Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BUILDING PERMITS.

At last night’s Council meetiug, Cr Richmond asked if it were a fact that an application for a permit to erect a building in Clyde Street had been made lo the Town Clerk and refused. ll so, what was the reason ? The Town Clerk said that the application had been made that day and as it .vas for the erection of a bnild'ng 1 i wood in the area proposed to oe included in the brick area he had decided to get the Borough Solicitor’s opinion re same. The solicitor advised him that under the circumstances it would be inadvisable to grant tne permit until the matter bad been put before the Council. He had therefore declined to issue it. Cr Richmond said there were some buildings erected iu Whyte Street recently that did not have brick walls. Were the permits tor these buildings issued since the new brick area was mooted.

The Town Clerk said the permits were granted some three or tour weeks ago, which was since the proposal to increase the brick area was brought forward. The two cases were not on all lours. One was tor the erection of ouibuildings and the permit was apu plied tor several weeks ago ; tire other was for a building in Clyde Street and the permit was applied for on the day ou winch it was proposed to confirm the special order extending the brick area. In the latter case it was apparently an endeavour to get behind the new by-law. Cr Richmond contended that no building permits stiouid have been granted alter the motion in connection with the extension or the area had been brought forward. Tne Town Clerk said that in the case of the outnuildiugs in Whyte Street, the permit had been applied for by the contractor which was in accordance with the implied meaning of the by-law dealiug with same, and an esti-

mate of the cost of the work provided. In the other case there was no contractor and no estimate was forthcoming. The matter was then allowed to drop.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19120903.2.15

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1090, 3 September 1912, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
347

BUILDING PERMITS. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1090, 3 September 1912, Page 3

BUILDING PERMITS. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1090, 3 September 1912, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert