Zoning of saleyards site to be resolved

Press, 11 September 1985, Page 9

Zoning of saleyards site to be resolved

The befuddled zoning of the land used for the Addington saleyards is likely to be cleared up as a result of a decision by the Planning Tribunal. The issue c«.r.e to a head after an appeal to the tribunal by the Canterbury Sale Yards Company, Ltd, to build a room for livestock sales and shows at the saleyards, in Deans Avenue. Plans to build the room had been scuttled when the Riccarton Borough Council refused to give the company planning consent for the new building, saying this was mainly because the site was not suitable for the planned use. The tribunal has recently decided to dismiss the company’s appeal and confirm the council’s decision not to allow building of the room. The tribunal, however, said in an interim decision in May that it believed that certain ordinances in the council’s District Scheme were invalid. It asked the council to provide “definite and valid” zoning of the saleyards land. The company would then have the right to object to the council about the land s zoning. The yards, built in 1875, are an anomaly under the

council’s District Scheme and are zoned as a special development area. According to the scheme, the special development area has an underlying zoning of either industrial C or residential C. The saleyards are not a permitted use under either of these zones. In an appendix to the scheme, the yards are referred to in a description of noxious and dangerous industries needing segregation because of noxious or dangerous elements. The council has continued to oppose the siting of the

saleyards in the area. After the tribunal’s interim decision in May, the council prepared a variation to its scheme. The Canterbury Sale Yards Company had objected to the variation to the scheme, said the Town Clerk of Riccarton, Mr J. B. Skinner. Cross-objections were now being received and the matter might be heard by the council in November, he said. Meanwhile, the tribunal said in its decision that it believed it would be against

the public interest to allow the company’s appeal to build the room. “As we mentioned in our earlier decision the present scheme objectives are clearly against the saleyards’ use continuing at the present site,” it said. “The final objects and purposes for the use of that land should now be resolved under the variation procedure.” The tribunal said that the District Scheme would need to be changed before the applications to build the room could be approved.