RIGHT OF APPEAL.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 223, 20 September 1929, Page 10

RIGHT OF APPEAL.

"BACHELOR FLATS" IN CITY.

TOWN PLANNING BOARD TO DECIDE. WHY PERMIT WAS REFUSED. "Our appeal to the Town Planning Board will be forwarded to Wellington to-morrow morning," Mr. J. Osbourne Lilly said to-day in his capacity as solicitor for the company which had been refused permission by the City Council to proceed with tho erection of a building in Vincent Street, to be known as Marlborough Mansions, and to contain 53 one-room apartments. "If redress cannot be obtained from the Town Planning Board," he added, "we are prepared to seek a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court." Mr. S. Alleman, architect for the company, said that the statement in last night's "Star" -that an appeal was to be lodged with the Town Planning Board, which had approved of similar projects in Christchurch and Wellington, and that if necessary the matter would be taken to the Supreme Court, had, in error, been attributed •to him. That matter was being dealt with by the company through its solicitor.

Mr. T. Bloodworth, chairman of the City Council's Town Planning Committee, said it came as no surprise to him that the company intended to appeal to the Town Planning Committee.

"Under the provisions of the Town Planning Act," he remarked, "they have that right and we cxpected that they would exercise it."

Mr. Bloodworth quoted sub-section 3 of section 34 of the Act, which is as follows:—"The determination of the Town Planning Board for the purposes of this section (right of appeal) on any question relating to principles of town planning shall be conclusive, and shall bind the local authority." It would thus appear, Mr. Bloodworth added, that in so far as the council's objection related to town planning the council would lie bound by the decision of the board in Wellington. An Advocate of Flats. "In regard to the broad principle of Hats as places of residence," said the chairman of the committee, "I have no objection to them provided they are built on modern lines with a sufficient number of rooms and adequate air space. In fact, I have advocated the erection of flats in accordance with town planning principles as a means of closer settlement. in the neighbourhood of the city. I have done this for economic reasons which would probably take too long to explain at this stage.

The principal at stake, Mr. Bloodworth said, was whether or not the apartments were adequate in regard to room and air space. The prospectus showed in each case a living room 17ft by lift, with a wall bed, a dressing room Bft Sin by 3ft Gin, a kitchenete Bft 3in by 3ft Gin, a bathroom 10ft by 4ft Gin, and a small entrance hall. There were to bo 53 of these apartments in a six-storey building on an allot ment with a frontage of sft Tin to Vincent Street and a depth of 103 ft.

"Would Mean Overcrowding." "The objection of the Town Planning Committee, as endorsed by the City Council," said Mr. Bloodworth, "is that in these apartments there is not provision for sufficient air space, and that in regard to the building it is planned to occupy almost the whole of the allotment. In these particulars, as well as others, the proposal does not, in my opinion, conform to modern town-plan-ning principles."

The prospectus of the company, Mr. Bloodworth said, estimated that when the whole of the apartments were let the income in rental would be £5787, which meant that on the average a rental of £2 per week would be charged for an apartment. This, in his opinion, was more than individuals in receipt of small incomes could afford, and the building of such apartments would therefore not help to improve the living conditions for such people.' Further, he thought that such fiats would lead to overcrowding. '"Surely," added Mr. Bloodworth, "tho time has not come in Auckland for so many people to be crowded into such limited residential areas."