ABATTOIR SITE ENQUIRY.

Manawatu Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 7971, 7 February 1905, Page 2

ABATTOIR SITE ENQUIRY.

Concluding Evidence.

An Able Decision

Further evidence in connection with the enquiry affecting the proposed abattoir site on Foxton Line was given before Mr A. D. Thomson-, S.M., yesterday afternoon, to support the Kairinga County Council's contention that the presence of abattoirs would tend to depreciate the values of iand in the vicinity.

S. W. Luxford, chairman of the County Council, was called, and stated he was of opinion the land in the vicinity of the proposed site would have a large suburban value, and the presence of the abattoir would tend to depreciate that value. The further the site was away the depreciation would be lobs, and in any case the abattoir would not affect the agricultural value of the land Witness knew of land in the vicinity of the site being sold at £100 per acre. Under cross-examination witness stated he had inspected the Napier and Nelson works, and he considered that the presence of the abattoirs would be sufficiently obnoxious to influence people from settling in the locality. E. S. Abraham gave evidence that in his opinion all the value of the land within three miles ot the Borough boundary would be more or less depreciated according to the distance from the abattoir. The constant driving of stock would also be prejudicial to the land values. The value of land in Eangitikei street five years ago waa about £20 a foot, and it was now JG3oor £40. Comparing, the latter street with Foxton Line, he considered the tendency of the former was to feecoma a business locality and the latter residential. The increase in the value of land adjoining the abattoir site was proportionate to the increases in the Borough. Witness did not recall any Berious accident that had occurred with stock in Rangitikei Line, but special precautions were taken to prevent it.

Eobert Gardiner, Government Valuer, stated he was in the vicinity of the Feilding abattoir recently and was not aware of the charaoter of the building until informed. He could not detect any smell. Witness valued the land adjoining the site on the railway side at j£3s per acre and at the back £25. Evidence was also given by- H. Mellsop, W. Park, and F. J. Tasker in support of the County's contention. D. G. Monrad under cross-examina-tion admitted that last Thursday he bought a section of land within 10 chains of the abattoir at JES2 10s per acre. There was a small house on it. The Magistrate's Finding. Mr Thomson said he had to decide that the consent of the Kairanga County Council ought to bo given to the site. The. Kairanga Council was the objector on behalf of its own ratepayers, whilst apparently some inhabitants in the borough would Jikc to see the abattoir in a different locality. The latter could not be heard in the present application, and if they wished to they would have to apply to their own Council, There were practically three objections offered to the site f

1. That it was unsuitable whilst there were others better adapted to the purpose. ,

2. That the access was dangerous. 3. That ehe property all round the site was residential, and would depreciate in value if the abattoir was erected thereon. -■;

The first objection, in the opinion of the Bench, was one that the County Council was not entitled to take. The choice of site must be left to the Borough Council, and the objections, if any, must deal with that particular sita. With the second, he felt that when the application came before him the first time the access did not offer protection to the public who used the road which was under the control of the County Council. Thai had been rectified by the new proposal as shown on the plans, and the letter which accompanied, them, the Borough put in at the present bearing. The Bench was quite satisfied with the provision made. There was now a satisfactory means of access, and the driving of stock to it would not be a source of danger. The evidence of the drovert fully bore this out. There would still have to be care exercised. The County Council had it in their power to make the means of access more safe by allowing the Borough Counoil to erect gatM across the old road, which the latter had offered to do. On the question of depreciation of land values, Mr Thomson pointed out that the site was about a chain away from the borough boundary. The building would be ten chains back from the Foxton Line. Dr Mason had said nothing would be allowed in the naturt of manure works, and that offal would have to be carted away to some place where it could be dealt with properly. The Health Department considered the site was too small for the pnrposes mentioned and, and they would take care to see that the offal was removed in a proper manner. The Court must pre. sume that the abattoirs would be properly conducted. If anything in the way of a nuisance was created, there wh a proper remedy. There was no objee* tion to the site by any of the immediate adjoining owners. The original ownew. Messrs Carter and Eawstron, sold only six acres out of 28 for the site. It did appear strange that if the erection ef the abattoirs was going to depreciate land in the vicinity to the extent of twenty pec cent., as asserted by Mr Loughnan, the owner of 28 acres would sell six and suffer depreciation on the other 22. Mr Thomson also made a similar observalion in respect to Mr S. W. Luxford'g offer of a section to the Borough, and commented on the fact that Mr Monrad had purchased a section of land within 10 chains of the site, with the probability of using it for his own place of residence, since the present proceedings had commenced. Other owners of land in the vicinity of the site, he continued, had offered parts of their land, and if the abattoir was going to depreciate the land to such an extent, it did not seem reasonable that they were prepared to lose considerably on the balance retained. It seemed quite clear from the evidence of Mr Gardiner that there was no sjig. gestion of offensiveness or smell from the abattoirs in Peilding. Mr Thomson did not think there was any valid objection raised as to the proximity of the abattoirs. On these grounds he was of opinion that the consent of the County Council should not have .been withheld. _ The question of costs will be mea« tioned this morning.