County Defies Authority

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30073, 6 March 1963, Page 11

County Defies Authority

In spite of the objection of the Christchurch Regional Planning Authority, the Paparua County Council had given permission for a company to build an asbestos cement plant on a property in Springs road, Prebbleton, the authority was told ait its meeting yesterday. The property concerned was next to the urban fence, but just outside it.

At its last meeting the authority agreed that land inside the urban fence zoned for industry should be developed for industrial use before applications were approved for factories to become established on ruralzoned land. It did not propose to extend the urban fence in the Paparua county district at this stage to include additional land for industrial purposes. Owners of vacant land in the county in the industrial zone bounded by Hayton’s road. Middle Lincoln road and the main south railway line had been approached over the Industrial development of their properties to see if suitable alternative land for the applicant company was available, said the

chairman (Mr E. J. Bradshaw) reporting to the authority on developments since the last meeting. The company concerned required an area of land between 20 acres and 30 acres, vi’ith direct and immediate rail access. The Christchurch

City Council, Health Department, and private landowners concerned were approached, Mr Bradshaw said Replies of Owners

One land-owner was prepared to sell a 20-acre block to the applicant company, and the Railways Department was prepared to provide rail access to it. Owners f nearly 100 acres in the block had indicated their willingness to consider any offers for their land, and owners of ■ further 83 acres were still considering the matter, said Mr Bradshaw. The owner of a block of about 86 acres had advised that he had no intention rf selling at present.

This pointed to a real problem, said Mr T. D. Flint. “We must not plan people out of an area altogether. Other parts of New Zealand are jumping ahead because they take a more lenient view and are more co-opera-tive with industry.” Mr W. P. Glue: We are not keeping people out. He agreed that it was pointless for the authority to have land zoned as industrial if it was impossible for companies to buy it, said Mr J. I. Colligan. “If the owner of land zoned industrial won’t sell, then we should zone it residential. I am strongly against this business of having industrial land not being turned over for industry.” Mr Glue: It simply isn’t true to My the land is not available. I know the reasons —the land is not as cheap as the land the company wants. -Drift of Industry”

‘Hie point was not whether the land was available or not. said Mr J. H. Weaver. "There is a lot of talk of drift of industry to the north —what else can you expect when you won’t provide Mutable land here. These people want a railway siding, and why should we send them away when we have suitable land available right next to the urban fence?” asked Mr Weaver. According to the report before the authority, the Railways Department had advised it could put a railway siding in to the industrial zone land, said Mr due. “U we allow them to build in Springs road, we will get that ribbon development we are trying our best to stop. I don't care w’hose land the company buys, but there is no doubt that there is m-diMtrial-aoned land for sale.'* It was obvious from the report and discussions that a railway siding would be available in the industrialtoned land, said Mr Braddaw. “I can’t see that any change in our policy would be anything but thoroughly bad planning. We have alreadv zoned sufficient land in Paparua for industrial use and we must stand firm, otherwise our planning is not

worth the paper it’s written on.” Mr Weaver then told the authority that his council intended to go ahead in any case. Members: Tut, tut. Mr E. Somers: If that’s the case, we should decide what action to take. I think the authority must make clearly known just where it stands. “I think the council’s decision is most regrettable. The county must be well aware that this scheme they have adopted is contradictory to the regional planning scheme,” Mr Somers said. Mr J. I. CoiHigan asked who would meet compensation for the firm if it began building and proceedings were commenced which eventually ruled against its erection. Mr Bradshaw: That’s over to the Paparua council. Asked after the meeting if the building permit had been issued to the company, Mr Weaver said that in the normal course of events, it would now be issued.