WITHIN BRICK AREA.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4963, 19 April 1926, Page 2

WITHIN BRICK AREA.

BUILDING IN IRON SOUGHT. BREEZE IN THE COUNCIL. An application by a local builder, on behalf of a property owner in Paeroa, for permission to erect an iron buifding 18ft by 10ft to an existing shop within the brick area in Belmont Road, came before the Pa,eroa Borough Council at its meeting on Thursday night. . Referring to the application the Mayor (Mr W. Marshall) said that if the application was granted, it would be in direct contravention of By-law 88, and there were no special reasons advanced to show why relaxation of the by-law should be given. He doubted if it was legal to grant a permit under the modification clause without nullifying the by-law. He moved that the application be deferred tor one month. This brought Cr. B. Edwards to his feet, a,nd he moved as an amendment that the application be granted. He pointed out fha.t at the committee meeting on the Tuesday evening the. matter had been thrashed out and five ■of the councillors (the number required under the by-laws;) had. voted in i favour of the granting of the application under .the saving clause. If the matter was held up by the Mayor it would be “merely a quibble ’ on his part. The Mayor objected .to the remark and ordered Cr. Edwards to withdraw it. Cr. Edwards, explained that what he intended to point out w'as the unfaii ness of holding the application up, and he could not understand the motive of the. Mayor in wishing to do so. His Worship said he took strong exception to the remarks a|hd attitude ofc Cr. Edwards. He questioned whether it was proper for Cr. Edwards; to take part in the discussion, in view of the fact tha.t he had stated in committee that he was acting as; agent for the owner of the property. It wap regrettable that it had been necessary to divulge what had taken place in. committee., but as Cr. EdWardfe had chosen to do so he (the speaker) did: not feel that he was committing a breach of faith.' I,t was‘highly improper, and he doubted if it was not illegal, for a councillor interested in such a matter to try and push it through the council in the manned’ Cr. Edwards had attempted. The Mayor said' he had hepeil that the council; would see fit to hold the matter up for a. month to give time for fuither consideration and .to give the applicant an opportunity to put his application in order. ' The Mayor went on to say that the application had been received at the borough office, after which it was; missing for some days. Presumably Cr. Edwards had retained it in his possession, and had approached the councillors a.nd discussed the matter with them. The resolution moved by Cr. Edwards would not be accepted, and the application was. not in order. Replying to the statements of the. ’Mayor Cr. Edwards said that, he held l)o pecuniary interests in the building under discussion. He felt flattered to hoar the Mayor say that he (Or. Edwards) was hopeful of pushing the matter through the council. He wasin the council as a representative of the ratepayers, and did not seek fear or favour. The application had been sent to his office as chairman of the building committee, and he had in tho course of his duty consulted the members associated with him on the committee- In his opinion the application had not been unduly delayed by him. At the committee meeting five councillors h.ad agreed ,to the application being approved. Further, the applicant. wap a large ratepayer, and it was reasonable that the property should become revenue-producing. The Mayor repeated that the application was not in order, and ruled that, the amendment was out of order accordingly. If necessary a legal opinion could be obtained and an opportunity given the applicant to put ,th,e application in order, and, if considered desirable, a special meeting could be held to reconsider the matter. He had no wish to delay the matter unduly.