The Press WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1971. School land policy and town planning

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32604, 12 May 1971, Page 16

The Press WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1971. School land policy and town planning

Three times the Burnside High School Board of Governors has been rebuffed in its efforts to retain for the school land that is designated to be sold for building sections. The Minister of Education (Mr Taiboys) has announced that the Cabinet—to which this seemingly trifling matter has been taken—stands by a policy that prescribes the sale of land on street frontages around schools. It has been persuasively argued that, because of the planned development of the school to a possible roll of 2050 pupils, all of the 35 acres of education land in Memorial Avenue should be retained for the school.

Notwithstanding the unusually large roll number, and the fact that the school will be used for training

teachers—and will accordingly require more buildings and parking space than any other school in Christchurch—the Cabinet has not been moved to set aside the general policy and to forgo an estimated $30,000 from the sale of land. The sale could still be delayed until experience has put the needs of the school beyond question. Clearly the Treasury would lose nothing by postponement and should gain from the appreciation of the value of this land—always assuming t.at Education Department policy in general stands the test of time and that this particular application of policy is proof against the pressure of public opinion. Perhaps the departments concerned have a sneaking feeling that it is now or never.

In fact, there are good reasons why this policy should be examined critically now. and changed with the least possible delay. These reasons have nothing to do with aesthetics, or with the preference of the school’s present neighbours for keeping the site open, or with the needs of the school for building and playing room. The State and local authorities are now spending millions of dollars on reading schemes devised to separate traffic from residential accommodation. Years after other countries have acknowledged that it is undesirable to line main traffic routes with houses, New Zealand planners are now endeavouring to keep main traffic flows away from the front doors of suburban houses. Yet here on Memorial Avenue—one of the busiest thoroughfares in Christchurch and one with the fastest growth of traffic —the State, for the sake of $30,000, is encouraging residential development where it is least desirable. What has been done there already cannot easily be undone, but that is no justification for making things worse. The Government has an opportunity here to do something useful in the Ir.terests of sensible town planning.