NO PERMIT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24783, 6 December 1941, Page 11

NO PERMIT

ALTERATIONS TO OFFICES ACTION AGAINST BUILDERS Allegations that the action was brought through spite were made at the i Port Chalmers Police Court yesterday, when the Port Chalmers Borough Council.proceeded against the Love Construction Company, Ltd., Dunedin, for commencing building operations without submitting plans for approval." The defendant company, which was represented by Mr O. G. Stevens, pleaded guilty to a technical breach, and was fined 20s.and costs (10s) by the magistrate. Mr H. J. Dixon, S.M. Mr W. J. Meade, who appeared for the Borough Council, said the defendant company had contracted to make extensive alterations to the office building of Messrs Stevenson and Cook, Ltd., in. Beach street, Port Chalmers. The work had been started early in August, but no plans had been submitted to the council for the purpose of the issue of a permit. The building" was now completed and still no plans had been forthcoming. The borough was compelled to take.a serious view of the matter.

The magistrate asked if the work done was of such a nature that the permit would have been refused. Mr Meade said that was not the case, so far as he was aware, but the council had had no plans to show what was being done, and it was consequently difficult to answer the question. Impossible* to Have Plans Mr Stevens said the charge was, in effect, one of failing to obtain a permit. Under the by-law, it was necessary to furnish plans and specifications before any work was commented. He wished to make it clear to the court that this building, and the alterations to it, were part and parcel of- the shipbuilding scheme. In the first place, Mr James Fletcher, who was directing the venture, had had interviews with the Mayor and the town clerk, and had given them a rough outline of the various proposals. Within a fortnight, work had been started. It would have been impossible, he submitted, to present plans to the council, as the preparation of these would have taken weeks, and the work was of such a nature that it could not be delayed. The magistrate asked how the contractors were going on with the work without Slans, and Mr Stevens said the architect ad provided rough sketch plans from time to time. The final result had been very difficult from the original intention, and the plans had been altered frequently as the work proceeded. The whole of the work had been carried out under the sole direction of the architect.

" This," said Mr Stevens, " is an entirely new industry, and the preparations for it have been extensive. To give some idea of the size of the project, I may say that the electrical work has required the

bringing in of a special supply line from Waipori. The whole thing is part of the war effort." He went on to recall the recent loss of the Australian cruiser Sydney and the newspaper report that the Germans had been urged that now was the time to strike in the Atlantic/ ''This is no time," he said; "to be hanging on for months to get plans. This is a vital matter." He suggested that by its action the Borough Council was impeding the war effort, and said that if it were going to adopt that attitude the council would, find that a grave responsibility rested upon it. " Brought Through Spite •» "There must be some other reason behind the prosecution," Mr Stevens con-, tlnued, " and I suggest that it was brought through spite. No complaint was made till more than two months after the work was started and after Mr J. Y. Love, managing director of the defendant firm, had crossed swords with the Mayor over the alleged filching by the council of a certain recreation reserve. That is the real reason behind it. It is a case where the. defendant company has been subjected to a definite attempt at revenge by a small and narrow-minded circle in Port Chalmers." Men were working almost 24 hours a day, counsel added, to get the work done, but the Borough Council had to have its permit. ': « When Mr Meade attempted to address the court, Mr Stevens submitted that he had no right to reply, but the court held that allegations had been made which he had a right to answer. Mr Meade said he did not propose to pay any attention to the allegations made by the defence. A permit had been sought and granted for the building of the slipways without any difficulty whatever. Mr Stevens: Does the council know there is a war on?

The magistrate said that the firm concerned was an old one, and knew the position regarding permits. He was sure that, if the council had had a provisional plan, its requirements would have been satisfied. The defendant would be lined 20s and costs (10s). ?..