Five-acre scheme for Mansons Point

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33077, 18 November 1972, Page 1

Five-acre scheme for Mansons Point

A new scheme of subdivision to create 33 five-acre sections at Mansons Point, Governor’s Bay, was submitted to the Mount Herbert County Council yesterday by town-planning consultants acting for Mr G. P. O’Farrell.

The scheme is an alternative to the original proposal by Mr O’Farrell to create a 148-section subdivision on the point. This was withdrawn last month, Mr O’Farrell’s solicitors reserving to him the right to introduce fresh proposals.

The council yesterday referred the new plan to its town-planning consultants, but the chairman (Mr E. R. Radcliffe) said that the fiveacre proposal was unlikely to conform to the council’s reviewed town . planning scheme.

The application was for approval of a rural subdivision of five-acre lots, the accompanying map showing Man-

sons Point gridironed with sections running off a central road along the ridge, and connecting with the main road above Allandale.

“I don’t know what you think of this, but it has got to be considered in relation to our review of the county planning scheme,” said Mr Radcliffe. “We must see how it ties in, and so we will be unable to make a decision today. We must first seek the advice of our town-planning consultants. “Not bound” "We are not bound to approve of it, even though the subdivision is technically permissible in the terms of our existing planning scheme. We indicated in our statement of planning objectives to accompany the reviewed scheme that we were considering raising the minimum, acreage to 10, and this will be confirmed in the details of the scheme. This proposal will be unlikely to conform.” Cr M. D. A. Radcliffe asked why no reserve or reserves were allowed for in the subdivision plan.

“The reserve contribution is not payable on five-acre sections,” said Mr Radcliffe. “If the land were zoned residential, the contribution would be payable, but it is zoned rural.” Cr Radcliffe asked if, in the event of the council approving, it could require reserves Ito be provided. "We can approve the sub-

division on any conditions we like,” said Mr Radcliffe. "I don’t know on a legal point how we would stand in designating a reserve, but in view of official interest in preserving the coastline, it should be possible to require the developer to reserve seafront.”

After it had been decided to refer the plan for advice, Cr C. E. Jenkins asked how long the council had held the plan. Why had it not been referred first?

Mr Radcliffe said he thought the council was entitled to see the scheme first, and make up its mind what to do.