Board Dismisses Appeal Against Hohepa Home

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30626, 17 December 1964, Page 1

Board Dismisses Appeal Against Hohepa Home

'rhe Town and Country Planning Appeal Board yesterday dismissed an appeal by 30 Cashmere residents against a decision of the Heathcote County Council granting permission for the establishment of a Hohepa home for intellectually-handicapped children at 141 Hackthorne road.

In a verbal decision given immediately after an inspection of the property, the chairman (Mr J. W. Kealy, S.M.), said the council’s decision was wise and correct. The board had no hesitation in disallowing the appeal, he said.

In the event of any disagreements between parties at some future date, the chairman gave them leave to apply to the board for determination of the disputed issues. Mr Kealy said he considered this would be a “safeguard for everyone." With Mr Kealy on the board were Messrs C. H. Taylor, W. F. McArthur, and E. Whittleston. Mr J. G. Leggat appeared for the objectors, Mr R. A. Young for the council, and Mr C. M. Roper for the Hohepa trust board. On Tuesday, the appeal board read the 209 foolscap pages of evidence heard by the council during the hearing which extended over eight nights earlier this year. Mr Leggat said he was content that the appeal should be dealt with from the notes of of evidence, and did not recall any witnesses.

Mr Roper recalled Marjorie Henrietta Allen, the principal of the trust board’s home school at Napier. She said the board could obtain the services of a trained woman from overseas for the proposed home at Cashmere. The woman had 30 years’ experience of teaching intellectu-ally-handicapped children. Asked by Mr Kealy whether she thought there was sufficient space for the trust board’s purposes at 141 Hackthorne road, Miss said there would be for 15 children. Nearby parks could also be used. Submissions Outlining his grounds of appeal, Mr Leggat said the establishment of the home would detract from the

amenities. He submitted that the council, in holding that the home would not detract, had acted against the weight of evidence and contrary to certain recognised townplanning principles. Mr Leggat submitted that the home would in fact be a mental hospital, and could not be permitted as a conditional use in a residential area. The objectors were, he said, very concerned that there would be insufficient staff available to control the child-

ren. If there was inadequate control, there would be behaviour problems. Mr Kealy: But surely this could also be the case in orphanages ami ordinary schools? Mr Leggat conceded that naughty children could create behaviour difficulties, but submitted that the normal child was capable of controlling himself. Air Kealy: I have for some years been on a board responsible for the running of a children's home. On one

occasion, we discovered that some of our dear little boys had been going out at nights and indulging in a series of car conversions.

Mr Whittleston said his daughter had a police record for running away when she was only two years old. but he could not describe her as intellectually handicapped. “Other members of the board know her, and I would venture they would not either." Amid laughter, Mr Leggat replied: “True, but they might have some comments to make on the running of the home."

Staffing of Home Mr Roper assured the board that the staffing position would be closely watched. He said there was no evidence to suggest that the home would detract or was likely to detract from the surrounding amenities. Referring to earlier long legal argument by Mr Leggat on the question of whether the home was a mental hospital, Mr Roper said the matter should be viewed with common sense.

“it: is absolutely artificial to consider it as a mental hospital,” he said. "It is only juggling with words."

After formal submissions by Mr Young in defence of the council’s decision, the board went to Hackthorne road and inspetced the property. in his decision, Mr Kealy said the board appreciated the manner in which counsel had handled the case. “This was a matter which could have aroused high and emotionally ■ charged feelings,” he said. Mr Kealy said the board would present a written decision later, but in the meantime the trust board could proceed with its plans foMhe purchase of the property.

“1 hope this matter will meet with a very great measure of success and that the fears of the objectors will prove unfounded," said Mr Kealy.