Owner selling from outside closed shop

Gone Potty owner Bridget Paape outside her Dunstan Road shop, which was closed by the Central...
Gone Potty owner Bridget Paape outside her Dunstan Road shop, which was closed by the Central Otago District Council as it does not have the correct building consent. Ms Paape has resorted to serving customers from outside the shop. PHOTO: SUPPLIED
An Alexandra business owner has taken to setting up outside her shuttered shop after being closed down because the building does not have the correct building consent.Gone Potty owner Bridget Paape was told by the Central Otago District Council two days before Christmas her application for consent for her Dunstan Rd business had been rejected as it was ‘‘insufficient’’ despite working for months to get it completed.

Last week council officers came to tell her they were closing down the shop the following day. Ms Paape had missed a letter on January 6 telling her of the closure date.

Ms Paape relocated from Dunedin and opened her Dunstan Rd business about 18 months ago.

After operating for six months an email arrived from the council saying she did not have appropriate building consent for a commercial building.

‘‘I said to the council, well, hold on a minute, you’ve known all this time, and you’ve sat in your office, and you’ve never come and talked to me about this. This is what’s really brassed me off.

‘‘I mean... the council knew what was going on, because it was a talk of the town that I was opening.’’

Ms Paape said there was initially no time frame given then for her to comply, but later communication said she had 12 months.

But in December, just nine months later, the letter arrived saying she had to close the shop.

Poor communication was the crux of the matter, she said.

‘‘Wouldn’t you think they’d just come for a wee drive and just say, ‘Hey, you know, Bridget, you need to [do these things]’.

‘‘I mean, they want new business, but they just don’t make it easy.’’

Being told the resource consent had a clause stating appropriate building consents were needed did not make it clear what exactly was required, she said.

Her initial drawing was rejected and she had to engage a draftsperson. Being new to the area she asked the council for a list of possible candidates, but was told they could not help.

Work to meet the requirements began immediately, including fire protection, but there were few people who could do that work and it took months to arrange, she said.

Too much time for the council, it seemed.

The December 23 letter said her building consent application had been withdrawn as it was ‘‘insufficient’’.

No-one had checked to see how far along the new work was and when it would be complete, she said.

‘‘It’s all about just communicating. There’s no communication.’’

Her experience had deterred other people from opening business in the region, she said.

‘‘I’ve had friends come in and people I know who have contacted me. They were going to open little businesses here but they listened to my drama and they said it’s just too expensive and too hard.

‘‘So that’s why they’re struggling to get new businesses here because the council don’t want to help. They’re just making it too hard.’’

Central Otago District Council group manager — infrastructure, planning and regulatory Quinton Penniall said the council was supportive of small businesses and had worked with Ms Paape to ‘‘guide her through the process’’.

‘‘We must also balance that support with our obligations to apply the relevant legislative and regulatory requirements, including the Building Act framework and associated codes, consistently and fairly.’’

Responsibility for ensuring appropriate consents lay with business owners and their contractors, he said.

‘‘These situations are never pleasant, and enforcement is always challenging. In the first instance, we aim to work constructively with the owner to achieve compliance; however, where matters remain unresolved over time, council must act in line with the statutory requirements and take the necessary steps.’’

A routine resource consent monitoring inspection revealed no building consent was obtained for the change from an unlined shed/garage to a retail space, he said.

Ms Paape said she had asked her builder multiple times about a building consent and he had assured her none was needed as it was just a ‘‘fit out’’.

Mr Penniall said the council had worked with Ms Paape over an ‘‘extended period of time’’.

‘‘Ultimately, where identified issues relate to fire safety and public access, council must ensure the building meets the legislative requirements.’’

Mr Penniall said the council was restricted by legislation, but they would review the wording of its emails to make the directions clearer and reduce the risk of misunderstandings.

Ms Paape said her only option was to do as the council instructed.

‘‘[I’ve] shut the doors and I’m going to reapply again. I’ll start right from scratch. But fortunately, I’ve just about got all the paperwork and everything done.’’

One saving grace was she could still sell online and had an active social media profile as the unplanned costs for compliance were high. A local restaurant had offered to display stock for her and she would meet people outside her building if they wanted to buy something.

She remained disappointed with the way it had been handled by the council.

‘‘They’re quick at sending you accounts, but not very good at helping you with the whole process.’’