SUMNER SEA-WALL.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20316, 15 August 1931, Page 21

SUMNER SEA-WALL.

10 THB tDITOa O? TUB PRESS Sir —I quite agreo with tha letter signed "Disgusted" in this morning's paper. Can nothing be done to save feumner from the hand of the de*pollers? Are we to sit still and see our sandhills thrown into the B ea and our beach ruined? We were led to believe that the wall was built to protect the sandhills, and it was stated by the Mayor that they would not be interered with. In spit© of this assurance, x f horsas with a scoop has been at work tor some weeks, and if this continues tha sandhills will have completey disappeared. At the last Council meeting it was stated that the hills between Heaci street and Scarborough were to be levelled, from which it would e inferred that those north of Head street would be untouched. Yet a considerable amount of work had already boon done in levelling the sandhills north of Head street, and this work still continues. This morning it was noticed that there was a further breach in the wall, at the Scarborough end, and a considerable quantity of the Band from behind the walls had apparently gone out to »ea The sole result of this wall is the obstruction both of the sandhills and of ae beach. There is no doubt also, that the cost of relaying the sewer 011 he beach and keeping it more or less m working order, has already been greater than would have been the cost or putting it under the roadway; and in addition to this, constant further expenditure will be necessary to prevent Lae wall and the sewer from completely collapsing. The natural beauty of the beach was one of the great attractions of Sumner, . and if the council is to have a free | to continue its work of destruction tor the next two years, this beauty I and much of the attractiveness of the | borough will bo gone for ever.—Your* ! etc., I RATEPAYER. August Hlu, 1931.