“NO COMPULSORY PROPERTY SALES”

Press, Volume CXIII, Issue 33252, 15 June 1973, Page 11

“NO COMPULSORY PROPERTY SALES”

No-one would be forced to sell, but the land would be designated and if those affected wished to seil, they could negotiate with the council, said Cr M. McG. Clark, when a Christchurch City Council sub-committee yesterday heard objections to proposals for urban renewal at Waltham.

Cr Clark described as “only a proposal or intention’’ the council’s scheme to use the Urban Housing Renewal and Improvement Act to redevelop the land bounded by Cecil Street, Waltham Road, Hastings Street and the proposed extension of Brougham Street. The committee had before it formal objections from property owners, and a petition with 54 signatures, asking the council to desist. Mr I. C. Morris, one of those affected, said that the ! council now said it was studying the scheme, but it would have been better to study it first and come down with proposals which people could consider. “Why not tell us about the plan instead of having old people worrying their hearts lout waiting for you to make up your mind?” he asked. Cr Clark said the council appreciated the anxiety, but jno one would be forced to I sell. Assurance sought Mrs G. Beaven, who organised the petition, said that she had been concerned about the compulsory sale possibilities. Originally, the

interpretation was that the; scheme was to come into, effect within 10 months, and, that people would be forced to sell in that time. “If you can give an assurance that no-one will be forced to sell unless they; wish to, it would satisfy me.” she said. “I would like it in waiting.” Mr L. G. Holder, appearing for five land-owners, complained that he had been unable to get information from the council, and because he did not know the exact proposals, had been unable to lodge objectons. Unless the act was followed, he said, the council: had no jurisdiction. The, reasons given by the council in its resolution—that the houses were aged and in need, of maintenance—was not in compliance with the act. Assent required Cr Clark said that whatever the council’s decision, it had to get the assent of the Ministry of Works and the Governor-General. The intention was that parts of Waltham and .Sydenham were suitable for reclamation and urban renewal. No immediate purchase or demolition of houses was contemplated. Mr Holder said that if the “no compulsion” statement was made in writing, it; put a different complexion on' the proposal, but he would

have to study the implications. “There could be problems with life tenancies and the like,” he said. “It does make the council the only buyer because no-one else would touch these properties with a 40ft pole. There is the economic aspect—they may not be able to sell at a price that would let them buy an ownership flat. 1 think they would prefer to take their chance on the market.” “New for N.Z.” “This is something new for New Zealand and the council is hopeful that it will result in something of a partnership between the council and the people concerned,” said CtClark. “The intention may fizzle out if it is not acceptable all round.” Mr D. A. Hinman, a council town-planner, said that from a town-planning point of view, steps should be taken to prevent the southward spread of industry beyond Brougham Street, and to eliminate non-conforming uses. Dilapidated houses would be cleared. Sound houses improved. Mr Hinman said that complete redevelopment should be restricted, if possible, to land near properties already taken for street works, with council purchases largely confined to this land, plus land with non-conforming uses.

Council’s problem

He explained that while houses had been demolished, only part of the land was wanted for works, and the’ problem was what to do with the six remaining properties: in Cecil Street. It would be possible to redevelop the entire block.