HOTEL APPEAL DECISION IS RESERVED

Taupo Times, Volume 19, Issue 98, 17 December 1970, Page 1

HOTEL APPEAL DECISION IS RESERVED

The decision on an appeal brought by the proprietors of the Spa Hotel against a decision by the Taupo Borough Council was reserved when it was heard by members of the Town and Country Planning Appeal Board in Taupo on Tuesday.

The appeal was brought by T. A. Heath Ltd against a decision of the Taupo Borough Council refusing consent to an application for conditional use.

Mr N. T. Gillespie O.B.E., of Wellington, appeared for the appellant company, while Mr J. Witten-Hannah represented the Taupo Borough Council. The board was led by its deputy-chairman, Mr K. O. Stephens, and with him were Messrs H. D. Lambie and G. F. Hogg. The decision that the owners of the Spa Hotel were appealing atainst, was one made by the borough council refusing to grant approval for extensions to the hotel public bar as required by the Licensing Control Commission on the grounds that the property was subject to flooding, erosion and geothermal activity. The licensee of the hotel, Mr J. W. Birnie told the board that he had been associated with the hotel since he obtained the licence in 1951. The first buildings on the property were reputed to have been constructed more than 100 years ago by the Armed Constabulary and had been used since 1869 as a hotel, he said. MAJOR FLOOD On December 17, 1969, the hotel was subject to a major flood. Subsequently a writ was lodged against the Taupo Borough Council in respect of damage to the hotel premises during this flood. The writ, which has been lodged with the Hamilton Supreme Court, alleged that the cause of the flood was the Taupo Borough Council's works further upstream and its failure to carry out any precautions which would protect the hotel premises against flood, said Mr Birnie In April this year, the company had made the financial arrangements necessary for the extension of the public bar and application was made for a building permit to carry out the extensions. required by the Licensing Commission. "It was on this occasion that my company was first informed that it would have to apply for a conditional use consent,' said Mr Birnie. "Until then it appeared to have been accepted by all concerned that a licensed hotel was the proper user of the site and that as it was a permitted conditional use within the rural zone, that work could be done without the necessity of a formal consent." CONDITIONAL USE When the application for conditional use was heard in July there were no objections, he said. ' 'No suggestions were made at the hearing that the hotel site was at all unsuitable for its present use or for the extensions. 'After that hearing I was left with the clear and unequivocal impression that there were no problems about the application,' he said. Mr Birnie said the writ and statement of claim against the

council for the flood damage was served on the council after the town planning committee had prepared a recommendation to the council that the application for the permit should be approved. "Two days after the writ was served the full council sat to consider the recommendations of the town planning committee," said Mr Birnie. The recommendations were referred back to the town planning committee for further consideration. Mr Birnie pointed out that neither he, nor his company, were notified that the application was to be reconsidered and there was no opportunity given, either to himself or a representative of his company to be present or to make any representations when the application was reconsidered. After reconsidering the application the committee made a recommendation that the application be declined and this was adopted by the full council in a divided resolution. NEW DEVELOPMENT 'To the best of my knowledge, the only new development relating to the hotel site between the date the application was first heard and the present day was the issue of the writ and an injunction to compel the borough council to protect my hotel property," he said. The borough engineer Mr W. K. Kiddle told the board that the cost of protective work sought by the hotel owners in its claim against the council would be about $139,000. It was considered far better sites existed for the proposed bar extensions at the hotel and councillors had agreed the council should support any application to resite the hotel, said Mr Kiddle The writ issued against the council had had a "major bearing' on the reversal of the town planning committee h recommendations, said Mr Kiddle in answer to a question from Mr Gillespie.