TOWN-PLANNING LAW.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20570, 22 May 1930, Page 8

TOWN-PLANNING LAW.

ZONING OF THE CITY.

OUTER SHOPPING AREAS, RIGHTS OF LAND OWNERS. One docs not need to possess the gift of a seer to predict with confidence a tremendous commotion over New Zea- | land's town-planning law. Town-plan-j ning ideals are among those things which communities in many countries have sup- ! ported with alacrity during the last 20 'years. There were places in Franco ; where it was possible to start de novo ; and build, so to speak, to the book. "Tho I book," of course is very new, and is very ' liable to reflect the ideas of gentlemen who object to practical circumstances coming into conflict with their dreams. But in devastated areas in France, and in many new suburban areas in England, it was possible to start at the beginning and construct a suburb upon model lines —the kind of suburb that will arise in Orakej, of Auckland. But the real problem lies in areas already built upon. In thousands of towns that have grown haphazard, including Auckland, the law has ordered zoning plans. And over the general aim there is not likely to be any great conflict of interests. The average citizen supports the ideas that residential areas should remain residential areas, that shops should be confined to certain areas, and that industrial premises, particularly those which may house "noxious trades," should be confined to fixed areas. Danger 01 Monopoly. But in Auckland, and probably in most large towns, the zoning plans have assumed a strongly communal aspect.. Wo find that the Town-planning Committee of the City Council, a body which includes representatives of non-official organisations, is attempting to fix shopping areas in a manner that will bestow a certain degree of monopoly upon existing premises and vacant areas. After a general review of town-planning administration to date, one is forced to the conclusion that the authority of the Act is being exceeded—with the best of intentions, of course, but nevertheless in a manner that interferes with the ordinary rights of property. It is admitted by idealists that the town-planning law invades what used to be called property rights more than the sum total of all other restricting ordinances of the average British community. But in so far as industrial plants and shops are excluded from residential areas, the community may be said to approve. When zoning, however, fixes limits upon the use that may be made of land within existing shopping areas, there is bound to be sharp conflict, and, as matters are shaping, resort to law is inevitable, if means can be devised for going past the Town-planning Board of the State. Jervois Road Area. Take one street already dealt with by the Town-planning Committee —Jervois Road. Practically the whole of the north side has been excluded from the shopping area, notwithstanding the fact that along a number of blocks shops are more or less continuous on the south side. To arrive - at this decision the committee obtained statistics as to the number of residences and the. number of shops serving them. One shop to 20 dwellings is accepted as the standard, and because this standard may be. exceeded the committee recommends excluding many sections as possible shop sites, notwithstanding the fact that they face existing shops. It is understood that a large majority of the people residing in the zone support thi3 judgment, but only a fraction of them have property interests in Jervois Road. Naturally, they are ready to sit in judgment upon other people's affairs. Doubtless they consider that the amenities of the area will be served by keeping shops off the bulk of the north 6ide, but whether two-storeyed apartments which are to bo permitted, will add to these " amenities" is a question. In any case, the opinion of the residents is nob necessarily important when it comes to a question of zoning a road which for a considerable distance is already a shopping area. The owners of the land are the first to be considered. The decision may create a degree of monopoly for the " soutli-siders," and operate very unjustly against a man who may have had vision to the extent of a couple of decades better than another, and on that account may have bought property with a view to building shops at a later time. Principles 0$ Town-planning. But the enthusiastic town-planner may quote principles—principles which have been hatched very recently, to support a decision which may destroy a scheme of former years whereby a man may have provided for his last years by buying shop sites years ago. It is not a case of one who adds to his house and creates a shop in a neighbourhood where no shops have ever been, but one where a man holds sites opposite' existing shops. One has heard (lie argument that shop property has been overbuilt in Auckland's suburbs, which is called " waste." Bub in this competitive world over-building is usually the means whereby a shopping area is rebuilt. The best premises are used and the out-of-date buildings are left vacant until someone acquires them to build again. In Jervois Road there are several shops which date back many years. Only building competition jvill remove them — that is until a day arrives when they may be condemned on sanitary grounds..Cub out building competition on townplanning principles, which frankly aim ab stabilising values, and shed-like shops will be given a fictitious value for many-years beyond the time they should have been pulled down. Man on the Boundary. When zoning defines areas within existing shopping areas for the limitation of shop-building, there is always the question of tho rights of the man just outside the boundary. And if such owners feel aggrieved, public opinion ns it is will support them Tho public never imagined that town-planning would enter zones already devoted to trade and draw lines to prevent adjoining residential property from turning over to shops at the discretion of the owners. In the few zoning plans completed in Auckland one sees reference to " nonconforming buildings." These are shops which exist in blocks that have been excluded from shopping areas. The presumption is that in due time the city will wipe them out with compensation. 111 the meantime they may flourish with' monopolistic confidence, and as things happen in municipal government one imagines that " non-Conforming buildings" are likely to have a long life. Taken all in all, there is every reason for fearing in Auckland zoning judgments which exceed the authority of the Act. To count present shop premises and to say that only so many will bo allowed for the ultimate needs of, the area, is to limit the reasonable rights of mar?y property owners within shopping zonus* It would appear that idealists are attacking actuality and until communism operates generally there is no justification' for removing the reasonable rights of enterprise from owners of land within existing shopping zones.