BUILDING BY-LAWS.

Taranaki Daily News, 18 December 1918, Page 7

BUILDING BY-LAWS.

QUESTION OF STREET FRONTAGE. COTTAGES AT WHITELEY STREET. Some time ago the matter was before the New Plymouth Borough Council of the erection of some cottages at Wbiteley Street, Moturoa, in which the requisite street frontage, as provided by the by-laws, was not allowed. The cottages were being erected by Mr. Geo. W. Browne for Mr. E. Griffiths, and when the matter first came before the council it was pointed out that work had been commenced without a building permit being secured, and when ultimately the plans came before the council for approval it was shown that to erect the houses as intended would be an infringement of the by-laws, because the necessary frontage of 40ft. was not provided. An amended filatt was submitted to the council showing the entrance to .the right-of-way which gave access to ' the two houses at the rear of the section, and over which the difficulty arose, widened to give the proper amount of frontage. This was agreed to by the council. Subsequently a report was placed befoTe the council showing that the plan approved had not been adhered to, but that the sections had been fenced off square and an entrance of only 15ft. wide left to the cottages at the rear N of the section, This was pointed out to !:he owner of the houses, who replied that if he had not complied with the requirements of the by-laws he would be glad to know what he ,yas expected to do. The Council decided to obtain a legal opinion on the matter, and this was read at Monday's meeting, and went to show that Mr Griffiths was liable to prosecution for erecting a house on land having less than 40ft. street frontage, without the permission of the Council, and also for fencing off the land by the building so as to leave less than 40ft. frontage. In a letter to the Council Mr Griffiths stated that he was not aware at the time of the requirements or he would have complied with the conditions or have asked for relief from the Council. He now wished to know if it was the Council's intention that the two Bmall triangles, as shown on the plan, should be specially fenced, or whether the Council would deal with the matter under the by-law which provided that when the enforcement of any by-law is likely to result in hardship to any individual, without commensurate benefit to the public, its compliance should not be enforced. , When the matter was introduced C(. Griffiths left the Council table. The matter was briefly discussed, Crs being of opinion that there could be no question of hardship in requiring Mr Griffiths to have his work carried out in compliance with the plans submitted to And approved by the Council. j It was decided that notice be given that the section must be fenced in ac'flordance with the approved plans by Jan. 13th next. ;,. .