Pubdate: Wed, 02 Sep 2009
Source: Lethbridge Herald (CN AB)
Copyright: 2009 The Lethbridge Herald
Contact:  http://www.lethbridgeherald.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/239
Author: Gerald Gauthier

HOMEGROWN SOLUTION

Province-wide standards are being proposed to ensure Albertans don't 
get burned by unwittingly buying or renting homes formerly used as 
marijuana growing operations.

New guidelines being proposed by the Alberta Real Estate Association 
would set uniform remediation standards for such properties across 
Alberta and would legally require sellers to disclose whether homes 
have any history as grow ops, even after they've been restored.

"We're looking at this strictly as consumer protection," said Bill 
Fowler, director of industry and government relations for the 
association. "Our fear is always that someone is going to give it a 
five-gallon overhaul and not do the work that needs to be done.

The proposed guidelines are based on work by a team of researchers 
from the University of Calgary. The association plans to present the 
recommended guidelines to the provincial health and municipal affairs 
ministries this fall for consideration.

Right now, there is no consistent standard for what constitutes a 
satisfactory remediation for former grow op houses, said Tang Lee, 
the U of C environmental design professor who led the research 
project. In addition to reducing potential health risks to future 
occupants of former drug houses, uniform guidelines would ultimately 
reduce costs as well as the likelihood of legal action after such 
properties have been sold, said Lee, an internationally recognized 
expert in building failure and indoor air quality.

The local health region follows remediation standards used in Calgary 
which are higher than standards in some other cities, notably Edmonton.

"Every municipality has a different way of approaching former grow 
ops and how they're remediated. It's variable right across the 
province. It's variable right across Canada," he said.

"There are differences of opinion in what constitutes proper 
remediation of these homes," he said, adding some requirements go too 
far while others don't go far enough.

Typical problems in grow-op houses are toxic moulds from the damp 
conditions, structural damage from holes being drilled in exterior 
walls, and overloaded electrical systems. Because power is usually 
cut off to such homes as a precaution, mould problems can also arise 
because of burst water pipes due to a resulting lack of heat during winter.

Public health inspectors issue orders condemning such homes as unfit 
for human habitation, and those orders aren't lifted until adequate 
remediation work is completed. But that doesn't prevent a condemned 
house from being sold at a discount to someone who thinks he can fix 
it up easily.

"There are a lot of houses that sell as is, where is," said Heather 
Langemann, a local health inspector for Alberta Health Services. 
"There's a lot of people who think they're do-it-yourselfers," she 
said. "(Remediation) is not cheap, it's not easy."

Costs for remediation, including the required air quality testing, 
typically range between $25,000 and $30,000.

The proposed guidelines also include tighter disclosure requirements 
so sellers would be legally required to indicate on their sales 
contracts whether homes have been previously been used as grow ops. 
Audrey King, president of the Lethbridge and District Association of 
Realtors, said she would welcome the proposed guidelines.

Even after they've been fixed up, former grow op homes are still 
harder to sell, she said, because they carry a stigma. A uniform 
stamp of approval might help lessen that stigma and give prospective 
buyers a greater level of assurance, she said.

Tighter monitoring and accreditation of contractors who do remedial 
works are also being recommended.

"We're finding out that the consultants who come in do this moulds 
remediation are not necessarily qualified. There's no standard as to 
who can call themselves a moulds remediator or an indoor air quality 
consultant," Lee said. "Some may be very good, but others may be very 
inadequate."

Homeowners could themselves having to pay twice for remediation work 
if the original work fails to meet structural and air quality 
standards, he added.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart