MINISTER’S LETTER NOT AUTHORITY

Lake County Mail, Issue 12, 13 August 1947, Page 1

MINISTER’S LETTER NOT AUTHORITY

Alterations to White Star 9 EXPLANATION BY CONTRACTOR

A letter from the Minister of Works, the Hon. R. Semple, stating that alterations to the White Star Hotel, Queenstown, would be authorised, was the reason for the contractor proceeding with the work without waiting for a permit. This was revealed at a meeting of the Queenstown Borough Council on Thursday night, in a letter from the contractor, Mr J. H. Butler, in reply to a demand from the council for an explanation.

At a previous meeting of the Borough Council, a letter from the district building controller, Mr J. Jackson, Dunedin, stated that the application for work at the White Star Hotel had still to be approved by the Advisory Building Committee in Wellington. Mr Jackson stated that he had been advised by a member of his staff that the work was still proceeding, and the question of referring the matter to Wellington, with a view to prosecution, depended upon the contractor giving an assurance that no further work would be carried out until the necessary permit had been received.

touch with the Building Controller, Mr R. L. McPhail, and, after plans and specifications had been forwarded by the applicant to the district building controller at Dunedin, the necessary permit would be authorised.

By-Jaw Breaches Cr Wheatley: I believe it has been stated that I have friends. I definitely have no friends when it comes to by-laws. He added that he had been absent from the previous council meeting when this subject had been discussed; The plans under discussion had been before the council on a previous occasion and had been approved, although the district building controller at Dunedin had then rejected them. Cr Wheatley referred to the 10s a week that the council was demanding for the deposit of rubbish on the street, and said that other residents of the town were repeatedly breaking this bylaw.

Letter from Contractor Stating that he had been given verbal permission by Cr A. H. Wheatley to proceed with the work, Mr Butler, in his letter, said:

“ He and I both knew that a per-

Mit was forthcoming. I had the

labour available, but was immobil-

ised through shortage of material

elsewhere and wet weather at the

time. I think you will agree that

A councillor; They are breaking the borough by-laws.

my action was, even though a tech-

nical breach, just what any business man would do in the interests of

Cr Wheatley: For example, Cr Lindsay has had material on the borough street for the past two months.

the building position generally. “ | note,” continued Mr Butler, “that it is your intention to

Cr Lindsay: Where is that, Cr Wheatley?

charge me 10s a week or part thereof for depositing materials

Cr Wheatley: Just along the street from the White Star Hotel.

on the streets without permission to do so. I presume that this J is in keeping with your by-laws * (of which I have not a copy

Cr Lindsay: Oh! They are shutters. They have not been there two months. They have been there seven weeks.

bandy). In view of past experi-

Cr Wheatley then explained how both the contractor and himself had seen the letter from Mr Semple authorising the start of the job, and naturally the builder, knowing the work had the necessary authority, and being held up on other work, had started on the demolition portion of the job at the White Star Hotel.

ence in your borough, however, I would like to know if this

charge has been invoked for

good. I shall in the future have

to know when costing and esti-

mating contracts. Or has it

teeeiu used as a punishment for

my unseemly conduct in dese-

Cr Sew JJoy; A permit has to be obtained from this council before any building operations can be carried out in the town.

orating the fair landscape of so public a part of the busy thoroughfare entering your

Councillors generally agreed that the contractor had beaten the pistol.

city? ”

Position Explained

From inquiries made at Dun-

The borough building inspector, Cr Wheatley, in justifying the action taken by the contractor, read a copy of a letter received by the applicant for the building permit from Mr Semple. This letter stated that the Minister had pleasure in advising the applicant that he had been' in

edin, it is understood that the

building permit authorising the

work was not received earlier by

the council because of unavoid-

able departn>enta! delays at Wellington and Dunedin.