Fendhlton Mall decision reserved

Press, 23 August 1984, Page 14

Fendhlton Mall decision reserved

The fact that a site next to Fendalton Mall had already been developed as a car-park should be totally disregarded now that permission was being sought to use it, a Waimairi District Council hearing committee has heard. The Waimairi District Planner, Mr D. D. Hinman, told the committee that work was done on the site in March this year, contrary to the wishes and against the advice of the council. It was done at the owners’ risk. “The fact that the resources used in developing the site could be wasted if consent was refused is certainly not a matter for the' council to take into account,” he said. The application under consideration was for consent to use a 600 m section adjacent to Fendalton Mall, as additional car-parking space. The owners of the mall and section, which is zoned residential, propose to increase the existing carpark of 120 spaces by a further 18. The owners, Messrs J. T. and W. M. Turner, lodged a similar application in 1981. It was refused on the basis that neither the need for additional spaces nor improvement in the shape and design of the car-park layout had been proved. There were 75 objections to the latest application. About 20 of the objectors attended yesterday’s full-

day hearing at the Waimairi District Council chambers. The proposed car-park became news in March this year when the applicants began work on the site. In the early stages the council took court action and obtained an injunction preventing continuation of the work. It was lifted after an assurance was given that the land would not be used for car-parking without the necessary planning consents being obtained. The owners completed work on the site, sealing it and painting white car-space lines. Speaking on behalf of the applicants, Mr D. H. Hicks said there was a need for more car-parking space to serve the existing facilities at Fendalton Mall. Since the mall was established in 1970, commercial activity had increased greatly. This was reflected in the number of staff working on and parking their cars on the site, as well as the number of shoppers parking. There was a critical shortage of parking space at peak shopping times. Mr Hicks attributed a "noticeable increase” in onstreet parking in Memorial Avenue to the shortage of parking at the mall. Onstreet parking was less safe both for parking and passing traffic and it was in the public interest that reasonable steps be taken to provide the safest possible conditions. The proposed alteration to the car-park would also improve the design and usefulness of existing spaces, said Mr Hicks. The present car-park narrowed towards the rear, causing some motorists manoeuvring problems. There would be minimal impact on surrounding occupants by the proposed extension, he said. The two adjacent neighbours would be shielded from the extension by ample landscaping and fencing, and would suffer no detriment.

Because the site had no street, access except through the existing car-parking area, it would be unsuitable for the residential use for which it was zoned, said Mr Hicks. The application was for a specified departure under the operative scheme. Under the council’s new reviewed District Scheme the site has been zoned residential G.P., which means that car-parking could proceed without a planning application provided the schemewas approved. Mr Hicks said the owners considered the matter urgent, which was why they had applied under the operative scheme rather than waiting up to two years for the reviewed scheme to become operative. The owners were asking only to be able to provide more adequately for the parking needs of the existing complex, said Mr Hicks. They were not trying to expand the car-parking space as a precursor to expanding the shopping centre. A consultant town planner, Mr B. W. Thompson, gave evidence in support of the application. According to a survey on the demand for parking at Fendalton Mall, there were many times when it was more than 85 per cent full. At these times there was a tendency for parking on the roadside to occur or double parking within the car-park, which led to congestion and reduced safety, he said. Ail the objectors were adamant that additional car-parking space was not needed. Mr E. H. Bennett, a resident of Otara Street, said that he and three other objectors had kept a count of cars using the Fendalton Mall car-park from December 14 to 24 last year. During this supposedly peak time, the lowest number of cars parked in the mall was

12 and the highest was 110, he said. On no occasion was it full, and on the average there were 80 cars in the park. The safety and convenience of a car-park was a matter of design, rather than simply of over-all size, said Mr Bennett. Increased safety and manoeuvrability could be achieved by widening individual stall spaces rather than by expansion. He and other objectors said they were concerned about the effect increased traffic flow in and out of the car-park might have on passing traffic in Memorial Avenue. There was some expressed concern that the outcome of the applicationhad been anticipated by the applicants as they had already developed the carpark. Mr Bennett said, “In my view it is no less a car-park just because there are no cars parked on it; in fact, its visual impact is as bad empty as full.” Most objectors said they were concerned about the .adverse impact the car-park' would have on the neigh-, bourhood. Mr Bennett said that with the additional carparking on the site, the whole car-park was now more expansive. Previously its scale did not detract too much from the residential character but with the additional area, the scale of the car-park had made the entire mall and its environs appear to be more commercial. Mrs E. J. Dando, whose property backs on to the subject site, said that she and her family suffered a loss of privacy because of the developed site. Although a 6ft wall had been erected between her property and the proposed car-park, the car-park land had been raised half a metre above the level of her garden, she said. This meant that people could see into her house and

garden. “We are beginning to feel like goldfish,” she said. Mrs Dando said she was concerned about the litter from the mall which was already affecting her property. The car-park was already used by people who wanted to “race round in, cars,” often on two wheels, after shop hours, she said. The extension of what was already a dark expanse at night could mean an increase in vandalism. Most objectors also said they were worried that the expansion of the car-park could be the preliminary to unlimited expansion of the mall. Mr P. J. Tucker said that the mall was initially developed to replace the shops lost when Clyde Street and

Memorial Avenue were widened. It was residential in character, which was what the local residents had liked, but was now in danger of becoming another large shopping complex like Bishcpdale, he said. The district traffic engineer, Mr P. L. Atkinson, said the proposed car-park extension would provide a higher level of service to customers and would enable a number of parking spaces to be brought up to standard. He had no objection to the proposal. The District Planner, Mr Hinman, said that he thought the proposal had planning merit and supported it on the basis that it complied with the provisions of the District Scheme Review. However, as there were

many objections lying against the review, which have yet to be heard, it was particularly important that the council was satisfied that the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act had been met before granting consent. Unless urgency could be established the more appro-, priate course might be to await the outcome of the District Scheme Review hearings, said Mr Hinman. If sufficient evidence was given to satisfy the council that a specified departure should be consented to, conditions should be imposed relating to the setting out of the car-park, and landscape proposals, he said. The chairman of the committee, Cr lan Calvert, reserved decision on the application.