THE MAYOR AND TOWN PLANNING

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 3, Issue 274, 26 February 1941, Page 4

THE MAYOR AND TOWN PLANNING

Sir,—As reported in your issue of 21st inst. the Mayor endeavours to white wash the actions, of his Coun~ cil, and colour facts to suit his own viciws and wishes. To crown all he makes a most egregious misstatement of fact when he states the Whakatane Strand (Street) is one and a half chains wide; and it was so made by the foresight of a member in spite of great opposition.. Nowhere is this' Strand one and a half chains in width. In fact it is less by 16 to 30 feet of boiogonc and a half chains wide. is still there to be measured, and "dummy tells no lies." Strange that the Miayor should not know the breadth of the street in front of his office, and make such a blunder.

Ten or twelve years ago, the Borough Council had a Town Planning brain quake. It declared Commerce Street a Brick Area between the Strand and Domain Road. This checked all building progress and there was not a brick building erected in that area for ftearly ten years*

The Mayor aiudes to the irfcident of the Borough Council prosecuting the Whakataneite for seeking to build a double unit house. The facts are that the Borough lost in Court on the major point, of trying to r.tap the eirection of the building. This was a moral win for the house builder. The builder w.as slightly lined for a small breach of the by-laws. In this respect, the builder was following the precedent of a member of the Borough Council who had broken the same building by-laws a very short time previously, hut who was not prosecuted. Was the Judge's son correct when he declared there was one law for the big man, and another law for the other man? However v the Mayor has no-U informed your readers, what is common knowledge, that the house builder's small fine was paid out of a free Government building bonus paid -to the builder in cash v when the disputed building was completed. There was then £32 over to tho builder's good after paying Ihe small fine. Who laughed last then? Who was the winner?

The Mayor states that the Borough: now has a by-law enabling it to pull down any building that the Borough Council thinks does conform with its by-laws.

Three or four years hack an Auckland Suburban Borough. Council passed a similar by-law, but a ratepayer challenged this restrictive bylaw in the Supreme Court, when the by-law was upset, the Court holding that it was unreasonable and ulta vires. No doubt the. Sam» fate would befall our local by-law, which is merely a long wordy jargon of loose phrases so badly constructed, that a 3rd standard school liid could improve on it. Yours ctc.„ A TENANT.