Town Planning

Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 1, Issue 12, 23 August 1983, Page 1

Town Planning

What a sorry state town planning has fallen into in Ohakune. I note that in the recent rulings of the Town and Country Planning Appeal Tribunal, the tribunal found itself unable to agree with the Council on even one of the four appeals against Council decisions. It gives one a warm glow to think that the spirit of Don Quixote is still alive and well, with the Borough Council riding out to do battle with windmills and ^fc^gons, while the town ^rowly stagnates, and the youth of the district riots happily in the suburbs. I wonder how many of the ratepayers of Ohakune will see the total value of their rate demands disappear to pay for this little escapade. Ten, fifteen? The cost to the Council, (meaning the ratepayer)', must have been in the order of $2:000. The most significant part of the ruling relates to the Council decision not to allow a restaurant in Goldfinch St. The ruling says: "The question before us is not whether restaurant uses should be permitted, but whether there is any planning reason why they should be prohibited. On • evidence before us we e concluded that it may be found in future to be destructive to the central area if restaurant facilities found both in NZ and overseas are not provided." The ruliiig also says: We can also envisage a situation where the full-time enterprises are deprived of casual tourist visitors, because the zone provides no basic services for them." How could such glaringly obvious facts have escaped the notice of Council? Does not the Council employ a town planning consultant, (for $50 hour I understand) to bring such matters to its notice? If the consultant did not raise these matters, I say he is not worth his exorbitant fee. If he did raise them, since when has the Council been so rich that it can afford to spend so freely on advice it has no intention of heeding?

Ian

Heappey,

, Ohakune