DESTRUCTOR AT SANDILANDS

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21257, 31 August 1934, Page 18

DESTRUCTOR AT SANDILANDS

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir,-r-I understood when the destructor at Sandilands was started, it was to be an experiment, to prove if this mode of destructor would be a success, but now it appears as if it was going to be a permanent affair, as I understand the Returned Soldiers' Association has a clause in its agreement about this property not to object to the destructor remaining there, and that there will be trees planted between the settlement and the destructor. I quite agree that the returned soldiers' arrangements with the council should be certainly kept, but the trees will be no protection for them, seeing that naturally we may expect most of them may be dead and gone before the trees are High enough to hide the view of the destructor. Then there is the worse nuisance, smell and noise, to be considered, which will not be kept back by trees. I would like to ask the council why the residents in this area were not consulted when this affair was started in their midst? Has it passed the health authority? Has it passed the town building committee? There is this abominable noise and smell coming around us most days of the week —I am surprised that the council should commence a business of this sort in a strictly residential area. Hoping that something may be done to improve the situation.—Yours, etc., E. A. LOCK. August 27, 1934. [When this letter was referred to officials of the Christchurch City Council yesterday, it was stated that the destructor at Sandilands was never intended to be merely temporary. In fact the council was considering placing more of a similar type of masticator in outlying areas to relieve the central one and save the cartage of all refuse to the heart of the city.]