Rajuk is to make sure the buildings are following the codes and construction rules.

“So many building owners are using their basements for storing flammable items just because there was no monitoring on Rajuk’s part. They only take action after every major incident, whereas the monitoring should have been a part of their regular work,” said Adil.