Play centre opposed

Press, 17 December 1976, Page 21

Play centre opposed

I An action to stop the construction of a playcentre i building and an outdoor i playground on a Waimairi County Council reserve in a ! new subdivision at Avonihead was heard by Mr Jusi tice Roper in the Supreme ■Court yesterday. i His Honour reserved his iecision. Nine persons who own five sections in the area sur- ■ rounding the proposed playcentre applied to the Supreme Court for an order i declaring unlawful and ;nI valid the building permit issued by the Waimairi County Council to the Avonhead ~ Playcentre, Incorporated, for the erection of a playcentre and outdoor playground equipment on the reserve, which borders Strathean Avenue and Stormont Place. The property owners con-j tended that the erection of a! playcentre building on the: reserve was unlawful because no permit for conditional use had been issued under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act, and on other grounds. Mr A. Hearn appeared for the owners: Mr .1. E. Ryan for the Waimairi County. Council, the first defendant? and Mr R. J. De Goldi for the Avonhead Pl ay centre, the second defendant. Both defendants opposed the orders sought by the plaintiffs. Opening hi» case, Mr

;- Hearn said that the plaintiffs! e owned five sections in Strar thean Avenue, which runs •i east off Withells Road, and! a in Stormont Place, a cul de; i- sac which runs north off! ;- Strathen Avenue. e On October 22, 1976. the! council issued a building s permit for the playcentre. At present no construction work had been done, rt'but a small quantity of! ", building material had been " moved to the site. ", The proposal involved the r use of 494 square metres, or: "19.53 perches, for the play-< . centre building, and a larger! 1 area, which was to be: " fenced off on the conditions; that there was no restriction 1 of pedestrian traffic through 1 ‘lthe reserve and that outdoor; ■I play equipment, such as 3 swings, slides, and jungle! ■ I gyms, was left outside fori iuse by children when the' ■ playcentre was not in ses-t ( ii sion. >! It had been stated that the I. • maximum number of ses-l isions each week at the play ' I'centre would be 10. but it . ilwas unlikely ’that there' would be more than six. Each session was for two 1 - hours and a half. ( At each session the centre • proposed to have a maximum of 25 children, aged '■ between three and five. The . residents were concerned i about the noise and traffic > the playcentre would > create and about the construction of the building,! • which would detract from

j the amenities of the neigh-l 'bourhood and interfere with : the enjoyment of their land. Il Nearly half of the reserve ‘ area was affected in some ; restricting way, Mr Hearn said. The erection of the I building would limit the Narea of land available to the i public. In its statement of defence ■ ; the Waimairi County admitted that the reserve was in a residential A zone, and that in the district scheme, which became operational on j September 1, 1974, the play- 1 | centres were a conditional I use in such zones. j However, the council con-: tended that the reserve had! ibeen the subject of a desig|nation of "recreation (play),’; land therefore denied that the I usual limitation of residential A zoning applied. : The council denied that; 'the erection of a playcentre' :on the reserve was not a luse within a designated use lof the district scheme, and that the issue of the building permit was unlawful. The plaintiffs are: Patrick Gary Horgan, an airline pilot; Richard Gordon Sunke! and Alice Jean Cheatley. company directors; Robert! William Foster, builder, and Delphine Constance Foster, his wife; John Goodlet: ;Pryde, an economist, and Ngaire Mary Pryde, a : teacher; Joseph Raymond IRagg. a builder, and Eunice; i Audrey Ragg, his wife.