Restriction Near Airfield “Denial Of Justice”

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31981, 7 May 1969, Page 8

Restriction Near Airfield “Denial Of Justice”

It was a denial of elemental justice for the Minister of Works to make a direction having far-reaching effects on a land owner without notifying the owner or giving reasons for the direction, said Mr R. P. Thompson in submissions to the Town and Country Planning Appeal Board. Mr Thompson was appearing for the New Zealand Fanners’ Co-operative Association of Canterbury, Ltd, iri its appeal against the height-restriction imposed on buildings in the flight path of aircraft using Wigram airfield. Mr Thompson called evidence to show that threefifths of the company’s 64 acres near Wigram was affected by the height-restric-tion “fan.” Buildings and trees were restricted to 25ft at the end nearest the airfield and to 50ft at the further boundary. He told the board that the fan was a safety zone for the time when pilots would be trained in jets at Wigram. They were very onerous and stringent restrictions, without any public or private notification. He asked the board to “disturb and amend” the Minister’s direction. Point of Law The hearing was adjourned yesterday after Mr Thompson had made submissions, on the invitation of the chairman of the board (Mr J. H. Luxford), that the height restrictions on the approaches to the airfield were not a “public work” within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act or within the meaning of the Public Works Act, and were therefore invalid. Mr Luxford said that he would have to go into the matter and it was likely that the board would decide that the restrictions, as incorporated in the ordinance of the Paparua County Council district planning scheme, were invalid. The Minister of Works

would possibly desire to have the board’s decision by way of case stated, as a decision that the restrictions were invalid could have wide effects, Mr Luxford said. The board would give its decison by way of case stated if informed that this was desirable. No evidence or submissions were offered for the Ministry of Works, leave being given for the Ministry to proceed if desired after the board's decision on the point of law raised had been given.