Fruitgrowers’ Appeals Dismissed By Bd

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32349, 15 July 1970, Page 7

Fruitgrowers’ Appeals Dismissed By Bd

Two appeals against a Waimairi County Council’s decision refusing permission for orcbardists on the Main North Road at Belfast to sell produce not grown on their own properties were dismissed by the Town and Country Planning Appeal Board yesterday. The board is Mr A. R. Turner, S.M. (chairman), and Messrs R. S. Martin, G. R. Tutt, and A. E. Kennard. The chairman said the reasons for the dismissal would be given in writing later. The appellants were Mr W. D. Turner, of 543 Main North Road (Mr A. B. Harman), and Mr B. A. Freeman, of 545 Main North Road (Mr K. J. McMennamin). They wanted a specified departure to allow them to sell produce other than that grown on their own properties. The appeals were opposed by the Waimairi County Council (Mr J. E. Ryan), the New Zealand Businessmen’s and Mixed Dairymen’s Association, the Canterbury Fruiterers’ Association, the New Zealand Federation of Retail Fruiterers, and the Growers’ Direct Market (Mr A. Hearn), and the Ministry of Works (Mr D. C. McCaskill).

The grounds of the appeals were that the Waimairi County Council’s decision was erroneous in that the effect of a specified departure would have little significance beyond the immediate vicinity of the properties concerned, and that granting the application was not contrary to the public interest. Mr Turner said that in February, 1966, he was granted a permit by the Waimairi County Council to build a new shop, and later he was told by letter from the county council that the I permit included restrictions i lon the goods that could be sold from his shop. He said he was told tbat ‘ the restrictions were a for-1 mality and he went ahead j and built a new shop. He said he had never been told that any form x>f conditional use would be imposed. Mr Freeman said that in September, 1967, he applied to the Waimairi County Council for a permit to build a new shop on his property. He was subsequently told that conditional use would apply to the new shop. Mr K. A. Fuller, president of the Canterbury Retail Fruiterers’ Association and speaking on behalf of allied! associations, said fruiterers accepted that a grower should be allowed to sell his own produce from his own property direct to the public, but the trade opposed any extension of selling rights to enable a grower to sell goods not grown on his own property. He submitted that such an extension would tend to undermine the established pattern of stability of the existing retail fruit outlets and would thus be contrary to the public interest. Mr Ryan said that the appellants’ proposals were contrary to town planning practice because of the traffic hazard and because there was no need for new and wider commercial activity in the area.

The council also felt that as there were so many roadside selling points 'in the county (about 160) that to grant the latitude asked for would set a precedent, and it would be very difficult to resist other applications.