USE OF CARAVANS FOR BUSINESS

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXXVII, Issue 14883, 21 January 1949, Page 2

USE OF CARAVANS FOR BUSINESS

PROBLEM AT MOUNT

MAUNGANUI

Council To Seek Court Ruling-

Establishment In Brick

Area

(Times Correspondent) The question of caravans in the Mount Maunganui borough being utilised for the purpose of operating businesses was again discussed at the monthly meeting of the Mount Maunganui Borough Council. At the December meeting of the council the question was deferred until this week’s meeting in order to secure legal opinions from the council’s solicitor and also from the Municipal Association’s legal adviser. The council, at its meeting this week, decided to seek a court ruling as to whether or not a caravan could bo classed as a building.

Legal opinion intimated that the council had no control over caravans used for business premises or for offices. Both the council’s legal adviser and the Municipal Association’s solicitor contended that according to the existing law a caravan was not a building and that it would need to be proved as such before the local bodies could assume to have any control over such premises, as long as the caravans satisfied the health requirements. As far as was known there was no reported case in which it was contested that a caravan, either on or off ids wheels, was anything other than a vehicle.

. Cr W. W. Edkins proposed that the council should make a test case of the caravan which was set up in the business and brick area at Mount Maunganui recently, and which was being used as a hair-dressing salon. “We are faced with a problem with which few, if any, other local bodies have been confronted,” stated Cr Edkins, “and I consider it essential to obtain a Magistrate’s ruling as to if and when a caravan ceases to be a caravan in the accepted sense of

the word.” If it was declared a building then the council would know where it stood,, and if not, nothing much would be lost nor a great deal of expense incurred. Need For Materials The Municipal Association’s adviser had suggested in his letter that if application was made to the Building Controller and the Minister of Works pointing out that more shops were required in the borough and urging the release of the necessary materials, the council’s anxiety over the possibility of a caravan township springing uo would possibly be alleviated, but Cr Edkins contended that even this would not prevent those wishing to use caravans for business purposes from doing so. Cr A. McFarlane asked if the council considered caravans a menace. “Do we wish to eliminate them from the borough?” he enquired.

Cr Edkins replied that the position at present was ridiculous. “Wo talk about town planning,” he said, “and yet according to the law as we know it, we can demand that only brick or concrete buildings may be put up in a brick business area and prohibit wooden buildings, and yet anyone can place a caravan there and use it as a shop.” Stating that as chairman of the Town Planning Committee he was very much concerned about the position, Cr Edkins urged tffat the issue be taken to court and finally settled. He was concerned about this particular caravan only because it was a typical case and was in the business area, he added, after Cr Page had asked why only the one caravan was causing the anxiety when there were several in the borough at the present time. Cr C. H. Clarke also considered that it was not a case of councillors selecting one operator. What applied to that one also apnlied to every other caravan similarly used. He would favour the framing of a by-law if it was within the power of the council to do so and enforce its provisions. Permission Unwise

The Mayor (Mr S. F. Newton) considered that good would ultimately come out of the thorough discussion which the council was giving this question. He was of the opinion that it was unwise to permit the use of caravans for business purposes in a brick area. After further discussion Cr Edkins said that if the council was of the opinion that no effort should be made to have caravans controlled ho was prepared to abide by that decision. “But that does not stop me from voicing my own very strong objections against their use,'’, he concluded. Cr McFarlane stated that he failed to see how any difference could reasonably be made between caravans used for residential purposes and those used for businesses.

Cr -Edkins formally moved that a test case be made of the caravan used for a hair-dressing salon in the brick area, and this was seconded by Cr Steevens. Cr A. E. Page then moved an amendment to the effect that a test case be made of all caravans in the borough used for business purposes and this was seconded by Cr A. N. Thomas. On being put to the vote -the amendment was carried with one dissentient, Cr McFarlane requesting his vote to be recorded against the motion. “The position is ridiculous,” he remarked, “and I am against both-the motion and tlw amendment.”