City Council fails in bid for $lm

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34104, 17 March 1976, Page 1

City Council fails in bid for $lm

(From CEDRIC MENTIPLAY)

WELLINGTON, March 16.

The Christchurch City Council's attempt to squeeze an extra million dollars from the Government for urban renewal has failed.

The request was turned down after a three-man deputation Jed by the Mayor (Mr H. G. Hay) called on the Minister of Housing and the Deputy Minister of Finance (Mr Gair) this afternoon.

Mr Gair told reporters later that the council had picked a “bad year” to ask for extra money, but he said the Government would not go back on its pledged level of support. He gave no indication that! there was any likelihood of! raising the council’s allocation this year. Mr Hay gave the Minister a report of what had been achieved this year, and indicated that only shortage of money was holding up other projects. Progress had been so good that the present allowance of s2m seemed likely to be overspent. The deputation had hoped for an advance of as much as an extra Sim so that existing projects could be completed and other important ones begun. Mr Gair expressed his appreciation of the work being done in Christchurch, but said that at present he could make no promises. Project delay Mr Hay said that, though progress had been good, last year’s allocation had been underspent. After leaving the Minister’s office, he said that the decision was regrettable but understandable. It was regrettable that one project, which was all ready to go, would have to be held. This would not mean a general cut in the building of council projects, however, and the [building workers of Christichurch would not suffer. A redevelopment project at Harman Street would not

proceed now until possibly the end of the next financial year, Mr Hay said last evening in Christchurch.

Loan approval had already been given for the area, but this was in excess of the s2m allocation already given for urban redevelopment. Mr Hay said that the deputation was asking for a carrying over of money that was underspent in the last financial year, which amounted to “several thousand,” and which would allow the project to proceed. ‘Good discussion'’ “It seems a pity that the Government is not prepared to do this, at this stage. The area needs redeveloping and is going to provide a lot of necessary rental housing.” said Mr Hay. On pensioner housing, the chairman of the housing committee (Cr B. J. Britten) said that this year Christchurch would be far ahead of what had been the annual total of 100 units. The total this year ended March 31 would be; close to 300. He was concerned at the cost limit of $13,500 a unit, which he said was restrictive if it included land in the central urban area. Mr Gair agreed to have a look at this, although lie said he would promise nothing. He promised to travel to Christchurch shortly to open a block of flats and inspect projects. Mr Hay said the discussion had been a good one, and “Mr Gair is in no position to make rash promises.” Interviewed after the deputation had left, Mr Gair said ruefully: “This is a bad time to ask a Government for anything. The Christchurch City Council is a local body which is working extremely well in . the twin areas of pensioner [housing and urban renewal. 'This is true even in this

most difficult period. I could give them no encouragement, and I am sorry about this.” He said that while in Christchurch to open a pensioner block he would take time to see the whole position. He had already approved the idea of advancing the limit of increases in pensioner and other council tenant rents to a dollar a year, as with State tenants. Mr Gair said he was sympathetic to complaints about the difficulty of limiting the’ total unit cost of pensioner; accommodation, including land, to $13,500. *‘l realise this is quite a limitation. There is a possibility of land and construction costs being considered separately. I am looking into this.”