IMPROVING VINCENT ROAD.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 61, 11 March 1916, Page 6

IMPROVING VINCENT ROAD.

EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COMMISSION. THE MAYOR'S VIEWS. Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., sat till late yesterday afternoon hearing evidence as a Royal Commission in irespect to the proposed straightening of Vincent Road, Remuera. Mr. J. Stan-ton appeared for the City Council, and Mr. A. Hanna for Mrs. T. Cotter, to oppose the proposal. The following evidence was taken yesterday afternoon: — Ashley Hunter. C.E., gave evidence to the effect that Vincent Road required improvement from a public point of view. The bend was an objectionable thing. From a ntilitarian point of view, rhe etraighter the road , was, the better for the public. They might round oil the road by taking of! a lump of Mrs. Pritt'e property, lie did not think Mrs. Cotter's property would be seriously J;i:naged under the eclieme, beyond the destruction of the macrocarpa hedge, lie could not see thai anything would be done to Mrs. Cotter's property which could not be compensated for. Mr. Kettle sa>id for some reason or other the Commission had to consider the words "cause undue hardship to owners of adjoining -property." Mr. Hunter eaid any oiiier scheme he could suggest would mean undue hardship to eomeone else's property. In answer to Mr. Hanna, witness said there was very little traffic on Yineenc Road excepting on race days. The present road had been in use for thirty yeans, and he had not heard of any accident. The fact that it had not been improved before, was no reason it 3houlJ not be done. The question was whether it was reasonable to take 6o much from Mrs. Cotler for the purpose of improving A in cent Road. I In answer to Mr. Kettle. Mr. Hunter said he considered the scheme a proper, and also a reasonable one. MAYOR GIVES EVIDENCE. j James Henry C.unson, Mayor of AuckI land, stated when he came into office tue improvement of Vincont Road was under consideration. He visited the site lat the request of the Engineer to con- ! sider the necessity of a revision in the j proposals. The result was the present I scheme suggested by the Engineer, and lit was submitted to the Council. That i scheme was adopted by the Council. Mr. I (iunson said he interviewed Mrs. Cotter ■ re her land, and toid her the proposal of I the Council in the matter. That was an j act of courtesy because her land was ' involved. Mrs. Cotter objected to the ! whole scheme. The necessary slep3 i were taken to secure the land required j under the Public Works Act. He had I tried to duly consider the interests of ■ iiot'i Mrs. Pritt and Mrs. Cotter, so that Inn undue hardship should be involved. ; I'ersouallv he was of opinion that no undue hardship would be caused. It I was a very desirable and necessary imI provement to Vincent Road, that was ! proposed in the scheme. It was also J opportune as certain improvements had I been contracted for by the old Reraupra Koad Board. The aim was to expend the money po as to get the best possible return for the expenditure. He did not approve of the alternative scheme sugby Mr. Hanna. because the imj provement would be so small that it would not be worth doing the work. It would still leave a considerable anjle in ; the road. The Council had regard to all I legitimate interests, and also the public ', pnod when adopting the present «rhenn\ To his rmnd Mr*, (""otter would hay? r. better frontage to her property if fho wished to f»t it up. No frontn?<> on thp main road would be lost under this -el-erne. In answer to Mr FTanna witness stated Mrs. Pritt had also protested very strongly aeainst the scheme from th» oti»<set. He took the Works Committee nml Riibspqiirntlv tliroe other Councillore to inspect the road. Evidence in support of the Council's scheme was al«o (?iven by Messr3. F. E.irl and fteonre ITonninjr. Mr. M. H. Wvnvard appeared for Mrs.' Pritt. and said that if the alternative srhome susa-ested by Mr. Hanna, was nererited she would olijj-ct to it* SvHnev Moore-Jone?. and TTames S. TMekson. M.P.. a'*o <jnvo evidence.- The latter considered the Council-! scheme unfair to Mrs. Cotter a= it would take too much of her pronertv. and h P did not consider the improvement worth til's pTtra cost. He contended that the alter- : native scheme fiii£r£re<iterl hv Mr. Hanni f would meet all requirements. J OPPONENTS TO PROPOSAL. [ Hugh Munro Wilson, C.E., was tho first witness called this morning by Mr. Hanna. He stated he was engineer to the Remuera Road Board until that district was incorporated in the city. Vincent Road had a very bad approach to Remuera Road, as it came in at an acute angle. The top end of the road was 60 feet wide, but three parts was about 50 feet in width. Mr. Wilson said his scheme embraced the widening Rernuera Road and rounding off Vincent Road at Mrs. Pritt's corner. For a big comprehensive scheme the Council's proposal was all right, but it was a question of the importance of the road, lie did not think the work proposed was at all necessary. By taking Mrs. Pritt's corner the danger to trallic would be remedied. His objection to the Council's scheme was that unless the whole street was widened to 6G feet it was scarcely worth doing such a comprehensive work as that proposed, especially as the configuration of the country was sloping. To his mind that rendered the Council's scheme of very little benefit. Taking so much land from Mrs. Cotter's property would interfere with the tennis court, stables and destroy trees and the hedge, leaving the land exposed to the south-west wind, which blew practically eight or nine months in the year. He did not consider the Council's scheme a "reasonable and I proper one," taking into consideration the importance of Vincent Road. Ke also considered it would inflict undue I hardship on Mrs. Cotter. The bulk of ! the traffic to the races went via Clonburn 1 Road.

In answer to Mr. Stanton witness said the Council scheme would do if it was a big comprehensive scheme for a main street. It would undoubtedly be an improvement to Vincent Road, but it was a question whether the importance of the street warranted it. The road was safe enough for traffic if Mrs. Pritt's corner was rounded off. Mrs. Cotter's house would still be a good distance from the road if the Council's scheme was carried out, but all privacy would be destroyed for some years. He considered that at least 20 feet should be taken off at Mrs. Pritt's corner and 16 feet of Remucra Road. At Mrs. Cotter's corner a piece should be taken off, and then Vincent Road would be perfectly safe for traffic.

In answer to Mr. Wynyard, witness stated there would be about 30 feet taken off Mrs. Pritt's property on the Vincent Road frontage, and 20 feet on

the Renruera Road frontage. He had laid out a number of Government townships, and was aware that it was a requirement that roads should he as straight as .possible and at right angles tc the main road with which they junctioned. The configurations of the country would, however, modify the application of such rules.

In answer to Mr. Hanna, witness said tie scheme he submitted to Remeura Road Board would be sufficient to meet the traffic requirements of Vincent Road for all time.

By Mr. Kettle: Witness did not condemn the Council scheme, but considered hie one would be just as effective.

His Worship suggested that an outside engineer should be called to give his opinion upon the respective schemes.

Mr. Stanton 6Uggested that the services of the Public Works Engineer might be obtained.

Mr. Hanna said he would be quite satisfied if that course was adopted. He also proposed calling Mr. EL H. Metralfe. City Engineer.

At this stage of the proceedings the Commission wae adjourned until Monday week.