HEARINGS COMMITTEE

There were no apologies.

Pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the Chairman called for late items to be accepted.

RESOLVED

THAT pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the following late items be accepted for discussion.

- Waihi Pony Club Resource Consent Application – Determination of Affected Parties

The item was not on the agenda because information had been received after the agenda deadline.

Discussion on the item could not be delayed because consideration needed to be given to the matter before the next meeting.

HC02/42 Carmine/Gordon CARRIED

HC02/43 Hayden/Gordon CARRIED

There were no matters arising.

The meeting adjourned at 9.15 am until 9.17 am.

Attached was a report from the Supervisor Environmental Services regarding a Dangerous Dog Notice serviced on Belinda McGaffin of 126 Campbell Road, Kopuarahi. An objection was lodged.

A hearing had been scheduled for 9.05 am. The hearing commenced at 9.18 am.

Mrs G Rees (complainant), Miss B McGaffin (dog owner) and Mr McGaffin attended the meeting for the benefit of the hearing.

Mrs Rees tabled a submission in support of her sworn evidence.

Mrs Rees outlined the incident that had occurred on 6 October 2002 when the dog Jessie acted in an aggressive manner towards her while she was in her garden. Mrs Rees commented that the behaviour from the dog was a threat to her safety and her intimidation had caused constant stress, as Mrs Rees was never sure where the dog was. Mrs Rees added that she does not feel safe on her property and the only way she could feel safe was to leave the property by vehicle.

Cr Tregidga asked how often Mrs Rees had seen the dog Jessie on the road.

Mrs Rees advised that this was the second time she had seen the dog Jessie out on the road since the last hearing in February 2002.

Cr Gordon asked Mrs Rees what happened when she realized the dog was behind her.

Mrs Rees advised that she didn’t move from her kneeling position in the garden but yelled out to her husband who was nearby who then yelled at the dog. The dog then ran away. Mrs Rees had not realized the dog was there until it growled at her.

Mr McGaffin commented that this was the first time the dog Jessie had been off since the last Hearing in February 2002. The running wire that the dog was attached to by a chain had become electrified and this had caused the dog to get an electric shock, which in turn made her break off and run away.

Cr Tregidga advised that there had been several different complaints about the dog Jessie over the last few years and this was of concern.

Mr McGaffin described the dog Jessie as a labrador cross. The dog was a pet and was tied up at all times other than when it was taken for a walk down the farm for exercise.

Mr Bierre quoted various extracts from the Dog Control Act and advised that the objection to the Dangerous Dog Notice had not been received within the statutory time frame of fourteen (14) days from receipt of the notice. However in view of the sworn statement and letter of appeal staff considered it prudent to have the matter heard as there were issues that needed to be looked into regarding the aggression. The legislation talks about aggressive behaviour and it was up to the Committee to determine whether the dog Jessie had acted in an aggressive manner or not.

Councils Dog Ranger, Mr Sexton, outlined the history regarding previous complaints received about the dog Jessie. There had been no complaints received since the last hearing in February 2002. For whatever reason the dog was deemed to be not under control. The question was whether or not the dog acted in an aggressive manner toward the complainant.

Mrs Rees commented that she did not have any problems with any other dogs in the area and she certainly did not have a problem of not liking dog except when they acted aggressively towards her.

Cr Tregidga commented that the Hearings Committee did all it could to avoid making dangerous dog classifications, however the previous history of complaints regarding the dog Jessie would have to be taken into consideration. If the dangerous dog order were enforced then the dog would have to be contained in a fenced section on the owner’s property.

Mr McGaffin commented that he would not be prepared to fence the property to contain the dog.

The hearing closed at 9.40 am.

The Chairperson advised that Council’s decision was reserved until it had considered the evidence presented and all other relevant matters.

After deliberation the Committee decided:

HC02/44 Tregidga/Carmine CARRIED

The Consents Officer (Planning) tabled a report at the meeting.

Waihi Pony Club had applied for resource consent for the continued use of the Banks Street Reserve for pony club activities, and to erect a toilet on the reserve. The land is zoned Reserve (Passive), and the proposal was non-complying.

The applicant had consulted with or attempted to consult with all the owners and occupiers of the properties surrounding the reserve. However, written approval from two parties had so far been unable to be obtained, although neither party had expressed any objections. One party was the occupier of 8 Stafford Street and the other the occupier of 79C Barry Road.

RESOLVED

THAT Council consider it is unreasonable in the circumstances to require the obtaining of the written consent of the occupiers of 79C Barry Road and 8 Stafford Street.

HC02/45 Gordon/Hayden CARRIED

The meeting closed at 10.00 am.

CONFIRMED

J Tregidga

December 2002