Johns Road Residents Oppose Crematorium

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29791, 6 April 1962, Page 10

Johns Road Residents Oppose Crematorium

Residents near Johns road, "shocked” by the idea.of a crematorium in their midst, have appointed a solicitor to handle their protest. The solicitor, Mr J. R. B Menzies, said yesterday he was instructed to take the matter to the Supreme Court if the Waimairi County Council did not rescind its decision approving the enterprise. The council will be told this in a letter from Mr Menzies, along with information that the residents consider they have been treated badly and are considering calling a public meeting with a view to demanding the resignations of their representatives on the council. Mr Menzies said he was appointed by two residents, who had the signatures of more than 80 to support the protest. Letter to Council A copy of the letter to the council says that residents consider a crematorium will detract from the amenities of the neighbourhood, be aesthetically offensive, and lower values of nearby properties. It is not in the interests ol the community, generally, to reduce already rapidly diminishing agricultural land near the city when the crematorium at Bromley will.

with proposed extensions, be able to cope with demands for years to come, the letter says. Residents are “nothing less than shocked’’ that the matter was allowed to go so far without the proposal being brought to their notice. Under section 38A of the Town and Country Planning Act. 1953, the council is not bound to advertise or serve notice of every application • for approval of change of use of land, the letter says. But under sub-section (2) particulars of any applica- ; tion where the proposed use “detracts, or is likely to detract from the amenities of the neighbourhood.’’ has to be advertised if the council ; so determines. Exercise of Discretion ’ The manner in which the • council determines a question like this is also within the council’s discretion, says ; the letter. "But where the > proposed use involves such possibilities of detriment to the interests of other occupiers it Is certainly fair and reasonable (and. in my present view of the law, legally obligatory) that the discre- ! tion be exercised in a judicial ; (or at the least semi-judicial) manner with due regard to the interests of all concerned. ; "The fact that such adver- . tising and notice are mandatory where a scheme is operative is at least a guide as to the nature of the obligations of a council when a scheme, as in this case, is on the verge of becoming operative,” Mr Menzies’ letter.* says.