Question Of Flats Above Shops Still Under Discussion

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXXVII, Issue 14930, 18 March 1949, Page 2

Question Of Flats Above Shops Still Under Discussion

Businessman’s Request At Mt. Maimganui

Conversion To Offices

Suggested

(Times Correspondent)

The question of flats above shops in , the borough (which has been regularly before the Mount Maunganui Borough Council since the council resolved that these would be permitted in the business area only if the entrance was through the shop) came up for further discussion at this week’s meeting, when the report of the Town Plan-, ning Committee was considered. Last month a resident had waited on the council as a deputation and made various submissions as to why the decision should be altered. The Town Planning Committee was then asked to consider these submissions and make a further recommendation to the council. _ Since that time the resident had come forward with an alternative proposal—that he be permitted to erect a shop with a flat above it, the entrance to be by stairway direct from the street and to be occupied by himself and family until alternative accommodation is available. When this happened the flat would be remodelled and turned into offices with no living accommodation what'Cver. He stated that he was prepared to deposit with the council a sum binding him to this undertaking. This suggestion had been considered by the Town Planning Committee stated the Chairman, Mr W. W. Edkins, who recommended that this permission be granted only if a written agreement was entered into between the builder and the council and that a substantial sum was deposited as a bond. The building inspector, Mr G. E. Hutton advised that the permti for a shoo and flat, had been issued with the entrance through the shop. The applicant now wished to alter this as stated.

Cr A. McFarlane commented that, in his opinion, the ,requirement of a bond wouVl be a doubtful legal point, and asked how the agreement would stand if the building was to be sold.

The mayor, Mr S. F. Newton, assumed that the councillors would have no hesitation in approving a permit which had asked for authority to build offices above a shon. Members agreed that such buildings were very desirable and in all probability would be in demand with the growth of the borough. It was stated that temporary living accommodation could become fairlv permanent and might not be suitable ior eonv nv si°n to offices. Cr A. E. Page said that the question of policy should be fina'lv decided. “This'matter has been taking up the time of the council for months,” he added. Cr J. J. Stevens understood that the size rf the section was partly the reason to be taken into consideration and Cr C. H. Clarke reminded the council that an ordinary flat or residence required a minimum frontage. “I am of the opinion that the original recommendation of the Town Planning Committee should be upheld.” he said. He considered that the committee'would welcome the erection of offices above shonwith direct street access, but it had sound reasons for disapproving of flats unless they had the entrance through the shop itself. He was not happy about the recommendation now in the report. The resident knew the section was too small when subdivided for other than business buildings, he added. The council finaby decided not to approve of the report tabled and to advise the resident that it would approve of offices having direct sheet access if designed as such. Any residential rooms would remih’" the entrance through the shoo itself as originally recommended by the Town Planning Committee.