AMALGAMATION’S ADVANTAGES

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25547, 15 July 1948, Page 6

AMALGAMATION’S ADVANTAGES

Discussing the advantages of overall amalgamation, Mr Somers said that financial resources could be considered as a whole, whereas to-day each authority tended to push its own interests without due regard to the overall effect. Any works such as the moving or relaying of tram traeks or the laying of drains should be co-ordinated if possible with road works, and this could be done with drainage and trams controlled by the city. An important advantage of amalgamation was the availability of specialised staff. The council would take over the technical officers of the Tramway and Drainage Boards. The grouping of experts would make all the special knowledge available to the general cause. In addition to the specialised staff, a large council would have foremen and workmen who were experts in various types of work. With general amalgamation a large pool of plant would be created. The council was well equipped with modern plant and the Drainage and Tramway Boards also had good plant. The counties generally were not so well equipped and would gain much. Another advantage to small local areas was the ability of the council to finance fair-sized jobs. There would also be the benefit of the Halswell quarry, which the council had bought about 25 years ago. Treated as a trading concern, it had paid off its cost in spite of the fact that prices charged to council departments had always been well below the ruling market rates. Building By-laws “With the citv in charge there would ae proner building and town-planning sontrol,” Mr Somers said. “Until recently two of the counties had no bv-laws—one. It is understood, still has none. While the city’s by-laws may not be perfect, they can be taken as reasonablv good, and by necessary amendments are kent up to date. None of the other local authorities by-laws is very complete or kept up to date. Buildings in som* of the counties are obviously sub-standard and likely to cause trouble as suburban building sp re ads.

I Questioned about the city’s water supply by Mr E. W. White (for the Riccarton Borough Council), Mr Somers agreed that the need for a new reservoir was urgent. Apart from a good standby plant and the reservoir’s capacity, the water supply was dependent on hydro-electric power. At the last power cut-offs the city’s water supply was not affected. When asked about the water reticulation . of New Brighton, Mr Somers said: It is on the way.” Mr White: Have you got the pipes? Witness: Some of them. After further questions, Mr Somers said: “It is remarkable that Riccarton got their cast iron pipes when we had to wait for two years before we got ours.'" “Perhaps you might get results by amalgamating Christchurch with Riccarton. said Mr J. W. Andrews, a commisMr A C. Perry (for the Heathcote County Council) asked Mr Somers why he had not reported against small areas coming into the city and creating irregular boundaries to which the Citv Council now objected. The City Council had believed that the city should be extended, replied Mr Somers, and it would have been illogical to have refused entry to small areas which wished to come in. By “poorly developed,” the term he had applied as a generality to the areas already amalgamated with the city, he meant that the areas were not as well developed as the city’s suburban areas. Mr Somers replied to Mr J. D. Hutchison (for the Waimairi County Council). , < w s e ’ l Mr Hutchison was cross-examining Mr Somers on behalf of the Tramway Board, counsel to the commission (Mr F B. Stephens) said that an alteration to tne Tramway Board’s area was not before the commission, but had been mentioned by Mr Somers. Tie asked whether the commission wished to consider any alteration. “Under the act, the commission has power to consider specific matters and . platters,” said the chairman (Mr I. J. Goldstine). If it became necessary the commission could issue a provisional scheme and then call for any 1 obiections, he added. Mr Somers agreed with Mr Hutchison

that it would be uneconomic to change the location of tram lines. “I don't think anyone now would expect the Tramway Board to spend any big sum to ensure that its vehicles run clockwise in the Square,” he said, “but the position was different about 10 years ago.” He agreed that the incidence of collisions in the Square was low, but added: “There is an element of luck.” ’ To Mr C. G. Penlington (for the New Zealand Refrigerating Company), the witness said he thought the inclusion of the Islington area in the cijy was a borderline case. Mr Penlington mentioned that the company’s freezing works occupied 813 acres, of which 256 acres were in the irea which the city claimed. Of the area involved in the city’s claims, 165 acres were used as holding paddocks. Mr Stephens announced that a petition had been received* from 13 property owners asking that an area of the Heathcote County bounded by Opawa road and Curry’s road should be taken into the city. The chairman said that if there were no objections to the petition the commission could deal with it, but if objections were ' forthcoming there would have to be the statutory period of one month allowed for them. Mr Somers was still in the witness box when the commission adjourned until this morning The previous witness. Mr A. H. Bridge, a former town planning officer to the City Council, was absent yesterday because of the death of a relative, and the commission allowed his cross-examination to be postponed. EVIDENCE BY INDEPENDENT WITNESSES There were a number of independent witnesses who wished to give evidence to the commission, said the chairman Some had already communicated with counsel to the commission (Mr F B. Stephens), and he asked that those who had not done so should indicate to him the nature of the evidence they wished i to give.